JERUSALEM BIBLICAL STUDIES

THE VERBAL SYSTEM OF

Editorial Board
Deborah Dimant, University of Haifa; Robert Gordon, University of
Cambridge, UK; Israel Ephcal, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Ora
Lipschitz, Simor, Ein Kerem, Jerusalem; Andrew Macintosh, St. John's
College, Cambridge, UK; Noam Mizrahi, Georg-August-Universitiit,
GOttingen, Gennany; Nadav Naoaman, University of Tel Aviv; Jeffrey H.
Tigay, University of Pennsylvania, USA.

BIBLICAL HEBREW
A NEW SYNTHESIS ELABORATED ON THE BASIS
OF CLASSICAL PROSE

Jerusalem Biblical Studies vol. 10

JAN JOOSTEN

The 'Jerusalem Biblical Studies' aims at publishing a series of

monographs on biblical literature and its formation, the religion of Israel
and ancient Near Eastern history

SIMORLTD
JERUSALEM 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

JERUSALEM BIBLICAL STUDIES

vol. 1 A. Rofe, The Book of Balaam: Numbers 22:2-24:25 (1979)[Hebrew].

vol. 2 Talia Rudin-O'Brasky, The Patriarchs in Hebron and Sodom: Genesis 1819 (1982) [Hebrew].
vol. 3 E. Tov, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research (1981).
vol. 4 N. Na;)aman, Borders and Districts in Biblical Historiography: Seven
Studies in Biblical Geographical Lists (1986).
vol. 5 S. Gelander, David and His God: Religious Ideas as Reflected in Biblical
Historiography and Literature (1991).
vol. 6 Zipora Talshir, The Alternative Story of the Division of the Kingdon:
3 Kingdoms 12:24 a-z (1993).
vol. 7 S. Bendor, The Social Structure of Ancient Israel; The Institution of the Family
(Beit-:JAb) from the Settlement to the End of the Monarchy (1996).
vol. 8 E. Tov, The Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research
(Second revised and enlarged edition, 1997).
vol. 9 A. Rofe, Introduction to the Literature of the Hebrew Bible (2009).

Acknowledgements
Abbreviations and other conventions
Part One: Forms and Functions

Chapter I
Chapter II
Chapter III
Chapter IV

Preliminaries
The verbal paradigm
Varying verbal meanings
Inter-clausal relations

7-38
39-78
79-124
125-160

Part Two: Verbal Usage

Chapter V
Chapter VI
Chapter VII
Chapter VIII
Chapter IX

WAYYIQTOL
QATAL

The predicative participle

YIQTOL and WEQATAL
The volitives

161-192
193-228
229-260
261-312
313-348

Part Three: Perspectives and Open Questions

SimorLtd.
11 ha-Oren Street, Ein-Kerem Jerusalem
e-mail: simcha@netvision.net.il
ISBN 965-242-009-10

All rights
may
reproduced
or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical or other means
now or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publisher

Chapter X
Chapter XI
Chapter XII

Verbal forms in textual perspective

Developments in Late Biblical Hebrew
Verbal usage in poetry

Bibliography
Index of biblical references
Detailed table of contents

349-376
377-410
411-434
435-452
453-500
501-513

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The preparations for the present work started, arguably, during my
undergraduate studies at the Faculty of Protestant Theology in
Brussels, in the late seventies. Under the guidance of Henk
J agersma, I first wrote a paper on Prohibitives in Leviticus and
then a Licentiate thesis, defended in the summer of 1981, on the
history of investigation of the verbal system of biblical Hebrew.
Ever since those days, the problem of the Hebrew verb has
pursued me, and vice versa.~ft~Lpr~li1'IlinC:lfY publications on the
predicative participle and on WEQATAL, a conference organized by
Ellen van Wolde, in Tilburg in 1996, gave me the occasion to
present a more global perspective to interested colleagues.
I thought then that my presentation, published in the conference
proceedings, would be a fitting farewell to this field of studies.
I had contributed what I had to contribute, and other fields, notably
Septuagint studies, were calling for my attention. Nicolai WinterNielsen, whom I met in Strasbourg soon after the Tilburg
conference, argued that it was necessary to elaborate my views
beyond what I had been able to do so far. That was when the idea
of writing this book was born.
Writing began in earnest during the year 200112 when I had
the privilege of spending a sabbatical year at the Institute for
Advanced Studies in Jerusalem. The lAS provides the best
environment imaginable for research in any branch of Jewish
studies. Its staff did everything in their power to support the
advancement of research. The research group on "Biblical Hebrew
in its Northwest Semitic Setting," directed by Avi Hurvitz and
Steve Fassberg, formed an exceedingly congenial company. To the
members of the group-Avi and Steve, but also John Emerton,
Randall Garr, Edward Greenstein, Jo-Ann Hackett, John
Huehnergard, Andre Lemaire, Elisha Qimron, and our researchassistant Ohad Cohen-I am indebted for advice and inspiration.
I left the Institute with the first two chapters of the present work in
near-final form, and with much of the ground-work for the other
chapters in my files. I did not think then that writing the other
chapters would take so long.
Although the present work does not contain a history of
research, a large part of the analysis on which it rests is based on
ideas developed by other scholars. The scholar who initially

moulded my approach to verbal syntax is Frithiof Rundgren.

While his writing is often difficult, at times verging on the cryptic,
his studies on the Semitic verbal system continue to repay close
study. More distant formative figures are Jerzy Kurylowicz,
Roman J akobson, and Ferdinand de Saussure. As to Hebrew
verbal syntax specifically, I have learnt much from the pioneering
works of Wilhelm Gesenius and Heinrich Ewald. Samuel Driver's
Treatise on the Hebrew Tenses has been a constant touchstone,
both for its exhaustive documentation of rarer usages and for the
celebrated Sprachgefiihl of its author. In the French tradition,
important contributions have been made by Mayer Lambert and
Paul J oUon. Over the last thirty years, crucial insights have been
added by Haim Rosen, Walter Gross, RUdiger Bartelmus, David
Cohen and his seminar, Hans-Jakob Polotsky, Alviero Niccacci,
Susan Rattray, Randall Buth, Mats Eskhult, Ron Hendel, Richard
Steiner, Galia Hatav, Ahuva Shulman, Steve Fassberg, Vince
DeCaen, Wido van Peursen, Anssi Voitila, Max Rogland, and
Andrew Warren, to name only a few.
Just as formative as the publications are the oral exchanges
and correspondence I have benefited from over the years. It would
be futile to try and enumerate all scholars with whom I have
discussed details of the Hebrew verbal system. Beyond the ones
already listed above, at least Peter Gentry, Christophe Rico,
Dennis Pardee, John Cook, Amikam Gai and Erhard Blum deserve
to be mentioned. Takamitsu Muraoka's advice and example have
been influential, in this area as in others. In May 2006, Bo
Isaksson invited me to present my approach to a group of
researchers and students at the University of Uppsala. This proved
to be a very agreeable and helpful experience. I also thank those
who sent me their doctoral dissertations on aspects of the Hebrew
"'veroarsysrem:-~Li~" ~eaerr;-P~-~orehin;''H.Dallaire,

