Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Rolf:

I agree with you. However, I anticipated Randall’s response even as I
read your rejoinder.

There are two problems with Randall’s approach to the question as I see them:

1) If there is even the slightest doubt that the sentence refers to
the present, he rejects it.

2) He limits objections to the Yiqtol, whereas you and I accept the
use of the Qatal just as much a disproof of his claim as a Yiqtol.

Offlist I responded, “Now let’s look at Exodus 3:7, 9 which together
have five Qatal verbs to refer to the present. These are not future,
nor past, but “I see” “I hear” “I know” and that’s why I send you
Moses. Again in verse 19 “I know”. You might try to argue that these
were timeless, but they referred to the then present situation of
Israel in Egypt, and of the particular king they were dealing with.
That was ‘present’ for that time. It is not present for another time.”
I view this as an example of the present as being denoted by other
than the participle in direct speech.

Further, the participle is not used only for the present, as Genesis
19:13 shows, namely there the participle denotes the future from when
the the sentence was stated. I find that as an example against the
argument that the present is denoted by use of the participle.

I understand Randall’s desire to discover the way two ancient Hebrews
would have spoken had we been able to record their voices. But I don’t
think the conversations recorded in Tanakh support his thesis that
Biblical Hebrew declarative statement conversations had a noun/pronoun
with participle to denote the present and no other syntax.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Rolf Furuli<furuli AT online.no> wrote:
> Dear Randall,
>
> It seems to me that you are trying to force the
> tower of Pisa into a different position. The
> standard definition of "Present tense" (I do not
> use "tense") is found in B. Comrie (1985)
> "Tense". He shows that an event that includes the
> present moment and continues fits the definition.
> In my view, all my examples fit this definition,
> and I will let the list-members judge whether
> this is true or not.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rolf Furuli
> University of Oslo
>