Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Isaac Fried <if AT math.bu.edu>]

Vadim,

I would translate VAYIKRA of Lev. 1:1 as "Then he called". The verse  
contains no definite articles, and "Lord" is only fifth in line. It  
is also not clear to me where you got this alien "would".

Isaac Fried, Boston University

On Mar 19, 2007, at 8:26 AM, Vadim Cherny wrote:

> > On 18/03/2007 16:55, Vadim Cherny wrote:
> > > ...
> > > Regarding wayiqtols, would you agree that no evidence contradicts
> > > understanding them as "and + future tense" with deictic center  
> > > shifts?
> > Well, on this hypothesis it is difficult to explain the WAYYIQTOLs at
> > the beginning of the books WAYYIQRA' = Leviticus and WAYDABBER =
> > Numbers, and several others if I remember correctly, including  
> > Jonah and
> > Ruth which cannot plausibly be understood as continuations of other
> > books.
>
> It is interesting how linguistic conventions affect perception of  
> text. I
> have always found it difficult to follow the English a/the articles.
> In your example, however, as a Russian speaker, I find wayiqtol  
> completely
> natural.
> Thus, in Lev1:1, "And the Lord would call unto Moses". The narrator  
> took a
> stylo, paused, immersed himself in the events, and started in the  
> future
> tense.
>
> > And then there certainly are cases where WAYYIQTOL is not
> > strictly sequential.
>
> I didn't see them and would appreciate examples.
> > So I think you will find it hard to show that
> > WAYYIQTOL is always relative future. A more plausible suggestion  
> > would
> > be that the regular use of this form in narrative originated in cases
> > where there was a clearly defined prior deictic centre, and use of  
> > the
> > form was then generalised to include cases where the deictic  
> > centre has
> > not been clearly set up. In other words, WAYYIQTOL might have  
> > started as
> > a relative future tense, but later shifted to be a simple narrative
> > tense in fact used at least primarily in the past.
>
> That's a reasonable suggestion, and I also advance it in the expanded
> version of the hypothesis. But it critically depends on the  
> discovery of
> wayiqtols in documents which clearly lack the deictic center  
> shifts, as the
> commercial papyri.
>
> > But this does not explain apocopation
>
> Apocopation is, in my opinion, a purely phonetic issue. When the  
> accent
> shifts onto the first syllable, the unaccented final vowel is lost.
>
> Vadim Cherny
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew