Hi List,
In our recent discussions about “meaning,” one of the things that Karl and I discussed was the wayyiqtol. Without starting a debate or any kind of lengthy discussion, I’d like to know what some of the various scholars on the list think the function of the wayyiqtol is. I know that Rolf has done extensive work here, and I’d love to see a short summary of his conclusions here. And I seem to remember that George has shared his views here as well. In any case, I’m not looking for a debate, but just a survey of the range of opinions as to what wayyiqtol’s function is. Here’s my own brief summary. I think that the most likely basic significance of wayyiqtol is that of indicating consecutiveness, succession, or sequencing. This succession can take place in a discourse that relates either past, present, or future events. But it is narrative, more than any other genre, that makes the most use of the idea of succession, and therefore makes the most use of the wayyiqtol. Because of this usage and the close association of narrative and wayyiqtol, the form, for all practical purposes, in narrative, comes to indicate past tense. This is so much the case that individual narratives can start with the wayyiqtol, and even in non-narrative texts, the wayyiqtol can indicate a past event, even without a sequence of verbs before it. Thus I am in agreement with Joüon-Muraoka that “the wayyiqtol form became so strongly associated with its past tense function that it was even used at the beginning, or at least at the relative beginning of some narratives.” (sect 118b). Again, no debate, or even back and forth discussion, just a survey of opinions. Blessings, Jerry Jerry Shepherd Taylor Seminary Edmonton, Alberta [email protected]
_______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