A. Shulman, O. Cohen, T. Notarius. Ron Hendel helped me to get

hold of Susan Rattray's dissertation, and Christoph MUller sent me
a copy of Andrew Warren's.
Since 2002, Randall Garr has been my faithful reader, proposing
innumerable comments on English style, the correct use of linguistic
terminology, and what is arguable or not in Hebrew syntax. At a late
stage, Robert Gordon read the whole work and made many
constructive suggestions. My doctoral student, Eran Shuali, prepared
the index. Ora Lipschitz and Simcha Friedman of Simor have also

contributed many improvements of style and presentation. I thank

all of them for their help.
After the 200112 sabbatical, the writing of the present work was
continued conjointly with my teaching and research at the Faculty
of Protestant T~eol~gy Of. the University of Strasbourg (formerly
Marc Bloch UnIversIty). SInce 2009, my nomination to the Institut
Universitaire de France has made it possible to reduce my teaching
load, thus allowing the final push. I thank both my faculty and the
IUF for providing a framework for research of this kind.

ABBREVIATIONS AND OTHER CONVENTIONS

AOAT
asynd.
BCE
BDB
BEATAJ
BH
BHS
BN
BSOAS
BZAW
CBH
coh
E
ed.
ET
fem.
FRLANT
Fs.
GKC

'I'
11

HUC
lAS
ICC
IEJ
imp.limv.
IUF
JANES
JAOS
JM
JNES

Alter Orient und AltesTestament

asyndetic
Before the Common Era
F. Brown, S. R. Driver, C. A. Briggs, A Hebrew and
English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford 1907)
Beitrage zur Erforschung des Alten Testaments und
des Antiken Judentums
Biblical Hebrew
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
Biblische Notizen
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African
Studies
Beihefte zur Zeitschrift flir die alttestamentliche
Wissenschaft
Classical Biblical Hebrew
cohortative
event time
edited!editor
English Translation
feminine
Forschungen zur Religion und Litteratur des Alten
und Neuen Testaments
Festschrift
W. Gesenius, E. Kautzsch, A. E. Cowley, Hebrew
Grammar (Oxford 1910).
Hebrew Union College
Institute of Advanced Studies (Jerusalem)
International Critical Commentary
Israel Exploration Journal
imperative
Institut universitaire de France
Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society
Journal of the Ancient Oriental Society
P. Jotion and T. Muraoka, A Grammar of Biblical
Hebrew, 2 vols. (Rome 20062).
Journal of Near Eastern Studies

LBH
LF
lit.
mas./m.
MH
MT
n.
NB
NICOT
NIV
NJPS
NRSV
0
OLA
p.
pI.
pr.
ptcp
Q
QH
R

Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages

Jewish Publication Society
Jewish Quarterly Review
Journal of Semitic Studies
jussive
ketiv
King James Version
Kleine Untersuchungen zur Sprache des Alten
Testaments und seiner Umwelt
Late Biblical Hebrew
long form
literally
masculine
Mishnaic Hebrew
Masoretic Text
note
nota bene
New International Commentary on the Old Testament
New International Version
New translation of the Jewish Publication Society
New Revised Standard Version
object
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta
page
plural
person
participle
qere
Qumran Hebrew
reference time

RSV
S
SBL
SF
sg.
SLL
SSN
STDJ
su
S-V

Revised Standard Version

speech time
Society of Biblical Literature
short form
singular
Semitic Languages and Linguistics
Studia Semitica Neerlandica
Studies in the Texts of the Desert of Judah
subject
the sequence subject-verb

JNSL
JPS
JQR
JSS
juss
K
KJV
KUSATU

SVO
TAM
UCLA
UF
V
vs.
VSO
vss.
VT

WBC
x
ZAH
ZAW
ZDMG

the sequence subject-verb-object

tense, aspect and mood.
University of California, Los Angeles
Ugarit Forschungen
verb
verse
the sequence verb- subject-object
verses
Vetus Testamentum
Word Biblical Commentary
any undefined element
Zeitschrift fur Althebraistik
Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenliindischen Gesellschaft

Biblical Books
Gen
Ex
Lev
Num
Deut
Jos
Jud
Sam
Kgs
Isa
Jer
Ezek
Hos
Joel
Amos
Ob
Jona
Mic
Nah
Hab

Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
Joshua
Judges
Samuel
Kings
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Ezekiel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk

Zeph
Hag
Zech
Mal
Ps
Prov
Job
Song
Ruth
Lam
Eccl
Esther
Dan
Ezra
Neh
Chr

***

3Kgds
Sir
Tob

Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
Psalms
Proverbs
Job
Song of Songs
Ruth
Lamentations
Ecclesiastes
Esther
Daniel
Ezra
Nehemiah
Chronicles
3 Kingdoms
Ben Sira
Tobit

viii

Terminology
As has become usual nowadays, the finite forms of biblical Hebrew
will be referred to with purely formal designations:
QATAL
YIQTOL

WEQATAL

W AYYIQTOL

The suffix conjugation, often called "perfect" in

older publications.
The prefix conjugation, often called "imperfect" in
older publications. YIQTOL is in principle to be
distinguished from the "short form" of the prefix
conjugation, as will be explained in Chapter I.
The suffix conjugation preceded by the Hebrew
conjunction waw and performing a special function,
often called "perfect consecutive" in older publications.
The short form of the prefix conjugation preceded
by a special form of the conjunction waw, often
called "imperfect consecutive" in older publications.

Secondary literature
For each section, the most important literature will be quoted in
abbreviated form following the subtitle. Full references can be
found in the final bibliography. Footnotes may provide more
detailed information on certain syntactical points, or they may
draw attention to philological or exegetical aspects of a passage
under discussion. Exhaustive discussion of the various positions
taken in the history of research is not an objective of the present
work.

English translations of biblical passages in principle follow the

NRSV unless it is indicated otherwise. Translations are added only
to give easy access to the Hebrew examples. In many cases, only
the Hebrew illustrates the point at issue.

CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARIES
The goal of the present work is a practical one: to provide exegetes
of biblical texts with a dependable analysis of the meaning and use
of Hebrew verbal forms. An effort will be made to keep theory and
technical terminology to a minimum. Nevertheless, a number of
theoretical considerations are needed in order to define a general
frame of reference.

