Biblical Hebrew Forum

["George Athas" <gathas AT hotkey.net.au>]

Serves to prove the view that the waw consecutive verbs are not imperfects at 
all, but preterites (past tense) with a non-converse waw. The jussive is 
formed off the preterite, hence both forms are shorter than the imperfect.



Best regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Lecturer in Biblical Languages
Southern Cross College
Sydney, Australia


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Harold R. Holmyard III 
  To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 6:22 AM
  Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Vav consecutive Gen 1:3


  Dear Chris,

  >I really mean it, I don't go looking for trouble but:
  >
  >Genesis 1:2  --  Let there be light and there was light.
  >
  >My grammar book states ( about the perfect + imperfect sequence):  "The vav
  >consecutive is used nowhere else in the whole hebrew verb system except
  >here".  I.E. Vav with patach.
  >
  >So? YHi (yod heh yod) being a jussive is followed by exactly the same 
except
  >with Vav consecutive, and as I understand it one cannot point the vav in
  >this manner EXCEPT on a vav consecutive. Yet this second verb is also
  >imperfect.
  >
  >Now you can all obliterate my reasoning because as is usual I have to be
  >missing something obvious.

  HH: I changed the header since the verse you cite is Gen 1:3. You may 
  be overlooking something. The preceding verb of importance may be 
  "and he said," because "Let there be light" is an object clause for 
  the verb of saying. So "and he said" is the main clause. The thought 
  progression may be: "And he said something, and there was light." So 
  the waw consecutive on "and there was" may follow a similar waw 
  consecutive on "and he said," which may go back to the QATAL verb 
  "was" in Gen 1:2: "darkness was."

  Yours,
  Harold Holmyard

  _______________________________________________
  b-hebrew mailing list
  b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>From lizfried AT umich.edu  Wed May 26 09:28:24 2004
Return-Path: <lizfried AT umich.edu>
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from struggle.mr.itd.umich.edu (struggle.mr.itd.umich.edu
        [141.211.14.79])
        by happyhouse.metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15E7F2008B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 26 May 2004 09:28:24 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from lizhp500 (pcp04150257pcs.sanarb01.mi.comcast.net [68.41.55.24])
        by struggle.mr.itd.umich.edu (smtp) with ESMTP id i4QDSKOh012327
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Wed, 26 May 2004 09:28:23 -0400
Message-Id: <200405261328.i4QDSKOh012327 AT struggle.mr.itd.umich.edu>
From: "Lisbeth S. Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53: oppression?
Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 09:35:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
In-Reply-To: <013501c44320$6b1d8e10$c28372c3@Vadim>
Thread-Index: AcRDIOQ2WyKJAP5RTgyLL1KDWQCDhgABSpEg
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 13:28:24 -0000

Dear Vadim,
I agree completely. An Otser, in this context, must mean a prison.
It's also used to denote a treasury house, so where things
are kept, detained, retained.
Liz Fried

> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-hebrew-
> bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of UUC
> Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 10:23 AM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53: oppression?
>
> Dear Harold,
>
>
>
> How about otzer?
>
>
>
> The translation of confinement (otzer, vs8) as oppression is unwarranted.
> The word is also translated thus in Psalm 107:39, which is clearly wrong
> in relation to the princes mentioned there. Rulers can be pressed
> (surrounded and wander in wastes) but not oppressed. In the only other
> instance, Proverbs 30:16, the same word refers to barren [womb], also a
> closed place, confinement. Because of (from) oppression he was taken is
> also meaningless, unless we assume he was taken from this world of
> oppression to the heavenly kingdom; but Isaiah does not profess
> resurrection. In the Tanach, taken [by God] is used only with Enoch and
> Elijah, and seems too high-flown considering the writer's attitude toward
> his subject. Further, this reading is not congruent with  his soul was
> exposed to death.
>
> The translation of confinement as perversion or protection is unwarranted.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Vadim Cherny
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew