Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Overview and comments on Furuli, A New Understanding of the Verbal System of Classical Hebrew

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Harold Holmyard <hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Overview and comments on Furuli, A New Understanding of the Verbal System of Classical Hebrew
  • Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:06:08 -0500

Rolf Furuli wrote:
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.

HH: Yes, and I see no need for a special convention. A progressive imperfect perfectly suits the context.

The point I tried to make was that linguistic conventions does not affect or pinpoint the meaning of a verb form.

HH: I don't see a special literary convention here.
BTW, how do you know that YIQTOLs with past reference are progressive,

HH: I believe they are progressive in this context because Ezekiel is watching angels carry out a repeated movement. The action is ongoing, as his witness of it.

while WAYYIQTOLs with past reference are not progressive?

HH: Context usually shows that the wayyiqtols function as preterites.

Because the grammars say so?

HH: When authoritative sources and experience match up pretty well, it gives some confidence.

In that case, how do the grammarians know? Do Waltke and O´Connor prove their point, or do they just say so?

HH: The authors cite many sources for their conclusions. In one of my posts I cited evidence that they give for their conclusion about WATTQTL forms. They discuss the Amarna evidence from Byblos for three prefix conjugations. They mention the significance of the energic pattern in early Northwest Semitic and Arabic. They cite authorities on both sides of various views. They talk about Ugaritic, and parallels it has with biblical Hebrew. There are many pages of discussion (Waltke-O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, #31, 33).

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

Gen. 37:7 We were binding sheaves of grain out in the field when suddenly my sheaf rose (perfect) and stood upright (perfect), while your sheaves gathered (YIQTOL) around mine and bowed (WAYYIQTOL) down to it.”

HH: The participle "binding" describes an ongoing action. It is a brief action for a sheaf to rise and stand, but it would be a somewhat time-consuming process for the other eleven sheaves to move from their original positions and gather around Joseph's sheaf. So the imperfect idea seems suitable. Bowing, again, is a brief action and the WAYYQTL seems appropriate for it.

Exodus 1:12 Three YIQTOLs and one WAYYIQTOL

Ex. 1:12 But the more they were oppressed, the more they multiplied and spread; so the Egyptians came to dread the Israelites.

HH: The first three verbs are YIQTOL verbs because it is an ongoing process with K)$R and KN ("as . . . , so . . ."). The WAYYQTL form gives the result that the Egyptians felt dread concerning the Israelites.
Deuteronomy 2:12 One YIQTOL and two WAYYIQTOLs

Deut. 2:12 Horites used to live (YIQTOL) in Seir, but the descendants of Esau drove (YIQTOL) them out. They destroyed (WAYYIQTOL) the Horites from before them and settled (WAYYIQTOL) in their place, just as Israel did in the land the LORD gave them as their possession.)

HH: The first two verbs are YIQTOL forms. The NIV shows the past continuative idea with the first:
"used to live." It is joined by a "waw" plus noun clause with another YIQTOL. This type of clause usually gives circumstances, so I gather the writer was giving a parallel to the first clause. There was a process of the Edomites driving them out. The result of this process was that they destroyed this people and took over their land (the two WAYYIQTOL verbs).
Deuteronomy 32:12 One YIQTOL followed by one WAYYIQTOL

HH: I don't know what you mean here because there is no WAYYIQTOL verb in the verse. Perhaps you mean another verse.
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?

HH: This is an unusual passage in its handling of verbs.

Neh. 3:13 The Valley Gate was repaired (perfect) by Hanun and the residents of Zanoah. They rebuilt (perfect) it and put (WAYYIQTOL) its doors and bolts and bars in place. They also repaired five hundred yards of the wall as far as the Dung Gate.
Neh. 3:14 The Dung Gate was repaired (perfect) by Malkijah son of Recab, ruler of the district of Beth Hakkerem. He rebuilt it (YIQTOL) and put (WEYIQTOL) its doors and bolts and bars in place.
Neh. 3:15 The Fountain Gate was repaired (perfect) by Shallun son of Col-Hozeh, ruler of the district of Mizpah. He rebuilt it (YIQTOL), roofing it (WEYIQTOL) over and putting (WEYIQTOL) its doors and bolts and bars in place. He also repaired (perfect) the wall of the Pool of Siloam, by the King’s Garden, as far as the steps going down from the City of David.

HH: It's true that the same verbs handled as perfects in verse 13 (suffix conjugation) are handled as YIQTOL verbs in verses 14-15. I'd have to study the issue closely to try and determine if there is any pattern in the Book of Nehemiah. I'm not sure how he is using the verbs at this point, though verse 13 might suggest that verses 14-15 are using the imperfects in a preterite sense. Since biblical Hebrew sometimes uses a preterite YIQTOL, this would not be impossible, but it is unusual to see such forms in newer, non-poetic material. On the other hand, it is possible that the author simply changed perspective in verses 14-15 and described the same actions in terms of the ongoing process that it was. I'd have to study the book more closely to make a closer determination.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page