Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Verbal Aspect (was Tenses - Deut 6:4)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Verbal Aspect (was Tenses - Deut 6:4)
  • Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 09:14:51 +1100

Hi Peter,

The cosubordinate constructional analysis of weqatal is by no means my idea. Matthew Anstey argues this in his dissertation and in an article which may still be in preparation, I'll have to check. Other related research on verbal deranking in BH is: Winther-Nielsen 1995: 53-62, 270-277; Dallaire 2002; Diehl 2004; Baayen 1997; Talstra 1997. The cosubordinate uses of weqatal are diachronically explainable (see Rainey's Amarna work and article in ANES) and typologically unexceptionable due to cross-linguistic similarity (see Cristofaro 2003).

I have not suggested that this is the case with wayyiqtol and do not believe it is so (DeCaen from memory argues something along these lines though with his proposal of modal coordination). That is, wayyiqtol is a narrative verb. qatal has a range of uses, the core of which in my opinion may be related to past tense, but may also be used in cosubordinate constructions.

Baayen, R. Harald. 1997. "The Pragmatics of the 'Tenses' in Biblical Hebrew." Studies in Language 21: 245-285.
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2003. Subordination. Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dallaire, Hélène. 2002. "The Syntax of Volitives in Northwest Semitic Prose." PhD diss., Hebrew Union College.
Diehl, Johannes F. 2004. Die Fortführung des Imperativs im Biblischen Hebräisch. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 286. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.
Rainey, A. F. 2003. "The Suffix Conjugation Pattern in Ancient Hebrew: Tense and Modal Functions." Ancient Near Eastern Studies 40: 3-42.
Talstra, Eep. 1997. "Tense, Mood, Aspect and Clause Connections in Biblical Hebrew: A Textual Approach." Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 23/2: 81-103.
Winther-Nielsen, Nicolai. 1995. A Functional Discourse Grammar of Joshua: A Computer-Assisted Rhetorical Structure Analysis. Coniectanea Biblica Old Testament Series 40. Stochholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.

Regards,
David Kummerow.

On 16/03/2007 19:44, David Kummerow wrote:

>/ ... weqatal is used in cosubordinate />/ constructions where it inherits its tense, aspect, mood, and />/ illocutionary force from the preceding main clause. ...
/
This is an interesting way of putting things which might clarify what I wrote before about WEQATAL.

Would you suggest something similar about WAYYIQTOL? We might then argue that the function of the prefixed vav is to neutralise the tense and aspect attributes of the verb form so that it takes the tense and aspect of the preceding main clause. Thus the prefixed vav has one function, not two contradictory ones.

But the problem with this analysis is that it does not explain why WEQATAL is used in some contexts and WAYYIQTOL and WEYIQTOL in others.

Another problem with this is that WAYYIQTOL is sometimes found without a preceding main clause, or else the main clause gives a background and setting, or a time, which clearly has a different tense and aspect from the WAYYIQTOL clause. But I then this happens with WEQATAL as well, in cases like Jeremiah 9:24 (English v.25) HINNEH YAMIM BA'IM ... UPAQADTIY ... (similar references are Jeremiah 7:32; 9:25; 16:14; 19:6; 23:5,7; 30:3; 31:27,38; 33:14; 48:12; 49:2; 51:52; Amos 8:11; 9:13; I haven't checked them all); the WEQATAL UPAQADTIY surely does not have the progressive aspect of the main clause expressed in a participle. So your description of WEQATAL, attractive though it is, doesn't work.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter at qaya.org
<http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>
Blog: http://www.qaya.org/blog/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page