Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] How does biblical Hebrew describe a present event?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] How does biblical Hebrew describe a present event?
  • Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:52:11 +0200

Dear Randall,

Now we come to the leaning tower of Pisa. But before we can see how straight it is, we need some discussion. While I would not use the discourse analysis of Niccacci or anyone else to find the *meaning* of Hebrew verbs, discourse analysis has its legitimate place in the study of any language. By the help of discourse principles we can find linguistic conventions and particular discourse patterns.

In connection with our discussion, we may note that the use of personal pronouns is different in connection with participles compared with finite verbs. When a participle functions similarly to a finite verb it is often preceded by a pronoun. But together with a YIQTOL, a WAYYIQTOL, or a QATAL we rarely find a personal pronoun. And when we find one, our first thought is that it stresses the person in some way.
On this basis, your B-examples (hu yivne [davar]) and your C-examples (hu bana [davar]) in your first post in this thread are excluded because of discourse reasons, and not because of temporal reasons.
We also know that word order can be important because of the discourse factors theme and rheme, or because of modality considerations. The first verb R)H in your example "*er'e et ha-`ets sham *"I see the tree there"" may have been taken as jussive because of its clause-initial place. So, if an author wrote in the indicative, he would hardly have started with a YIQTOL (though there are some clause-initial YIQTOLs in indicative clauses).

My main point in the previous paragraph is that we must take the discourse constraints into consideration. We cannot just point to examples of pronouns and participles with present reference in direct speech, and argue that there are few if any YIQTOLS and QATALs with present reference in direct speech. And therefore, the participle is THE present form in BH. Moreover, there can be other reasons for the use of a particular form (e.g., a participle) in a particular context, and situations which are different may be scarce.

But what kind of examples do we have from Pisa? All quotes are from NIV


YIQTOL WITH PRESENT REFERENCE

DEUT 20:20:

However, you may cut down trees that you know (YIQTOL)

A present state (to know) is expressed by YIQTOL.

2 Samuel 18:27:
The watchman said (WAYYIQTOL), "It seems to me (PERS. PRON+PART) that the first one runs (NOUN) like Ahimaaz son of Zadok." "He's a good man (NOMINAL CLAUSE.)," the king said (WAYYIQTOL). "He comes (YIQTOL) with good news."

A present action (to come) is expressed by YIQTOL.




WAYYIQTOL WITH PRESENT REFERENCE

1 KINGS 19:10:
He replied (WAYYIQTOL), "I have been very zealous (QATAL+ INF. ABS) for the LORD God Almighty. The Israelites have rejected (QATAL) your covenant, broken down (QATAL) your altars, and put your prophets to death (QATAL) with the sword. I am the only one left (WAYYIQTOL+ PERS. PRON), and now they are trying to kill (WAYYIQTOL) me too."

In this verse we find two WAYYIQTOLs with present reference, and the first is connected with a personal pronoun.

1 Kings 8:20:
"The LORD has kept (WAYYIQTOL) the promise he made (QATAL): I have succeeded (WAYYIQTOL) David my father and now I sit (WAYYIQTOL) on the throne of Israel, just as the LORD promised (QATAL), and I have built (WAYYIQTOL) the temple for the Name of the LORD, the God of Israel.

In this verse we find three WAYYIQTOLs with a present completed force, and one is used with present reference ("I sit")



QATAL WITH PRESENT REFRENCE

1 SAMUEL 8:5:
They said (WAYYIQTOL) to him, "You are old (QATAL), and your sons do not walk (QATAL) in your ways;

In this verse we have two QATALs with present reference. The second do not fit your exceptions, because it is negated. But this is rather artificial; why should not a negative statement with present reference be representative of present reference?

1 Kings 17:24:
Then the woman said (WAYYIQTOL) to Elijah, "Now I know (QATAL) that you are a man of God

The QATAL is connected with the adverb "now," so the reference must be present.



WEQATAL WITH PRESENT REFERENCE

Genesis 9:9, 11:
(9) I now establish (PARTICIPLE + PERS. PRON) my covenant with you
(11) I establish (WEQATAL) my covenant with you


Here we have exactly the same present situation in both instances. In the first case it is expressed by a personal pronoun and participle, and in the second case it is expressed by a WEQATAL. This shows that there are several ways for the expression of present reference in direct speech.

In order to be sensitive to gravity, it is important, not only to avoid saying that the leaning tower of Pisa is standing straight, but also avoid saying that the tower is leaning in the opposite direction than really is the case. This would be the case if one tries to explain away examples that contradict particular viewpoints.

I do not dispute your claim that a normal way of expressing present reference in direct speech is by the use of a personal pronoun and a participle. But I say that there also are other ways, as shown above; and the examples could be multiplied. However, to find the most common way to express direct speech tells us very little regarding which verb forms in BH that can be used with present reference. This is so because the situations from which examples can be taken are so restricted. In order to find how present reference is expressed in BH, we must consider all such situations. this is corroborated from the examples Waltke/O'Connor give regarding YIQTOL and present reference.

BTW. In this thread no one has claimed that WAYYIQTOL is a present tense. The closest we come to such an idea is that I said that WAYIQTOL is nothing but a YIQTOL with a prefixed conjunction. I never use the word "present tense" to describe BH or English verbs, because in these cases I view the expression as a misnomer.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo



After another set of six comments, it is probably useful to re-orient
back to the original issue. None of the comments proposed
a YIQTOL example in an actual, positive, real, present reference,
(yes, given a strict set of parameters to insure that we are
comparing a few apples to a few apples)
though one comment assured that such was 'accurate', and another
seemed to imply that the vayyiqtol was effictively a present tense. If the
latter, then one wonders what distinguishes vayyiqtol +Subject from
ve-Subject+qotel, or even ve-qotel Subject? But that would need to
be a different thread.

Let's keep looking for some bonafide examples
of present yiqtol without outside contingencies. The kind that
Hebrew profs keep giving me like:

* er'e et ha-`ets sham *"I see the tree there"

Again, look at this the other way around:
What if I had a class and was saying to a standing student

* ta`amod sham vaani e`mod po
as if to say * "you're standing there and I'm standing here"

I would have hoped that people would have jumped all over me and
said
'show us some good examples for the kind of Hebrew you're teaching!'
(they sure do that fast when they hear participles !
"I get slandered, libeled, I hear words I never heard in the Bible")

Instead, it may be that people are looking from a 'leaning tower of pisa'
so that if I would lean with them they would say
'you're standing straight'.

But I'm sensitive to gravity and want to stand straight.

blessings
Randall Buth





--
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicalulpan.org
randallbuth AT gmail.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page