...Liz (and Isaac), this contention is not mine or Rolf's but goes back to Gesenius. or at least GKC. He wrote (section 107b-i) that "the imperfect [our YIQTOL] serves - 1. In the sphere of /past time/: (a) To express actions, &c., which /continued/ throughout a longer or shorter period ... (b) To express actions, &c., which were /repeated/ in the past, either at fixed intervals or occasionally ... 2. In the sphere of /present time/, again (a) To express actions, &c., which are /continued/ for a longer or shorter time ... (b) To express actions, &c., which may be /repeated/ at any time, including therefore the present, or are /customarily/ repeated on a given occasion ... (c) To express actions, &c., which although, strictly speaking, they are already finished, are regarded as still lasting on into the present time, or continuing to operate in it ... 3. In the sphere of /future time/ ..." GKC gives many examples of each of these categories, starting with ya`aleh in Genesis 2:6, clearly not future to any composer!
Dear Peter,
I understand that is your contention, and Rolf's. I am still waiting for a
sentence with a Yiqtol in it that I would agree would make no sense that
way. I allowed for the future to begin the moment the pen is lifted from the
paper of the composer.
Liz Fried
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.