Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 12:50 AM, Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no> wrote:

>
> …
>
> The task of the student, therefore, is to study different Hebrew texts,
> find the deictic center (C) of each verb, and see how and where reference
> time (RT) intersects event time (ET). I propose a challenge: Apply this to
> Proverbs 31:10-31, and explain why so many different verb forms are used in
> the same way with the same temporal reference.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rolf Furuli
>
> That is a good example of where C, RT and ET indicate that the qatal and
yiqtol do not grammaticalize for time at all, neither tense nor aspect. But
the conjugations do fit within the qatal = primary and yiqtol = secondary
that I proposed earlier.

An example of primary vs. secondary would be a long answer to the question,
“What did you do yesterday?” where “I woke up at 5. Then I took a shower.
Then I walked the dog. Then I ate breakfast. Then I went to the store to buy
lunch. Then … Then … Then … …” with each of the ‘thens’ indicating a
continuation, secondary, to waking up. In Biblical Hebrew, each ‘then’ is
usually written with the wayyiqtol, and with so much of Tanakh being
narration, as in the long answer above, it is no surprise that most
wayyiqtols refer to past events.

When one looks at Proverbs 31:10–31, one finds that the majority of verses
are made up of a primary idea, followed by a secondary verb that indicates a
completion or continuation of the primary idea. The primary idea is written
with a qatal, the secondary a yiqtol.

As long as Fred insists that the Biblical Hebrew verbs conjugate for time
and that time is tense, he is not going to get anywhere in his
understanding. This is an example of where the lack of terminology can
restrict understanding. After reading Tanakh through cover to cover, I found
that qatal and yiqtol don’t grammaticalize for aspect either. That is why I
propose the ‘primary’ vs. ‘secondary’ meanings as the purpose of the
conjugations, but as of yet, this idea is very preliminary, like the alpha
release of new software, therefore may need much refining to become
completely understood.

Karl W. Randolph.