Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

A few issues here:

Firstly, Wayyiqtol is not not the only way for referring to the past. Qatal 
can also be used. However, I would argue that even calling these conjugations 
as past referring is a misunderstanding of the grammar.

Karl argued that Hebrew is not marked for aspect, but then defined this as an 
axis of completed/uncompleted action. That, however, is not so much 'aspect' 
as it is 'Aktionsart'.

Todd did raise the issue of clause initial verbs, which is an important 
consideration. A negated verb can never be clause initial, because the 
negation must precede it. So there is a pragmatic consideration here. But 
even if we had three positive assertions being made in Ps 1.1, we would not 
get wayyqitol verbs, because they would each produce narrative momentum. This 
is not what the verse is trying to do, though. The use of Qatal verbs in this 
clause is for the statement of simple fact: a man who has not walked… stood… 
or sat… This is just what the Qatal does: state an action as a simple fact.

The use of Yiqtol in 1.2 is simply to indicate the generality of the 
righteous man's practice. These are actions that occur many times, and are 
indicative of the past, as well as implying intention for the future.


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