Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Randall,

An argument of yours in a previous post in favor of Qohelet being 
Proto-Mishnaic Hebrew was:

"and the frequent use of ve-qatal (50xx) instead of vayyixtov is 'low
dialect' not just Second Temple, and lines up with Mishnaic Hebrew."

Below is the statistics of the use in Qohelet of QATAL  with prefixed 
W (WEQATAL) and with prefixed $. Could you please show the list how 
the use of the prefix-forms in Qohelet  "lines up" with Mishnaic 
Hebrew?


VERBS IN QOHELET (TEMPORAL REFERENCES)

WEQATAL

Past: 24
Present: 7
Perfect: 1
Future: 2 (not future perfect)
Gnomic: 11
progressive past: 1
Modal: 2

QATAL:

Past: 44
Present: 31
Perfect: 31
Future: 2 (not future perfect)
Gnomic: 26
progressive past: 1
Modal: 1

In addition to the QATALs and WEQATALs Qohelet has 115 YIQTOLs and 3 
WAYYIQTOLs.


Which traits are Mishnaic of Proto-Mischnaic?  The past and perfect 
references of Qatal agrees with Mishnaic Hebrew, but we also find 
this use elsewhere in the Tanakh. But what about all the gnomic 
(=expressions of general truths) examples, all the examples with 
present reference, and the two examples of QATAL with future 
reference? And how shall we explain the WAYYIQTOLs?

Moreover, in the book of Proverbs we find 150 QATALs and 41 WEQATALs, 
and they have about the same temporal reference as the QATALs and 
WEQATALs in Qohelet. But we find only 28 WAYYIQTOLs. The reason for 
the many QATALs and the few WAYYIQTOLs is of course genre and style. 
So why could not the extensive use of QATALs/WEQATALs in Qohelet 
(compared with the few WAYYIQTOLs) also be ascribed to genre and 
style, because Qothelet is in many respects similar to Proverbs?


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo