Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] The Explicative use of wayyiqtol

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: <moon AT sogang.ac.kr>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] The Explicative use of wayyiqtol
  • Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 16:06:55 +0900 (KST)





Hi,


&nbsp;


there have been many and in depth discussions on the sequential nature of


WAYYIQTOL.&nbsp; The following is the quote from the archive of this list
written by


Prof. Niccacci:


&nbsp;


&nbsp;


&nbsp;The information conveyed by this wayyiqtol is USUALLY
ALSO
CHRONOLOGICALLY sequential (or successive) to that of the
preceding
wayyiqtol; however, there are cases of explicative wayyiqtol as
well as of
resumptive wayyiqtol. This fact does not contradict the claim
that
wayyiqtol is sequential; it only qualifies it.



--------------------------------


I would accept the above explanation about the "resumptive" wayyitol,
because


the resumption starts a new sequence. Though not explicitly mentioned
above


I would accept the "summarizing" use of wayyiqtol, because the
summarizing


is a sort of conclusion which is a sort of logical entailment, which involves



a kind of sequence.&nbsp;


&nbsp;


But, it is beyond my imagination how the explicative use of wayyiqtol


only qualifies the sequential nature of wayyiqtol.&nbsp;For example


consider Num 1:47-54.


&nbsp;


&nbsp;The families of the tribe of Levi, however, were not counted (X + QATAL
)&nbsp;along with the others.
&nbsp;48 The LORD had said to Moses
(WAYYIQTOL):
&nbsp;49-53 "You must not count the tribe of Levi or include
them in the census of the other Israelites. ......."


&nbsp;54 The Israelites did&nbsp; (WAYYIQTOL) all this just as the LORD
commanded Moses.


Verse 54 is an example of summarizing use of wayyiqtol, which summarizes


all things mentioned&nbsp; in the chapter 1 before that verse. So, verse 54
is not a part of


a sequence started by WAYYIQTOL of verse 48.&nbsp;So, we have here a
stand-alone


single&nbsp;WAYYIQTOL. A stand-alone single WAYYIQTOL cannot form a
sequence,


which requires at least two WAYYITOLs.


&nbsp;


Can anyone explain this passage within the framework that&nbsp;WAYYIQTOL
is


sequential in a "broad sense" or a "qualified sense" to use Niccacci's
words?


&nbsp;


Moon-Ryul Jung


Sogang Univ,


Seoul, Korea


&nbsp;&nbsp;








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page