Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Randall Buth <randallbuth AT gmail.com>]

> From: 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

Many things in language start out as physical relationships. However,
they develop into a full-blown system and must be treated as a system
not as an etymology. So basically, I find that an orientation like 'before'
'at the face' referring to past time is irrelevant to a discussion, though
it would support my own position.

In addition, however, I certainly do not think that weqatal continues the
sense of a head verb. It (weqatal) is its own tense-aspect-mood.
See, for example:
Gen 47:22 (ואכלו 'and they were eating' following qatal negated past),
1Sm 2:22 (ושמע 'and was hearing' following qatal past or verbless
[adjective] indicative),
Ruth 3:9 (ופרשת 'and you should spread out' following verbless indicative),
Judges 13:3 (והרית וילדת 'and you will be pregnant and will give birth'
following qatal negated past/perfect), and
2Ki 6:10 (והזהירה 'and he was warning the place[city]' following
wayyiqtol past).

The reason for Hebrew to have developed TWO sequential Tense-Aspect-Moods
(wayyiqtol and weqatal) is two allow each one to mark one specific T-A-M group
within the binary T-A-M verb system of BH.
See Living Biblical Hebrew, Part 3 (gimel), Selected Readings with 500 
Friends,
(Biblical Language Center, 2007) pages 153-157.

Among other citations in the pages above (155) is a reference to the
Arad letter 16:3-5 where weqatal ושלחתי follows a verbless clause.
I read it naturally as a sequential future
"and I will send the money" because that is the easiest reading within a
'Relevance theory' approach. Of anecdotal interest:
Pardee reversed himself in Context of Scripture, and now
independently agrees with me, arguing that such is the first and most likely
reading for the language users of the time.

blessings,
Randall Buth

--
Randall Buth, PhD
www.biblicallanguagecenter.com
Biblical Language Center
Learn Easily - Progress Further - Remember for Life