Biblical Hebrew Forum

[FPutnam AT biblical.edu]

Based on "The Megiddo Modern Dictionary", my paperback Bantam-Megiddo 
"Hebrew & English Dictionary", by Sivan & Levenston (1975), has 46,000 
entries, and claims to be "the most up-to-date and comprehensive 
one-volume English/Hebrew, Hebrew/English Eictionary available anywhere in 
the world".

Peace.

Fred

Frederic Clarke Putnam, Ph.D.
Professor of Old Testament
Biblical Theological Seminary
Hatfield, Pennsylvania
215.368.5000x150
>From pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca  Mon May 23 22:30:05 2005
Return-Path: <pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail.teksavvy.com (mail.teksavvy.com [65.39.192.132])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 100774C006
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Mon, 23 May 2005 22:30:04 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from duron ([216.208.50.122])
        by mail.teksavvy.com (TekSavvy Mail Server v1.0) with SMTP id 
JDE74935; 
        Mon, 23 May 2005 22:30:02 -0400
From: "Ken Penner" <pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca>
To: "'Steve Miller'" <smille10 AT sbcglobal.net>,
        <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: RE: [b-hebrew] The mystery of vav-consecutive
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 22:29:34 -0400
Organization: McMaster University
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353
Thread-Index: AcVfGxO/eYh0SnxaQl+Olo9y65AuXgA3+uYg
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
In-Reply-To: <00b301c55f1b$caae3f60$6900a8c0@Dad>
Message-Id: <20050524023004.100774C006 AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Cc: 
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca
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: Tue, 24 May 2005 02:30:05 -0000

I think it's fair to say it was S. R. Driver's  _A Treatise on the Use =
of the Tenses in Hebrew and some other syntactical questions_ that =
popularized (in English) Ewald's idea that the Hebrew qatal and yiqtol =
were not past and future tenses but perfect and imperfect "aspects". I =
recommend the Eerdmans/Dove 1998 reprint with an introduction by W. =
Randall Garr.

If we are going to use the labels "imperfect" and "perfect", we really =
shouldn't call them "tenses", but rather "aspects". If we are going to =
speak of "tense"-reversal, then we really shouldn't call them =
"imperfect" and "perfect".

Basically, if the qatal and yiqtol are not "tenses", then adding a "vav" =
cannot reverse the "tense".

If you are looking for examples where the wayyiqtol refers to the =
future, you may be interested in Walter Gross' _Verbform und Funktion. =
Wayyiqtol f=C3=BCr die Gegenvart? Ein Beitrag z=C3=BCr Syntax poetischer =
althebr=C3=A4ischer Texte_ (M=C3=BCnchener Universit=C3=A4tsschriften. =
St. Ottilien: EOS, 1976).

Driver provides some examples of wayyiqtol for the present in the =
Pentateuch:
Gen 19:9; 31:15; 32:5; 49:24; Ex 4:23; Num 22:11.

He was not sure about Dt 33:27-28.

Leslie McFall (_The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System_) counts the =
following numbers of times the wayyiqtol is translated by the present or =
future, respectively:

Gen: 3, 0
Ex:  3, 2
Lev: 0, 0
Num: 2, 0
Dtr: 8, 1

By way of comparison, the number of times wayyiqtol is translated by the =
past in the RSV:

Gen: 2096
Ex:  855
Lev: 188
Num: 730
Dtr: 239

That's 99.5% past, BTW. Some would call this high percentage a =
coincidence due to pragmatics.

The problem with conceiving of the Hebrew verbal system as a tense =
system has little to do with the wayyiqtol used for the future, but more =
to do with the qatal used for the future, and especially with yiqtol =
used for the past. The weqatal is a more complex question, since one =
would have to determine whether the vav was "conversive" or =
"conjunctive".

I hope this is helpful.

Ken Penner, Ph.D. cand.: "Verb Form Semantics in Qumran Sectarian Texts: =
Hebrew Tense, Aspect, and Modality between the Bible and the Mishnah"
M.C.S. (Regent College, biblical languages), M.A. (McMaster, Hebrew =
poetry)
Biblical Field (Early Judaism major)
McMaster University
Hamilton, Canada
pennerkm AT mcmaster.ca
Hebrew vocabulary software: http://s91279732.onlinehome.us/flash or =
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flash_pro/join


> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org=20
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Steve Miller
> Sent: May 22, 2005 6:16 PM
> To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] The mystery of vav-consequtive
>=20
> Can anyone give me 5 examples from the Pentateuch where the=20
> vav-consecutive
> is clearly NOT a tense reversal?