...
I think you are applying too much logic here. If we read this as participle,
it would indeed imply that Abraham was already running. However, if we
for a moment suppose a "comic strip scenario," ...
One concordance of mine lists this along with 1 Sam 20:36 as instances of
QATAL RaC. But both here and I think also in 1 Sam 20:36 a participle
meaning is acceptable. This would leave no instances of QATAL RaC.
Perhaps there weren't any such instances in Biblical Hebrew usage. I don't
think we have a large enough data set to tell. But I think the presence of
7 participle RaC against 2 cases of "maybe participle maybe qatal" RaC
seem to suggest that the reading in those two cases is participle as well.
[now continuing from your earlier message]
The interesting point, however, is that this QATAL is not apparently a past perfect preceding the previous WAYYIQTOL, as presumably Abraham told Sarah what to do before running off.
Rubinstein wouldn't necessitate that QATAL is past perfect in such a case.
In some cases Rubinstein holds that QATAL is used simply for past since
WAYYIQTOL is prevented due to the Biblical author wanting to emphasize
something in the verse. In this case it seems clear that the Biblical author
wanted to emphasize the cattle, as the cattle comes first and we would
normally expect either WaYYaRaC Abraham or W:Abraham RaC. ...
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.