Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>]

Dear List,

I would like comments from the list regarding the wayyiqtol, yiqtol, etc. 
found
in the articles by Edward Cook http://ralphriver.blogspot.com/ which are found
below.

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III

Toward a Theory of Hebrew Poetic Tenses

A simplistic take of the Hebrew verbal system is that there are two
conjugations, the prefix-conjugation (or imperfect), or PC, and the
suffix-conjugation (or perfect), or SC. Formally, this is not far from the
truth, but it is generally recognized now that there are actually three
different PCs: the imperfect (PC1), the preterite (PC2) and the
jussive-cohortative (PC3). All of these have diverse historical origins.
Although formally they often fall together in Biblical Hebrew, occasional
differences in morphological form are discernible between these three.

There are also two kinds of SC: the perfect (SC1) and a second form (SC2)
sometimes called the "converted perfect," or just we-qatal (because in prose 
the
SC2 is usually preceded by the conjunction ו). My impression is that the SC2 
is
currently the most discussed of these forms. Although SC1 and SC2 may have the
same historical origin, they function synchronically in different ways, and
should always be distinguished.

The workings of these five conjugations is pretty well understood now in prose
texts: PC1 for future, general present, modal, or past habitual; PC2 for
narrative past; PC3 for volitional mood. SC1 is also used for past tense when
narrative sequence is not in view, while SC2 is used in the same way as PC1 
with
the added feature of sequentiality. There are various fine-tunings of all 
these
functions, but the broad outlines are agreed upon.

As I said, this picture is valid for prose only. When it comes to Hebrew 
poetry,
the outline is not so clear. Various conjugations appear in neighboring poetic
lines without clear difference in function. PC1 appears to sometime be used 
for
the past, SC1 for the future. Plus "odd" uses of SC1, such as the precative
perfect or the prophetic perfect, are claimed to appear in poetry.

Without going into the whole history of discussion, I propose that Hebrew 
poetry
is more like prose than usually thought, but with the difference that word 
order
is variable and the usual conjunctive particles that in prose differentiate 
the
conjugations are either absent or replaced with different particles. More
particularly, I think that the "odd" uses of the SC1 are often actually 
"normal"
uses of SC2. The reason this has been hard to notice is because usually SC2 in
prose occurs with the conjunction ו, but in poetry the ו is optional. In other
words, in poetry you can have the וקטל without the ו. This accounts for some
anomalies in Hebrew poetry.

For instance, in Ps. 23, all the finite verbs are PC1 except for v. 5,
‏dishanta. (The questionable form veshavti in v. 6 I leave out). Although
dishanta is SC, it is almost always translated in accordance with the presumed
general present tense of the other verbs: "thou anointest (my head with oil)."
Here it makes most sense to take this SC as SC2, continuing the tense of the
PC1. In prose, the line would read as follows: תערך שלחן -- ודשנת בשמן וגו ,
"you prepare a table ... and anoint with oil," etc.

Another example is from Ps. 11:2: הרשעים ידרכון קשת כוננו חצם , "the wicked
string the bow, they set their arrow (on the string)."** Most English
translations again use the general present for both verbs, although the first 
is
PC1 and the second is SC. In prose, the second verb would be וכוננו , "and 
then
they set," etc. It is SC2, not SC1.

The picture is complicated, of course, by the fact that SC1 is also used in
poetry, both in a past sense and, depending on the Aktionsart of the verb, as 
a
present. Plus it should be asked whether there was some kind of suprasegmental
differentiation (such as stress accent) between SC1 and SC2 in poetry. In a
future post, time permitting, I might go into these issues and also the 
question
of the prophetic perfect and the precative perfect as poetic usages of SC2, 
but
this necessarily brief survey gives the general idea. Comments and reactions 
are
welcome.

**Many translations obscure the fact that the idiom דרך קשת means "to string 
the
bow" (by stepping on one end and bending the other end down to attach the
string), not "to bend the bow (for shooting)." Hence stringing has to precede
setting the arrow, and the second verb cannot be taken as past or as
conceptually prior to bending.

Poetic Tenses (cont.): Hidden Preterites and False Preterites


1. As I noted previously, the SC2 can appear in poetry without the waw which
usually accompanies it in prose. The same is true (and this is more widely
accepted) of the PC2, which can appear in poetry as the type wayyiqtol, as in
prose, or simply as yiqtol. Examples are ready to hand, such as Ps. 24:2, כי 
הוא
על ימים יסדה || ועל נהרות יכוננה , "for he founded it (the earth) on the seas,
and made it firm on the rivers." The past orientation is clear from the 
context,
which deals with the creation of the earth. Other examples are Deut 32:10-13,
Ps. 18: 4-19; etc. (There is an excellent post here on this very verse, with
stimulating discussion in the comments.)

Another example, precisely of the same sort, is found in Ps. 78:58: 
‏‏ויכעיסוהו
בבמותם ובפסילים יקניאוהו. "They angered him with their high places, and with
their images made him jealous." Only the most captious or over-subtle
interpreter could find a difference in the time reference of the two verbs 
here.

2. More controversial are examples of the opposite kind, in which verbs
vocalized as preterites (PC2) must be understood as PC1 (imperfect) or jussive
(PC3). This entails a rejection of the Masoretic vocalization, but the overall
implicature of the poem, along with lexical and syntactical cues – in short, 
the
context – make such a move necessary in many cases. An example is Ps. 94:23:
‏‏וישב עליהם את אונם וברעתם יצמיתם. "May he turn against them their sin, and
destroy them for their evil."

In this case, the first verb wayyashev must be understood as PC3, not PC2. The
LXX translates both verbs in the future tense (see the BHS apparatus). Another
example is Ps. 29:9, where ‏וַיֶּחֱשֹׂף must be understood as PC1, in 
accordance
with the sense and form of the verb ‏יְחוֹלֵל in the previous line. Here also
the LXX translates the first verb as present participle, the second as future;
note also that the targum translates both by participles.

To sum up: in Biblical Hebrew poetry, the form known as wayyiqtol (preterite) 
in
prose can be simply yiqtol in poetry, but still a preterite. On the other 
hand,
forms that the Masoretic text presents as wayyiqtol preterites must sometimes 
be
understood from the context to be imperfect or jussive with conjunctive waw 
(and
therefore the MT must be vocalized differently).

I think these principles are fairly uncontroversial. I'll try to get to more
debatable ones (e.g., the prophetic perfect) sometime in the near future. In 
the
meantime, comments are welcome.


Comments Please.