> >presented. The latter part of Judges 12 has several "chains" of
> >WAYYIQTOL that cannot possibly be "sequential," in terms of time
> >or "logical consequence" or any of the other common extensions of
> >the term.
>
> I don't see the problem here at all. They seem quite clearly sequential to me.
This is the funniest thing I've read here in many a day. So what
you're saying is, Ibzan judged Israel for an indeterminate time
(wayyiqtol), took time off to have 60 kids (wayyiqtol) and raise them
old enough to marry them all off, then resumed judging for 7 years
(wayyiqtol). Elon judged Israel (wayyiqtol) then judged some more
(wayyiqtol). Abdon, like Ibzan, judged for a while (wayyiqtol), took a
vacation to raise his children and grandchildren (wayyiqtol) and then
resumed judging (wayyiqtol). Oh, "clearly sequential." Uh huh.
Sure. Get real.
> Not according to virtually every other Hebrew grammarian including Driver,
> GKC, Kelly, Juon Waltke and O'Connor.
Do you really suppose I haven't read them, Andrew? You border on
being insulting with this kind of condescension. It was years of
study of these grammars that pointed out to me the weakness of the
theory. And incidentally, it's Jouon, not Juon, and you need a
comma after it. I can be condescending, too <g>
Like Ibzan and Abdon, right? Yup. "Easily detected."
I suggest you
read something beyond the basics. You could start with Andersen,
and then move on to my 1994 Hebrew Studies paper. You are
clearly one of those people who needs to "get over it." A good basic
book on linguistics would be a good investment, as well, something
like Radford's "Transformational Grammar." Andersen and I both
show plenty of places where there is no connection between a
wayyiqtol and what precedes. Until your learning gets beyond this
kind of simplistic regurgitation of what you've read, I don't think we
can have a productive conversation.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.