Shalom Rolf > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Rolf" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 14:12:31 +0100 > Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Tense > Dear Chavoux, > > Se my comments below. <snip> > RF: Regardless of our view of the Classical Hebrew verbal system we must > study the text that we have. There are many orthographical variations, but if > we accept the dates given in the different books; thus accepting that the > text was written down over a period of several hundred years, the text is > remarkably uniform. If we take bad grammar into consideration, each scholar > must, when he detects a clause that contradicts a particular view, ask > whether this may be caused by bad grammar. We can illustrate the situation by > looking at some of the examples above and the use of the negation L(. > > Judges 6:4 tells us three things, which are connected wit WAW (and): And they > camped (WAYYIQTOL), and they destroyed (WAYYIQTOL), and they did not let > anything remain (YIQTOL). The reason for the use of YIQTOL is that the verb > is preceded by WAY+negation. if the negation was removed, the WAW would have > been prefixed to the YIQTOL and would probably have been pointed as a > WAYYIQTOL. > > Daniel 12:8 tells us three thing which are connected with WAW (and): And I > heard (QATAL), and I did not understand (WAW+ negation+ YIQTOL), and I said > (WAYYIQTOL with paragogic he). The explanation is the same; if the negation > was removed, the WAW would have been prefixed to the YIQTOL and would > probably have been pointed as a WAYYIQTOL. > > 2 Samuel 22:38-39 tells us seven things which are connected wit WAW (and): > And I pursued (YIQOL), and I destroyed (WAYYIQTOL), and I did not turn > (WAW+negation+YIQTOL) and I finished (WAYYIQTOL), and I crushed (WAYYIQTOL), > and they could not rise (WAW+NEGATION+YIQTOL), and they fell (WAYYIQTOL). > here we have the same situation as in the two other examples. Note also the > clause-initial YIQTOL. > > 2 Samuel 2:28 and 1 Samuel 1:13 follow the same pattern. Can the use of the > YQTOLs in these cases be caused by bad grammar? I see no reason for that, > because the same pattern is followed in all the examples, and it is a logical > pattern. There is no temporal differences between the WAYYIQTOLs and the > YIQTOLs, and why should there be any aspectual diffrence? The YIQTOLs rather > than WAYYIQTOLs are used for syntactical (pragmatic) reasons, because they > are preceded by a negation that prevents the WAW to be prefixed to the verb. > > > Best regards, > > > Rolf Furuli > Stavern > Norway Thanks Rolf, I think I understand you better now. Do I understand you correctly, that in _narrative_ (i.e. typically starting with QATAL and then continuing with WAYIQTOLS) when there are "inbetween" words, like LO, the WAYIQTOL changes to a W'"inbetween word" YIQTOL, with basically the same meaning as "WAYIQTOL" (but _not_ the same meaning as YIQTOL without waw - possibly followed with WAQATAL)?
Regards Chavoux Luyt _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