Methodological questions
Biblical Hebrew is a so-called dead language. All the linguist has
to go on is a limited corpus of texts contained in the Bible,
supplemented by a very meagre collection of inscriptions. No
native speakers can be consulted. Moreover, the corpus, consisting
as it does of writings dating to different periods, puts certain
obstacles in the way of linguistic inquiry. On the positive side,
biblical Hebrew is indeed a language, and as such it may be and
can be investigated by the same methods as other human
languages. In principle the grammarian studying the text of the
Bible in order to discover the rules of the language is not very
different from the field linguist trying to do the same on the basis
of tapes recorded among an unknown tribe. In the following a few
words will be said about the biblical corpus and about the
linguistic approach underlying this book.
Corpus
Saenz-Badillos, History (1993),50-129.

A major problem with grammatical studies on biblical Hebrew is

that the language of the Bible is not a unity. What presents itself
today as one book is in reality a small library of writings originating
in different periods, areas and social milieus. Moreover, the

Preliminaries

individual books of the Bible are scarcely more homogeneous than

the collection as a whole. Scholars claim to detect, with varying
degrees of certitude, different literary layers .even within single
books. No consensus exists as to the dating of most of the texts.
All that is widely accepted is the variegation of biblical Hebrew.
Linguistic variety, within certain limits, is something grammarians
should be able to cope with. No linguistic corpus is without
variety. A reasonably homogeneous corpus, defined in the course
of diachronic research on biblical Hebrew, is "classical biblical
prose" (CBH) - roughly the prose texts of Genesis-2 Kings.
Historically, these texts reflect in the main the literary idiom of the
period before the Judean exile (587 BCE). Indeed, classical biblical
prose shows obvious similarity with the language of pre-exilic
Judean inscriptions, few though they may be in number. Moreover,
the classical prose language is notably different, both lexically
and grammatically, from the "late biblical Hebrew" (LBH) of
manifestly post-exilic books such as Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah,
Esther, Ecclesiastes and Daniel. Admittedly, the distinction
between "classical" and "late" biblical Hebrew is not clear-cut.
Several books appear to belong to a transitional stage between the
two (Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Job, and parts of 2 Kings), while other
books seem to reflect a rather successful attempt by late authors to
produce classical prose. 1
Poetic texts pose problems of their own. Poets tend to take
certain liberties with the language. Archaisms, innovations,
figurative language and other kinds of poetic freedom make it hard
for a linguist to perceive the underlying system. Moreover, the
diachronic question is as acute with biblical poetry as it is with
prose, or even more so. Within the Book of Psalms, for instance,
texts
to
different
stand si<!~QY ~ide.
The present work attempts to take the variation of biblical
Hebrew into account. The main description of the use of the verbal
forms will be based on the corpus of classical prose - roughly the
books of Genesis to 2 Kings. For this corpus, an effort will be
made to provide full documentation, except for phenomena that
are very frequent. From the vantage point of classical prose, the

Chapter 1

use of the verb in LBH and in poetry will then be inspected. 2

Similarities and differences will be pointed out, and major
exceptions signalled. Examples will be drawn freely from these
other corpora, but no attempt at exhaustiveness will be made.
NB. All that has been stated here about variation in biblical Hebrew concerns
the lexicon, the morphology and the syntax. The phonology of the language has,
to a large extent, been unified by the Masoretic pointing. It is clear that this
phonology sometimes reflects a later, post-biblical, stage of the language. For
the type of research proposed in this book, the late origin of the pointing is
hardly relevant. The vowels and accents are generally to be considered
a valuable aid to the analysis. They need to be evaluated critically, however, and
at times it will indeed be necessary to distinguish between Masoretic and preMasoretic grammar. 3

Linguistic approach
De Saussure, Cours de. linguistique generale (1949); Benveniste, "Niveaux de
l'analyse linguistique" (1966); Rundgren, Das althebraische Verbum (1961).

The present work does not wish to advocate any single linguistic
doctrine. In fact, several theories will be combined. Nevertheless,
there is no denying that this study is indebted to a particular school
of linguistics, the Saussurian-structuralist approach. The axioms of
de Saussure provide some of the basic procedures underlying the
research presented in this book.
In the structuralist approach, a distinction is made between
langue, the language system, and parole, the actual use of
language. The challenge for a grammarian is to discover, in the
multifarious phenomena attested in texts, an underlying system.
The approach is in principle synchronic: the language system
reflects linguistic knowledge shared by a community of speakers
in a given period. Comparative and historical information may
assist the scholar in understanding certain phenomena but it does
not determine the way a speaker actually uses the language.

A possible example of successful classicizing is the book of Jonah. Although

this book presents some' lexical and phraseological signs of lateness, its verbal
syntax is mostly representative of Classical Biblical Hebrew.

In Chapter XI, a more systematic review will be presented of verbal usage in

Late Biblical Hebrew; Chapter XII will discuss the main peculiarities of verbal
syntax in poetry.
Notably, this will be envisaged for the distinction between weqatalti and
weqataltf, see below p. 15.

10

Preliminaries

The elements making up the language system, the linguistic signs,

consist of a signifying side and a signified side: the phonic form of
a word evokes its meaning and vice versa. The link between
signifier and signified is arbitrary. The implication is that language
is not a matter of assigning phonic expression to a fixed set of
meanings. Rather, the meaning of signs is exclusively determined
by their relation to other signs. In this respect, a notion that is very
important for studies on the verb is that of opposition: the meaning
of a given verbal form is determined in opposition to that of
another verbal form, the meaning of a group of forms in opposition
to another group. A particular type of opposition is the privative
one, where a "marked" form expresses a specific feature while the
other "unmarked" form does not express it (although it does not
necessarily imply the absence of the feature).
The elements of language interact not only in "paradigmatic"
relations, such as those opposing various verbal forms, but also in
"syntagmatic" relations among elements within a spoken (or
written) chain of signs. For the verb this means that the
combination of verbal forms with other verbal forms, with other
parts of speech, or in a specific word order, may lead to a change
in the basic meaning. In addition to the basic, paradigmatic
function of a verbal form, a number of secondary, contextconditioned functions may exist.
A final concept is that of linguistic level. Meaning is effected
through layering, from the lowest phonetic, through the
intermediary morphological and sentential, to the highest textual
level. On the level of the individual word, verbal forms coexist
with lexical items. The lexical meaning of the verb may exert
a certain influence on the verbal function. On the textual level
1-'.&."'.I"0.&.....&."'"L'" cons
,"come into
play. In certain cases a contradiction may be created between what
is expressed on the morphological and sentential levels and what is
meant in reference to the real world (e.g., when a future event is
represented as belonging to the past). Occasionally, a verbal form
may be completely emptied of its basic meaning and come to serve
an unrelated, pragmatic function.
The influence of contextual, lexical, and pragmatic factors
makes it difficult to determine the grammatical meaning expressed
by the verbal form as such. The challenge to the grammarian is to
find constants and rules in the multiplicity of contextual usages.

