Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Harold,

Clusters of YIQTOLs with past reference are very rare; one other occurrence 
is the building of  the tabrnacle. When such a thing occurs, there is some 
reason for it, and my suggestion was that there is a convention in such 
situations to use YIQTOLs. The point I tried to make was that linguistic 
conventions does not affect or pinpoint the meaning of a verb form.

BTW, how do you know that YIQTOLs with past reference are progressive, while 
WAYYIQTOLs with past reference are not progressive?  Because the grammars 
say so? In that case, how do the grammarians know?  Do Waltke and O´Connor 
prove their point, or do they just say so?  Please look at the examples 
below and tell me why the YIQTOLs should be taken as progressive why and the 
WAYYIQTOLs should not.

Genesis 37:7 One YIQTOL  followed by one WAYYIQTOL

Exodus 1:12 Three YIQTOLs and one WAYYIQTOL

Deuteronomy 2:12  One YIQTOL and two WAYYIQTOLs

Deuteronomy 32:12 One YIQTOL followed by one WAYYIQTOL

Please also consider Nehemiah 3:13-15. Are the two YIQTOLs and three 
WEYIQTOLs in these verses progressive while the WAYYIQTOL in v.13 with of 
the same root as one of the WEYIQTOLs in v. 15 is not progressive?


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harold Holmyard" <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Overview and comments on Furuli, A New Understanding 
of the Verbal System of Classical Hebrew


> Rolf Furuli wrote:
> > I object strongly to the claim that linguistic convention and  the
> > intrinsic meaning of a verb form are interchangeable. For example, in 50
> > verses in Ezekiel chapters 1and 10 we find a description of a heavenly
> > throne. Of the verbs with past reference I count 28 YIQTOLs, 2 QATALs, 7
> > participles, two infinitive absolutes, and 15 WAYYIQTOLs. In addition, 
> > there
> > are 3 QATALs with pre-past meaning. Why do we have all these YIQTOLs with
> > past reference  in this scenario? Interestingly, when I translated the
> > Ethiopic Enoch into Norwegian some years ago, I found the same excess of 
> > imperfective
> > forms, with and without prefixed WAW in the heavenly visions in that 
> > book.
> > Logically, there is some linguistic convention behind this, but this
> > convention does not tell us anything about the intrinsic meaning of the
> > YIQTOLs or the Ethiopic prefix-forms.
>
> HH: I just looked at Ezekiel 10, and there is nothing in the use of the
> verbs that does not seem to fit into well-known categories of usage. The
> YIQTOLS give every evidence of being progressive imperfectives
> (Waltke-O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax #31.3b). They describe ongoing
> action that the prophet observes.
>
> Yours,
> Harold Holmyard
>
> _______________________________________________