Biblical Hebrew Forum

[David Kummerow <farmerjoeblo AT hotmail.com>]

> And here is something that DK seems to have overlooked, namely, that 
> narrative sequences have different properties that cannot be ascribed to 
> the verb forms:  B. Comrie (1985) "Tense" p. 63 says:
>
> "In looking for examples of relative time reference, it is essential to 
> ensure that the relative time reference interpretation is part of the 
> meaning of the form in question, rather than an implicature derived 
> from, in part, the context. One area which is particularly confusing in 
> this respect is narrative, where one gains the impression that a 
> sequence of events which are located temporally one almost immediately 
> after the other, the chronological sequence mirrored in a linear order 
> of clauses. Thus one might be tempted to think that this sequencing is 
> part of the meaning of the verb forms used, thus introducing a meaning 
> of 'immediate past' or 'immediate future' relative time reference 
> (depending on whether one defined the time reference of the preceding 
> verb in terms of the following verb, vice versa). However, as was shown 
> in section 1.8 this sequencing of events is a property of the narrative 
> itself, quite independent of the verb form used to encode the narrative, 
> so that the mere fact that verb forms receive this interpretation in 
> narrative is not sufficient evidence for assigning this meaning to the 
> verb forms."

Hi Rolf,

Again you've misrepresented me. I haven't overlooked it, it's just that 
I haven't expressed my view on this in print. I agree with Comrie. Also, 
I don't take sequencing as being part of the semantics of wayyiqtol. 
Please don't suggest that I do, because I don't. Where I have I stated 
otherwise that you can point to? If I have that I can't remember, then I 
retract what I said.

Regards,
David Kummerow.