I'm not sure I am following you here. Is the theory suggesting that WAW-YOD is the prefix of VAYIQRA and the resulting form is equivalent to a perfect?
In a message dated 3/21/2007 10:13:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hholmyard3 AT earthlink.net writes:
HH: I am not familiar with the latest theory, but my understanding is that current ideas involve the possibility that there were originally two prefix verb conjugations, a long and a short form. The "conversive waw" would represent a phonological difference dependent on use of the original short form. There are occasional long form "waw conversives" and these are seen to be "secondary, analogical developments" by some scholars (Waltke-O'Connor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, 33.1-2). So it is not exactly the waw changing the meaning of the verb, but two different verbs with different meanings, one of which is represented in the waw conversive.
************************************** AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.