Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Herman Meester <crazymulgogi AT gmail.com>]

Dear Rolf,

Thanks for "taking up the glove";)
I have a feeling we disagree, but we're also talking on slightly
different wavelengths, in the sense that I was also looking for a
sound explanation for the gemination in wayyiqtol, whereas I have a
feeling you consider this detail of minor importance.

You state:
"The WE- and WAY- of the so-called consecutive forms are the
conjunction WAW, and the gemination and patah of the WAY- prefix are
caused by phonetic rules and the stress position."

I was looking for those phonetic rules, or rather, I think that the
gemination comes first.
Although I can't take any offence at your words below, and it is your
prerogative to consider the gemination of minor importance (most
people do, I guess), I like Hatav's theory because it *does* explain
the "phonetic rules" you refer to (I do wonder why, in your theory,
wayyiqtol exists next to weyiqtol if they have both the same semantic
meaning; without primary gemination they cannot have the same "waw",
or they cannot be the same yiqtol; however I fear this remark might
call for a huge discussion which will be endless).

I can understand that going all over the entire verbal syntax of
BHebrew may be a little too much if you've "been there before".
However, could I ask you what, in your opinion, makes the theory
described in my article (attached to one of my mails on this list)
implausible?

(I consider the theory to be like foreign food: it looks weird, it
smells weird, but just try it and you may love it! ;) )
This applies to anyone: give me a good reason why the theory I support
is *not* plausible or even impossible! Thank you all in advance.
You will be rewarded! (with a fresh look at wayyiqtol and the definite
article ;) )

best regards,
Herman
Rotterdam