Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - [b-hebrew] Question for Rolf on the JW outlook on the Hebrew verbal system

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: MarjorieAlley AT cs.com
  • To: furuli AT online.no, b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [b-hebrew] Question for Rolf on the JW outlook on the Hebrew verbal system
  • Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:21:37 EDT

Rolf ---

Thank you for your gracious and lengthy reply to what was indeed a personal
question (albeit one which I thought was relevant since a scholar's
underlying
presuppositions may affect the direction of his research or even cause him to
dismiss out-of-hand certain positions contrary to his working hypothesis.)

>>> The first time I realised problems with the understanding of the Hebrew
verbal system was in 1961 when I read about it in the Foreword of the New
World
Translation. It caught my attention, but I forgot it until I read the book
"The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System" (1982) by L. McFall.<<<

Even if the details of the NWT foreword slipped your mind until you read
McFall's treatment of the verbal system some twenty years later, I find
myself
wondering whether twenty to thirty years of reading a translation which
emphasizes a particular POV of the Hebrew verbal system might not have had a
subtle
effect on your thinking when you later took up the topic in formal study?

While I doubt if there is any way of assessing the psychological effect of
twenty to thirty years' worth of reading phrases such as "and God proceeded
to
say," "and God began calling," "and God went on to say," etc. which reflect
the
NWT's stated purpose of "present[ing] the Hebrew verbs with accurate meaning
and dynamism by maintaining a distinction between the perfect and the
imperfect states of the Hebrew verbs," I think it not unreasonable to
suppose that
this constant repetition would indeed have some effect on one's thinking.


>>> A situation not very different from this is seen in Hebrew studies from
end of the 19th century and up to the present. A typical example is the
creation of the ad hoc hypothesis of "prophetic perfect," which was invented
in the
19th centuries. It has since been parroted over and over again in Grammars
and
Textbooks, but I have never seen any serious attempt to *prove* it (See
Gesenius-Kautzsch 106, n (p.312) and Waltke-O´Connor 30. 5.1e (pp. 489-490).
And
that is natural, since it is a psychological explanation, it requires
aknowledge of the minds of dead prophets.
<<<

Was "the ad hoc hypothesis of 'prophetic perfect' " really invented in the
19th century?

I see that the editor of the Shottenstein edition of Tehillim, published by
Mesorah Publications (Artscroll, an Orthodox Jewish publishing house) accepts
the prophetic perfect:

"In Tehillim, as elsewhere in Tanach, future events are described in the past
tense, because the prophet has seen these events in his prophetic vision."
(p. xii, Editor's Foreword.)

I confess that I have no evidence regarding the history of the "prophetic
perfect" interpretation, but I would be surprised to find that Orthodox Jews
so
readily adopted a 19th century "ad hoc hypothesis." I would expect their
understanding to go much further back, perhaps to Qimhi or Rashi?

Thank you again for responding to my previous post. I appreciate your
willingness to discuss the factors which have influenced the direction of
your
research.

Kind regards,
Marjorie Alley </HTML>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page