Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] "Verbs and War Scroll"

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Søren Holst <sh AT teol.ku.dk>
  • To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] "Verbs and War Scroll"
  • Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:34:24 +0200

Sorry for the shameless self-exposure: I was asked on the G-Megillot list to
say a few words about my dissertation "Verbs and War Scroll. Studies in the
Hebrew Verbal System and the Qumran War Scroll", which has been sort of
semi-"published" in xeroxed format by the University of Copenhagen. As the
subject matter is rather more linguistics than qumranology, I thought I'd
send a copy of my answer to this list.

kol tuv
Soren

***************************************'

Thanks for your interest.

Whether it is, in the full sense of the word, a "book", may be a matter of
definition: It's my dissertation in the exact form in which I defended it
last summer (the opponents were Mats Eskhult, Uppsala, Bodil Ejrnæs,
Copenhagen, and Emanuel Tov, Jerusalem). The university makes the theses
publicly available in xeroxed form, quite nicely bound in a paperback cover.
But I'm still looking into the possibility of perhaps publishing it in
revised form in a more formal context.

To put it briefly (sorry about that, but I'm swamped with work right now, and
quite willing to go into detail later), the thesis combines two interests:
The perennial problem of the Hebrew verbal system (tense, aspect. modality,
text linguistic aspects), and the relation of Qumran Hebrew to Biblical ditto.

Most work on the verbal system has been done on narrative, so I decided to
work on a mainly discursive (instructional) text like 1QM, and by way of
Biblical parallel, on the instructional material in Ex 25-30.

After a review of the history of research in the two areas mentioned, I
analyse the War Scroll with regard to the function of different verb forms
(yiqtol, weqatal etc.) in different clause types and different dicursive
contexts (primarily: The military instructions as opposed to the prayers).

I am attracted to the text linguistic school of thought associated with J.
Longacre, A. Niccacci a.o., which sees the meaning of individual
conjugational forms as not inherent in these forms themselves, but rather in
their function in the wider discursive context, which cannot be determined on
the basis of an analysis confined to individual sentences. According to this
approach, the "mainline" of a text is marked by the "consecutive" forms
(wayyiqtol in narrative, in a discursive text like 1QM, weqatal), whereas
clauses with non-"consecutive" forms provide "off-line" material. The
main-line may, I guess, be defined as that which carries the course of the
text onwards - and the off-line as that which consists in background
description, digressions and other comments etc.
In 1QM, however, we encounter long stretches of material with not a single
consecutive form at all. But the idea of a text with no main-line does not
seem to make sense, and more specifically, the passages in question give
progressive instruction for the conduct of the sons of light, and so indeed
do carry the main course of the text forward, or I'm much mistaken about
either the theory or the sense of the text or both.
I do not think that by pointing this out I have proven the text linguistic
approach "wrong", but at least for my purpose of analyzing 1QM, I find it
productive to nuance the description of the working of the verbal "tenses" by
focusing on word order (I pick up on work by R. Buth, B.L. Bandstra, J.
Joosten and a few others here): The yiqtol and weqatal "in themselves" convey
abolutely identical information, but the consecutive form is always
clause-initial, the non-consecutive one never (hence the term "x-qatal" or
"x-yiqtol" clause, where "x" indicates the clause element preceding the
verb). As unmarked word order in Hebrew is V-S, a sentence which continues
the present flow of discourse, and thus introduces no change of subject, will
therefore begin with its verb, which by virtue of the clause initial position
will be a consecutive form. This, however, is the typical state of affairs,
not the necessity suggested in the text linguistic school. Whenever the
author needs to (re)introduce material which is not presently at the centre
of attention, the new material takes first position, and the verb, because of
moving to clause internal position, takes the non-consecutive form.
The preceding paragraph is basically my general conclusion on the working of
the Hebrew verbal system. I arrived at it by looking for a reasonable
explanation to the long passages with no consecutive forms in 1QM, and so my
more specific conclusion as regards that problem is, that there are cases
when the subject matter itself necessitates the repeated introduction of new
non-verbal information in sentence upon sentence with no break in the main
line as a consequence. - Thus, if we maintain than an x-yiqtol sentence of
necessity involves a change in focus, a prolonged chain of x-yiqtol sentences
as the ones found in the War Scroll must be regarded as a sort of "dotted"
main-line, the "dots" consisting of short pieces of off-line discourse. It
may be less cumbersome, though, to simply suggest that the existence of this
phenomenon calls for a slight emendation of the text linguistic approach in
this regard.
I'm pretty sure of the above explanation for the complete absence of
consecutive forms in e.g. 1QM 1,16-2,14. More tentative is my suggestion for
another possible explanation for a few such passages: Randall Buth has
suggested that a succession of x-qatal clauses in narrative can have the
function of marking "dramatic pause" (an example is Esther 3:15). The same
might go for 1QM 1,8-15, where not a single weqatal form is used in the
description of the defeat of the sons of darkness in the seventh round of
battle after six inconclusive engagements (cf. also 1QM 16, 7-9).

To put the results into perspective, I round off the dissertation with a much
more superficial analysis of Ex 25-30. This is not so much an independent
investigation of that text, but more of a check to see whether what I found
in Qumran Hebrew is flatly contradicted by Biblical Hebrew, and at least in
that modestly-sized sample, it is not. I make no attempt at drawing
historical conclusions from this.

The printed edition that the Orion Centre kindly registered in their
bibliography, can be bought at something like $20 from the University of
Copenhagen, but as they're not making a profit on it, I assume they can have
no objections to me sending a Word of PDF-file to anyone interested.

Yours cordially
Soren



  • [b-hebrew] "Verbs and War Scroll", Søren Holst, 03/30/2005

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page