Chapter 1

11

Verbal forms in biblical Hebrew: An inventory

No meaningful discussion of the Hebrew verbal system can take
place before it is determined how many verbal forms the system
comprises. What might appear to be a routine operation in fact
constitutes a major hurdle in the study of the Hebrew verb.
Hebrew forms that look the same are in reality to be distinguished,
while forms that look completely different are functionally
identical. The inventory should also include a discussion as to
which verbal forms are to be considered as indispensable members
of the system and which are peripheral. 4
YIQTOL and the jussive
Lambert, "Emploi des suffixes" (1903); Rosen, "Comparative Assignment"
(1969), 215; Niccacci, "Neglected Point" (1987); Revell, "System" (1989), 1417; Qimron, "Consecutive and Conjunctive Imperfect" (1987).

The biblical Hebrew prefix conjugation includes two forms that

are usually indistinguishable morphologically. A form like N~~:
may be either a regular YIQTOL form "he will find" or a jussive
"may he find." In proto-Hebrew, a long form and a short form
would have been distinguished, corresponding, respectively, to
Arabic yaqtulu, "he kills" and yaqtul, "may he kill."5 The loss of
final short vowels in biblical Hebrew brought about extensive
grammatical homonymy. The homonymy is not complete: even in
biblical Hebrew the short form remains distinct from the long form
in the following morphological categories: 6
- in forms of III-h (i1"t,) verbs without personal endings:
e.g., t,~: "may he depart" versus i1~~: "he will depart."
- in forms of II-W/y ('''l] or ""l]) verbs without personal endings:
e.g., ~fZj" "let him return" versus ~1rzj" "he will return."7
- in h/phil forms without personal ~ndings (except in l]"l] roots):
e.g., N~;M "may it bring forth" versus N"~;M "it will bring forth."g
4 For

the necessity of making an inventory, see Hoftijzer, "Preliminary Remark."

For fuller discussion, see Dallaire, Syntax of Volitives.
6 See GKC 48g.
7 The verb o,n exhibits forms like oh~ (with or without mater lectionis) that are
to be regarded as YIQTOL forms: Deut 7:16; 13:9; 19:13,21; 25:12; Ezek 5:11;
7:4,9; 8:18; 9:10. See JM 80k.
g Note, however, that ="IOi\ and similar forms in Oen 4:12; Lev 5:16, 24; 27:31;
Num 5:7; 22:19; Deut 13:1; 18:16; Hos 9:15; Joel 2:2, are not to be regarded
as jussives. They are YIQTOL forms of a rare class of the qal stem; see JM 75f.
5

12

Preliminaries

- in the 2 sg. and 3 sg. with 3 sg.'; object suffixes:

e.g., 1i11~~: "may he keep him" versus. 1~'l~~: "he will keep him."9
In all other cases, the two forms coincide in Masoretic grammar. 10
Perhaps they were distinguished in pre-Masoretic Hebrew by
stress-patterns or vowel length. 11 In any case, they may still be
distinguished, at least in classical Hebrew prose, by paying
attention to the syntax. The jussive usually takes the first position,
while YIQTOL tends to occupy non-initial position in the clause:
1 Sam 1: 18

'9"~",v:p jlJ

'9 I;10~tq

Chapter 1

Excursus: * yaqattal in pre-Masoretic Hebrew?

Rossler, "Prafixkonjugation" (1962); Bloch, "Nachweisbarkeit" (1963); Fenton,
"Absence" (1970); Kottsieper, "Yaqattal" (2000).

It has been suspected that the biblical Hebrew prefix conjugation

hides, alongside the long and short forms, a third category
etymologically related to Akkadian iparras and Ethiopic yeqat~l.
Evidence for this view is the non-assimilation of the nun in
thirteen occurrences of I-n (J"::l) prefixed forms:

N~~1:I '~~r-1j

Isa 29: 1

And she said, "Let your servant find [jussive] favour in

your sight."

Prov 6:33

In 1 Sam 1: 18, the clause-initial form is used to express the

speaker's request, while in the proverb the non-initial form
expresses ageneral truth (note the long form i11Jrp~ in the parallel). 12
In spite of their formal similarity, YIQTOL and jussive are
semantically distinct, at least in classical prose. They need to be
distinguished and assigned their proper places within the paradigm
of the Hebrew verb.
In LBH the two forms are still in use, but the functional
distinction between them starts to break down. In the late biblical
books and in early post-biblical Hebrew the short form tends to be
used in clause-initial position, as in the classical language. But the
semantics of the jussive are no longer distinct from those of the
long form. In non-initial position, the long form is used. The long
and short forms are turning into syntactically conditioned

'11 i1~O n~iP ~~"j~ ~~"j~ "ii1

1~Pi: t:l"~lj i1~~-~.p i1~~ 1!j~

Ah, Ariel, Ariel, the city where David encamped! Add

year to year; let the festivals run their round.

i11Jrp~ ~~ in~i1J1 N~~: ji~Rr17~~

He will get [YIQTOL] wounds and dishonour, and his

disgrace will not be wiped away.

13

The nun in 1~Pi: should, according to the normal rules of Hebrew

morphology, have assimilated to the following consonant. Perhaps,
therefore, such forms represent a morphological category where
a vowel was inserted between the first and second root consonants.
If this were true, other forms belonging to this category might exist
that would be undetectable in their Masoretic presentation. The
claim amounts to postulating an additional form in the verbal
paradigm, expressing perhaps a durative function.
The basis of the claim is very slender. And the nonassimilation of the nun could be explained otherwise. In any case,
even if there was a *yaqattal form in pre-Masoretic Hebrew, it
would seem, in the light of the thirteen cases, to have been used
infrequently. Moreover, all examples of non-assimilated nun are in
poetic texts. The present description of the biblical Hebrew verbal
system will not reckon with a third variety of prefix conjugation.
YIQTOL

and WAYYIQTOL

Lambert, "Le vav conversif' (1893); Rainey, "Ancient Hebrew Prefix Conjugation" (1986); Garr, "Driver's Treatise" (1998), lxv-Ixix.

