To: sbfnet AT netvision.net.il, b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
Subject: Re[3]: WEQATAL NONVOLITIVE
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 12:34:25 -0500 (EST)
Dear Prof. Niccacci,
Thank you for your help.
You wrote:
"I do not quite understand what do you mean by "matrix of the priestly
blessing" and "the blessing itself"?"
Here I was referring to Numbers 6:23b and 27, the words spoken to
Aaron and his sons, as the matrix or setting of the blessing,
distinguishing it from the words of blessing embedded in it, verses
24-26. The matrix is an instruction to the priests, but there is a
weqatal "non-volitive" form there. The blessing itself, with weyiqtol
forms, is volitive in a different sense of the priests desiring
blessings from God.
In the light of an off-list comment, may I ask for a clarification:
are you saying that weqatal is always nonvolitive and semantically
marked as such, or are you simply saying that weqatal is not
specifically marked a volitive and so may be used in volitive and
nonvolitive contexts. I would agree with the latter, but the former
gives me a problem, which may of course be solved when I am able to
read your book.
Peter Kirk
Title: Re[2]: WEQATAL NONVOLITIVE
Dear Peter Kirk,
Thanks for your comment.
I have tried to show that predictions (as the announcements of the
plagues) as well as instructions (as Exod. 26:1 ff.) use non-volitive
x-yiqtol, continued by weqatal. Weqatal usually appears in a chain. A
chain of weqatal's represents the mainline in direct speech when the
time reference is the future.
The direct-speech chain of weqatal corresponds to the narrative chain
of wayyiqtol. One could compare Exod. 26:1 ff. (God's instructions)
with Exod. 36:8 ff. (execution of those instructions). You might have
a look at my _Syntax_ ##58, where I compared those texts.
This is how I see the situation. I think BH distinguish weqatal from
weyiqtol, and the difference is: simple, non-volitive future, also
including modalities (can, may), versus volitive (comprising
promise).
I do not quite understand what do you mean by "matrix of the
priestly blessing" and "the blessing itself"?
Blessing is invoking or wishing God's mercy on someone. It is not the
same as benediction--like, "You are blessed, o Lord..."
*barukh 'attâ...*--which is indicative (non volitive). The versions
translate Num. 6:24-26 with volitive forms-- LXX *eulogêsai*;
Vulg. *benedicat*; RSV "The Lord bless you".
Have you different ideas?
Peace.
Alviero Niccacci
On 02/26/99 (Re[2]: WEQATAL NONVOLITIVE) Peter Kirk wrote:
> Dear Prof. Niccacci,
>
> Thank you for your helpful and clear explanations on this
list.
>
> I was rather surprised by your explanation of weqatal as
non-volitive.
> I have recently worked through the instructional and legal
material in
> Exodus-Deuteronomy. There there are many x-yiqtol followed by
weqatal
> sequences, e.g. Exodus 26:1ff with its repeated t.a(:a&eh
and
> w:(f&iytf. I had assumed that these sequences were in some
sense
> volitional, i.e. instructions, rather than simply predictions.
But
> according to your theory these are non-volitive. How do you
account
> for this?
>
> Surely also the matrix for the priestly blessing, Numbers
6:23,27, as
> well as the blessing itself, is volitive?
>
> Peter Kirk
Studium Biblicum Franciscanum Tel. +972
- 2 - 6282 936
POB 19424 - 91193 - Jerusalem Fax
+972 - 2 - 6264 519
Israel
Home Page:
http://198.62.75.1/www1/ofm/sbf/SBFmain.html
Email
mailto:sbfnet AT netvision.net.il