From: "Silberman, Alfred" <alfred.silberman AT lmco.com>
To: "'Peter_Kirk AT SIL.ORG'" <Peter_Kirk AT SIL.ORG>, "'Biblical Hebrew'" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Subject: X + qatal (Peter)
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 08:34:33 -0500
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter_Kirk AT SIL.ORG
>
> I accept the danger of the hypothesis becoming meaningless
> or tautologous (e.g. X + qatal
> means past or present or future!) but I think it still has
> some meaningful and explanatory content.
>
An interesting example of this may exist in Iyyov 22:13:
"Ve'amarta" here has the past tense form. While the accent on the
word is not clearly indicated - it is a 'dekhi" and not placed on the
accented syllable - the word has an ultimate stress (I infer this from the
metheg found in some manuscripts). The prefix vav is taken as a Vav
Hahippukh by the targum and the future tense in the Aramaic is used.
However, in English, the two translations I checked - JPS and Koren - use
the present tense for forming the proper English sentence.