Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>]

Randall Buth wrote:

Clauses with maHar 'tomorrow' never have 'qatal' or wayyiqtol' as
the main verb. Zero out of 52. That is fairly significant statistical
evidence that is against the prediction of 'aspect-only' or 'modal-
only' theories of the Hebrew verb.

=======

This is a fair point, Randall. However, I wonder whether this is simply 
because Hebrew has a default perspective of looking at the past. That is, if 
we think about aspect and how one is to 'see' an action, then that which is 
'before the face' is לפנים—the past. Thus, Qatal, being the most basic or 
default of the verbs, is the verb of least resistance and, therefore, is past 
referring by default. That's why you don't get a simple Qatal referring to 
the future. However, when a Qatal is attached conjunctively to another 
verb/clause (i.e. when it becomes a weqatal), it continues the sense of that 
head verb/clause without resistance. Statistically this happens to be 
future-referring most of the time, but this is simply statistical accidence, 
not a design of the weqatal.

I'd value your opinion on this take of things.


GEORGE ATHAS
Director of Postgraduate Studies,
Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au)
Sydney, Australia