Another relevant question is that of the relation between YIQTOL

and WAYYIQTOL. With most verbs, WAYYIQTOL is simply YIQTOL
There are a few exceptions to this rule, e.g., Gen 6:16; Job 20:19.
Waltke and O'Connor, Introduction, 497, indicate that the two forms are
distinguished also in the qal of geminate verbs, but this is incorrect.
11 Qimron points out that jussive forms of strong verbs are written defectively far
more often than YIQTOL forms, see Qimron, "Massoret Halashon" 40-43.
12 Another criterion is tliat the negation t,N and the modal particle ~J occur only,
or almost only, with volitive forms.
9

10

14

Preliminaries

preceded by an unusual form of the copula.13 Here too, however,

the similarity is only superficial. The prefix conjugation in
WAYYIQTOL is not the same form as regular YIQTOL. Rather, in
WAYYIQTOL one finds the short form of the prefix conjugation. 14
The morphological differentiation is broadly the same as between
YIQTOL and jussive. Thus we find ~~~J' :lto~J (pausal form;
contextual form: :lrf~J), ~~;MJ, 1i1~1~;J. The sole difference between
WAYYIQTOL and the jussive occurs with the first person, where for
the former one finds short forms [e.g., t;1~~4 (Gen 24:46), "i:t~J
(Num 13:33)], alongside cohortatives [e.g., i1~t;1~4 (Jud 6:9),
i1~~1j~J (Gen 41:11)]. No first person jussives, short forms with
a volitive meaning, are attested. 15
Comparative Semitic evidence shows that the use of the short
form in WAYYIQTOL is not a Hebrew anomaly. WAYYIQTOL
functions predominantly in narrative to recount the main events of
a story. This function shows important overlap with that of the
Akkadian preterite iprus, "he cut off," which is the exact
morphological cognate of the Hebrew short form. Arabic, too,
knows a preterite use of the short form (lam yaqtul, "he did not
kill"), though this is merely residual. U garitic is thought to have a
cognate form functioning as preterite, although the absence of
vowel signs makes certainty difficult to attain in this matter. 16
These cognates show that what happens in WAYYIQTOL is not that
the copula waw, aided perhaps by a mysterious additional element
(*az or *an), turns YIQTOL into a preterite - the assumed process
expressed by the term "waw conversive." Rather, an ancient

13

.
7'
.
....
is doubled, if
possible. Before aleph, in the first person singular, the vowel of the waw is
qamets except in Ezek 16:10; Ps 119:163; Job 30:26 and perhaps 2 Sam 1:10.
See Driver, Treatise, 70, n. 2.
14 0
. 11y, WAYYIQTOL occurs wIth
. a marked long form, e.g., i1~~~1, 2 Kgs
ccaslO!la
13:11 (mstead of expected ~.il~1). Such cases are probably due to later scribes
who were unfamiliar with the distinction between the long and short form of
the prefix conjugation; see Stipp, "Narrativ-Langformen"; Bloch, "From
Linguistics to Textual Criticism."
15 Short forms in the first person occur in 1 Sam 14:36; Isa 41:23(K), 28; 42:6;
Hos 11 :~; Job 23:9, 11, but no volitive nuance seems to be intended (except
perhaps m Isa 41 :23, unless the ketiv should represent the verb N'~, "to fear").
For ='jl;lk in Deut 18:16 and Hos 9:15 see above, note 8.
16 See Greenstein, "Form and Functions."

Chapter 1

15

prefixed preterite was preserved in a well-defined syntactic

environment. The term "waw conservative" has been proposed.
That one and the same form, the short form of the prefix
conjugation, should function as a preterite and as a jussive may
seem remarkable. 17 But the same phenomenon is attested in
Akkadian, where the precative liprus is formed on the basis of the
preterite iprus and in Arabic where the preterite lam yaqtul exists
side-by-side with jussive yaqtul. Moreover, the suffix conjugation
too exhibits both functions in some Semitic languages, notably in
Arabic where it is attested both as a preterite and as a precative. 18
WEQATAL and QATAL
Moran, "The Hebrew Language" (1961); Joosten, "Biblical Hebrew weqatal"
(1992); Hatav, Semantics (1997), 142-162.

The forms WEQATAL and QATAL, too, need to be kept apart.

Admittedly, on this point no comparative evidence exists showing
that there were two different kinds of suffix conjugation. A formal
marker characterizing WEQATAL is the tone shift in the 1 sg. and
2 m.sg. of verbs that are not third weak. 19 Thus one finds ~~~~
"you have eaten" (Gen 3: 11), with penultimate stress, as against
~~:;l~1 "you will eat" (Gen 3:18) with ultimate stress. Probably,
however, this tone shift arose in the reading tradition of biblical
Hebrew a long time after WEQATAL had become obsolete as
a living feature of the Hebrew language. 2o In the biblical period
WEQATAL forms may have been accentuated in exactly the same
way as QATAL forms.
Historically, then, WEQATAL is simply the conjunction followed
by QATAL. But on the synchronic level, WEQATAL clearly has
a distinct function. While QATAL typically refers to processes
completed before the time of the utterance, WEQATAL typically
refers to processes not yet begun at the time of the utterance.

17

18
19

20

Robert Hetzron has tried to solve this problem by postulating an original

distinction in the accentuation of the preterite versus the jussive, see Hetzron,
"Evidence." See, however, Goerwitz, "Accentuation"; Garr, "Comparative
Method," 19-20.
See Gai, "Past and Optative."
For an exact description of the conditions of the tone shift, see Driver,
Treatise, 110.
Revell, "Stress," 440; Garr, "Driver's Treatise," lxxviii-lxxxii. Why the tone
shift arose is not entirely clear, however.

16

Preliminaries

Moreover, when WEQATAL is used in past-tense contexts it has an

habitual-iterative function totally uncharacteristic of QATAL.
How WEQATAL and QATAL came to express such distinct
functions is difficult to explain. Different historical hypotheses
have been proposed. Possibly, the future-modal function of
WEQATAL evolved from the use of the form in conditional
sentences. The Amama letters seem to indicate that, in early
Canaanite, the suffix conjugation could be used in reference to the
future in conditional and similar sentences. In the Amama letters,
this use is not conditioned by the waw. If the Amama and biblical
usages are connected, the suffix conjugation must have gone
through an important development from early Canaanite to biblical
Hebrew. In Hebrew, WEQATAL is frequent in main clauses, and the
future-modal meaning is indeed conditioned by the waw. 21
WEQATAL

and copulative QATAL

17

Chapter 1
Even when the cloud continued over the tabernacle
many days, the Israelites would keep the charge of the
LORD, and would not set out.

The question arises whether such grammatical homonymy was not

detrimental to communication. In most cases, the context suffices
to obviate misunderstandings. Moreover, in classical prose, the
cases of copUlative QATAL are rather rare. It is only in the later
books, starting with 2 Kings, that the form becomes more frequent.
Its proliferation in exilic and post-exilic texts clearly anticipates
the post-biblical stage where copUlative QATAL supersedes
WAYYIQTOL as the main narrative verbal form. 22
Some grammarians would eliminate all occurrences of copulative QATAL in classical Hebrew by rep ointing the forms either as
WAYYIQTOL or as infinitive absolute. There seems to be no
compelling reason to do so.

