Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 26/09/2005 10:30, Vadim Cherny wrote:

> > ...
> >
> > No, this is a rule that I am sure of, that in a chain of WAYYIQTOLs 
> > with no explicit subject on a following clause the assumed subject is 
> > the subject rather than the object of the preceding clause.
>
> That is for sure. The point is, is there an unbroken chain of 
> wayiqtols in 2:7, or rather two phrases: the man was formed or 
> designated, and that dust blew in his face, suggesting him to go 
> irrigate.
Well, I see two (well, in fact about 6 continuing into verse 9) 
successive clauses with WAYYIQTOL verbs, which is what I mean by a chain 
of WAYYIQTOLs. There is no evidence for a break in the chain in the 
middle of verse 7. Anyway, the object which was breathed in this middle 
clause is not dust, but the breath of life.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/