Spieckermann, Juda unter Assur (1982), 125-128; Andersen, "Salience" (1994);

Rubinstein, "Anomalous Perfect" (1979); Huesman, "Waw + Perfect" (1956).

The volitive paradigm: cohortative-imperative-jussive

The distinction between QATAL and WEQATAL implies full

homonymy - except for the tone-shift in 1 sg. and 2 m.sg. forms
- between WEQATAL and regular QATAL when it is preceded by
the copula. Older grammars distinguish between perfect consecutive (WEQATAL) and perfect copulative (we + QATAL). Thus, in
Isa 31:3, t,~~1 is to be rendered "and he will fall" while in Jud 7:13
the exact same form means "and it fell."
This is not a matter of one verbal form expressing different
contextual functions. One is dealing with two distinct verbal forms
that are morphologically indistinguishable. The difference between
.
.
The. negation
of copulative QATAL is lo~+ QATAL:

While the jussive is to be separated from the formally similar

YIQTOL, it is to be joined to two verbal forms that are formally
distinct: the unprefixed imperative, and the suffixed cohortative. 23
Cohortative, imperative and jussive make up one suppletive
paradigm. The negation is with t,N + jussive. The existence of such
a paradigm is confirmed by the following phenomena:
a) Cohortative, imperative and jussive very often co-occur tn
various types of sequence. All three are found in the following:

1 Kgs 21:2

But the people were silent and answered him not a word.

The negation ofWEQATAL is lo~ + YIQTOL:

117ti:l"
T

The forms are found in every type of combination.

o"~j o"~: tf~~ij-t,~ t~.vi) '''i~ij~1

~t" it,it., ni~rzj~-nN t,Nifzi"-"j:l

:

T:

-: -:

:.

-:

..

T:

..:

1iOrz.;,
S

In Qumran Hebrew, this stage is not fully attained; see Smith, Origins. In
mishnaic Hebrew, however, W AYYIQTOL is attested only a few times.
23 The cohortative ending cannot normally be attached to III-h (i1"Z,) verbs and it
is rarely attached to III-aleph (~"z,) verbs. In these classes, the co hortative is
formally identical to first person YIQTOL
22

21

N1it ":p P1:-t~~ "~-";:t"1 '9~l:;p-n~ .,~-it~tr;'I

1~7p~ :li~ o1f '''I!1~t1 '9~ it~~~1 "l:1"~ t,~~ :liiR

Give me your vineyard so that I may have it for a

vegetable garden, because it is near my house; I will give
you a better vineyard for it.

i~' ink 1~oV-N"1 ooVO 1rz.;"'001

2 Kgs 18:36

Num 9: 19

Bergstrasser, Grammatik (1929), 10a; Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996).

A number of exceptions exist, however, in both directions: one finds a few

instances of QATAL with modal meaning, and instances of we + QATAL with
an indicative meaning; see Chapter VI.

18

Preliminaries

Chapter 1

b) The cohortative is almost entirely limited to the first person, 24

the imperative to the second person and the jussive to the third
person (the second person jussive is found following ,,~, since the
imperative cannot be negated).25 Rather than posit three defective
paradigms, we should combine the three forms into one.
c) The meaning of the three forms is practically the same: they
express a process willed by the speaker. Notably, the imperative is
not limited to direct commands. It is also used, like the cohortative
and the jussive, in predictive statements that conform to the will of
the speaker:
i1W~ i1"1' i1M~ ,~~ ,i1::l n~1
You shall die there[NRsv]on th~ ~o~ntai~-th~~-yo~ ~sce~d~

Deut 32:50

And it is used, again like the cohortative and the jussive, in

volitive sequences to indicate the desired result of another action:

2 Kgs 5: 10

111~~ .o"~.v~-:-17;l~ i;1~Tj11'1i"v

'yrp1 1~ 11~~ :JfZJ;l

Go, wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh shall
he restored and you shall he clean.
VIQTOL and WEQATAL
Gross, Verb/arm (1976), 21-41.

Another suppletive paradigm is made up of elements that are even

more dissimilar, YIQTOL and WEQATAL. The principle by which
these forms alternate is according to their position in the clause: in
clause-initial position one finds WEQATAL, in all other positions
YIQTOL. Exceptions to this rule are rare, at least in classical
YIQTOL and WEQATAL often occur in the same context:
Gen 2:24

i~~-n~l '''~~-n~ ~"~-:lur~ 1~-".i1

'1J~ ,~~~ 1"y1 iM~~~ P;1'

Exceptions are the third person cohortatives in Isa 5:19 and perhaps in Ps
20:4; Job 11:17 .
25 A second person short form is found with a preterite function in Deut 32:18.
Other occurrences are dpubtful: in Num 17:25, a third person form should be
read (see BHS); in 1 Sam 10:8; Gen 24:8 and 1 Kgs 2:6 one expects the long
form (YIQTOL).
26 A corollary of this rule is that WEYIQTOL is in principle to be regarded as
we + jussive.
24

19

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and

clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.
Ex 33:7

i1~O~~ r1n~ i"-il~~1 "OkV-n~ n~: i1~b1

il;y1 '.v.i~ "Ok i" N1R1 i1~O~ij-l~ PIJ1ij

'.v.i~ "Ok-"~ ~~~ i1~i1; ~P.;l~-"f

Now Moses used to take the tent and pitch it outside the
camp, far off from the camp; and he called it the tent of
meeting. And everyone who sought the LORD, would go
out to the tent of meeting.
When they occur side by side, it is hard to detect any temporal,
modal or aspectual difference between these forms. The sole
distinction is connected to the word order: clause-initial WEQATAL
is usually sequential, while clause-internal YIQTOL often indicates
some discontinuity in the discourse. This difference, however, is
not expressed by the verbal forms as such but by the clause type in
which they occur.
In fact, the meanings of YIQTOL and WEQATAL confirm that
they make up one single paradigm. The two forms share exactly
the same temporal-aspectual-modal functions. Both are used as
expressions of futurity-modality, general truths, and repeated
action in the present and past time-frames. This is a remarkable set
of functions, and the fact that they are expressed by YIQTOL as
well as by WEQATAL shows these verbal forms to belong together.

The predicative participle

Cohen, Phrase nominale (1975), 298-328; Joosten "Predicative Participle"
(1989).

Many analyses of the Hebrew verb exclude the participle from the
core system. The participle is taken to be a verbal noun that cannot
be related directly to the finite forms. It is to be conceded that
many of its uses have no clear temporal-aspectual implications,
particularly when the participle functions as a subject, object or
attribute. When, however, the active participle functions as
predicate, it does assume verbal functions. 27 These functions,
moreover, are not optional and accidental but entirely regular. For
certain verbal meanings the use of the predicative participle is
obligatory, at least in prose. The finite forms - YIQTOL, QATAL,
27 Exceptions, with a "nominalized" predicative participle, are rare: Gen 42:9,
"you are spies"; Deut 19:6, "he was not his enemy."

20

Preliminaries

WAYYIQTOL, WEQATAL and the jussive -

do not cover the entire

range of verbal functions. Notably, the participle is required for the
expression of the real present, i.e., the representation of an action
as actually going on at the moment of speaking:
Num 11 :27

iT~1 il~~ '~~!lj nWb~ i~~j ,.t:~ij rl~j

n,jn~~ C"N~:Jnc

And a young man ran and told Moses, "Eld~~i ~nd M:~d~d
are prophesying in the camp."

This clause could not have been formed with QATAL or YIQTOL
without implying a very different temporal-aspectual representation of the action.
The participle is also the required form for expressing
attendant circumstance in a past-tense context:
Gen 19: 1

:l'17~ no'"lO c"~N'T.On ",jrzj 1~:l!l'

...... T

C'"lO'-:'~~~ ~~;, Oi~;

The two angels came to Sodom in the e:ve~i~g; a~d Lo~

was sitting in the gateway of Sodom.

Both the real-present and the attendant circumstance functions are

well attested in biblical Hebrew prose. It would make no sense to
exclude these functions from the verbal system merely because
they are expressed by a periphrasis employing a nominal form.
Periphrastic expressions employing participles (or infinitives)
occur in the verbal systems of a great number of languages.

Chapter 1

21

construct infinitive occurs with an explicit subject so as to make

up a semblance of a clause.
These marginal features of the verbal system will not be at the
centre of discussion in the present work.
Summary
The verbal system of biblical Hebrew is made up of the following
main categories:
-QATAL
-WAYYIQTOL

- the volitives: cohortative-imperative-jussive

- YIQTOL and WEQATAL
- the predicative participle
Other forms exist but they are marginal, both numerically and
functionally.
With five main categories, the Hebrew verb is poorer than
some European languages such as French or English. This implies
that the semantic scope of the Hebrew forms will typically be
broader than that of their European counterparts. In given cases the
Hebrew verb may, of course, express nuances not encoded in the
European verb.
At the same time, the biblical Hebrew verbal system is richer than
that of some other Semitic languages, such as Ethiopic which
makes do with three main verbal forms.28

Marginal items
Muraoka, "Participle" (1999), 194-196; Huesman, "Finite Uses" (1956).

Verbal functions expressed in biblical Hebrew

A number of constructions still need to be mentioned, although

they are poorly attested and do not playa central role in the system

Although languages express a seemingly endless variety of

functions by means of their verbal systems, the most important
fUnctions can be described in terms of temporal, aspectual and
modal relations. In the following, the main functions are briefly
presented with particular attention to the way they are expressed in
biblical Hebrew.

The verb n"n combines with the participle to make periphrastic

forms: HAYAH QOTEL, WAYHI QOTEL, YIHYEH QOTEL, etc. In
classical prose, these forms are rather rare; they become more
frequent in later stages of the language. Their function can be
described simply as an addition of the function of the form of the
verb n"n and a durative nuance expressed by the participle.
Hebrew infinitives do not normally function as the predicate of
the clause. Nevertheless, in a number of passages, the absolute
infinitive does function as the main verb, in both modal and
narrative passages. One also finds a number of cases where the

28 See Weninger, Verbalsystem.

22

Preliminaries

The biblical Hebrew verb and tense

Reichenbach, Elements (1947), 287-298; Kurylowicz, "Verbal Aspect" (1973);
Birkeland, "lmperfectum Consecutivum" (1935).

Tense is a deictic category: it designates the principle by which

events are located in a given time-frame such as the past, the
present or the future. Tense situates events on the time line:
past

present

future

>,--------~---------------------->

In linguistics, the main distinction of tense is usually considered to

be between the past and the non-past. The future, when it is
considered as a distinct category, has a different epistemological
basis. Events occurring in the future are not ~~real" to the same
extent as are events belonging to the past or the present. Future
tense and irrealis modality go hand in hand in many languages.
An important contribution to the study of grammatical tense
was made by the philosopher Hans Reichenbach. Reichenbach
pointed out that the English verbal system cannot be adequately
described if one considers only the relation between the time of the
event (E) and the time of speaking (S). In a clause like "Peter had
gone," the tense can only be understood by postulating a third point
in time, namely the reference point (R). The event of Peter's going
happened before the point of reference, which in tum is situated
before the point of speech. Schematically this can be noted down as
E<R<S. The three-point system allows one to explain the difference
between the English simple past and present perfect. In both "I saw
Charles" and "I have seen Charles" the tense situates the event
before the moment of speaking (E<S). The difference between the
two lies in the location of the reference time: in "I saw Charles" the
~~~"~<""-~,~~~",-~"",,,",~,,"",,"-,~~~);ji:m,~~btm~g~~lte'1-iJl-tJ:le-~~'Ji:;:;R~:~")." wiliie in "I have" seen
Charles" it is located in the present (E<R=S).
The relevance of the category of tense for the analysis of the
biblical Hebrew verbal system has often been questioned. There is
no verbal expression of tense in Hebrew, it is claimed. Every
verbal form may be used in reference to any time frame. 29 In part
this claim is based on improper evidence. A discrepancy between
grammar and pragmatics" can probably be attested in most
languages of the world: an event may be represented as belonging
29

See, e.g., McFall, Enigma, 186-188,215-216.

23

Chapter 1

to the past when in reality it has still to come about, or it may be

represented as going on in the present when it occurred in the past,
and so on. Such cases should not be used to call the existence of
tense into question.
In part, however, the impartiality of the Hebrew verb forms
with regard to time-frames is indeed systematic. What is
particularly striking, for speakers of modem West-European
languages, is the way forms may express a similar function in both
present-tense and past-tense contexts. With regard to the future the
similarity in the use of the verbal forms is less clear, although it
certainly exists. A few examples may illustrate:
QATAL

- with R=S: present perfect, present with stative verbs

- with R<S: pluperfect, contemporaneousness with stative verbs
- with S<R: future perfect
Examples:
J os 1:6

rl~o-n~ i1'FJ o.vo-n~ ""IJ~I.:1 i1~~

Oi1" nn" on;~N" "F'-l:l1ZrD:J-'
rCN
-10:-:
O:T

"T

-:-

You shall put this people in possession of the land that I

have sworn to their ancestors to give them.

Jos 21:43

rl~O-"f-n~ "~lf?':~ i1ji1~ l(l~j

on;~N" nn" l1ZrD:J 'rON
0:-:
T

.OT

-:-

_:_

Thus the LORD gave to Israel all the land that he had
sworn to give to their ancestors.

1 Kgs 13: 17

O"~ orO i1MrOn-~'" on" "~~n-~"

~~ ~~~v~,~~: il'~ n~~'~ ~~'rC~-~"

You shall not eat food or drink water there, or return by

the way that you came [i.e., will have come].

In Jos 1:6, the QATAL form "r:1S;~~~ expresses very nearly the
meaning of an English present perfect: it presents a past action
whose effects are relevant to the situation of the speaker. In Jos
21:43 we find exactly the same function except that the action
expressed by QATAL is relevant to the time frame of the narrative
past. In 1 Kgs 13:17, QATAL expresses the same with regard to
a future time-frame.
YIQTOL

with R=S: future, modal, general and habitual present

with R<S: prospective, past modal, past habitual

24

Preliminaries

Examples:
".:IS-nN nk'~ ~::>~n N~ '~N!l'
"n, O'Nn ".:IN'''-N~ ,,~
But, he said, you cannot see my fac~;T fo; ~~ o~e :~ill se~

Ex 33:20

T T

.,'

me and live.

Gen 48:10

n;N'l~ t,~~" N~ 1i~t~ ~'~f ~~l~: "~".v.l

N ow the eyes of Israel were dim with age, and he could

not see well.

Although the reasons for the inability to see are different in each
case, the grammatical structure of the clauses containing the
YIQTOL of ~::>" "to be able" is very similar. What differs is the time
frame: in Ex 33:20 the form expresses inability at the time of
speaking, in Gen 48:10 inability at the time of the events narrated.
Subject-Participle
- with R=S: real present, general present
- with R<S: attendant circumstance in the past
- with S<R: attendant circumstance in the future
Examples:
Gen 45: 12

r~;~~ "r)~ "~".v.l niN' C~"~".v. n~jJl

O::>"~N '~'~n "~-":!l

And now your eyes and the eyes of my 'b~~~he; :ile~ja~i~

see that it is my own mouth that speaks to you.

Jud 13:20

1j~~~ij ::lij~~ n~n;-1~~~ ~t7~j

C"N' iFlrDN' nijc~

The angel of the LORD ascended in the fl;me or' th~ ~lt~r
while Manoah and his wife looked on.

'9"~Ok-~~~1 '9~ ';l9~ '9~pj "~~jJ

!:l'M~ 1~~.:I'
I am making you a terror to yourself and to',' ;11 yo:";~

Jer 20:4

Chapter1

25

In all these cases, there seems to be a core meaning of the verbal

form that remains constant while the location of the event on the
timeline varies. This suggests that the main function of these
verbal forms is not to express tense. More precisely, the verbal
forms reviewed do not specify the relation between reference time
and speech time.
The indifference of Hebrew verbal forms to time-frames
should not be interpreted to mean that speakers of biblical Hebrew
had no notion of the time line. 30 Biblical Hebrew has a full set of
temporal adverbs showing that Israelites were perfectly capable of
distinguishing the past, the present and the future.
Moreover, the disregard for tense distinctions is not shared by
WAYYIQTOL. In prose, W AYYIQTOL practically always refers to
events completed before the time of speaking.31 Several other
characteristics of this verbal form indicate that it is a preterite
explicitly marking past tense. 32 More specifically, WAYYIQTOL
denotes events contemporaneous with a point of reference anterior
to the moment of speech (E=R<S). The form shows that the concept
of time frames is not alien to the verbal system in biblical Hebrew.
Tense is a relevant category for the biblical Hebrew verb, even
though only WAYYIQTOL positively expresses it. 33 In technical
terms, WAYYIQTOL may be considered +TENSE, while all the other
forms are -TENSE.
The biblical Hebrew verb and time reference
Kurylowicz, "Verbal Aspect" (1973); Bartelmus, HYH (1982).

Although the predicative participle and QATAL do not express

tense they do express temporal relations of some sort. While
leaving open the relation between reference time and speech time,
they define the relation between event time and reference time.

friends; and they shall fall by the sword of their enemies

while you look on.

In all three examples, the sequence subject-participle expresses the

ongoing process of visually witnessing an event. However,
whereas in Gen 45: 12 the seeing happens in the present, in Jud
13:20 it happens in the narrated past, and in Jer 20:4 in the
predicted future.

30 Note George Steiner's claim that "Hebraic intemporality in regard to

prophecy and to God's eternal 'thereness' -yesterday and tomorrow are
now, are 'presently' -is organically situated in the a-temporal and horizontal
mode of Hebrew verbs." Quoted in Goldfajn, Word Order, 11.
31 Even the poetic uses of this form can probably all be explained on the
supposition that it expresses the past tense; see Gross, Verb/orm.
32 See Chapter II, pp. 41-50.
33 That biblical Hebrew should possess only one tense is not remarkable. In
general linguistics, it has been argued that most languages express one tense
only; see En~, "Tense and Modality," 356-357.

Preliminaries

26

The use of QATAL normally means that the event occurred before
the reference time, while the predicative participle indicates that
the event is contemporaneous with the reference time. With
dynamic verbs, this opposition between anteriority and contemporaneousness is clear:
1 Sam 24:15

"~l~: l~~ N~; "~ "lO~

=rt,

n~~ "~ "lO~

After whom has the king of Israel come out? Whom do
you pursue?

The QATAL form represents an action that has taken place before
the reference time, the predicative participle an action going on
during it.
With stative verbs, QATAL often requires a translation with
present-tense verbal forms in English. Such cases can still be
viewed as expressing anteriority when it is realised that the event
in this case corresponds to the coming about of the state or, in
certain cases, the moment the state was perceived:
1 Sam 12:2

o~,,~~~ l~ij~~ l~~ij n~iJ iTI!1.l11

"~~~~ "l:1~R! "~~j

See, it is the king who leads you now; and I am old and grey.

When Samuel was not old, he led the people. Now he has become
old and can no longer do so.
Jud 14:3

"j"l1:J nirz.;" N"n-":!j

T

T: T

But Samson said to his father: "Get her for me, because
she pleases me."

the Hebrew .
(and continues to be) right in my eyes."

Chapter 1

27

classification would be acceptable if it were not for ,the fact that it

underplays two properties of these functions. First, it needs to be
stressed that the normal reading of both QATAL and the predicative
participle implies identity of reference time and speech time (R=S).
Only under specific circumstances-notably in subordinate clauses
-will the context or the speech situation impose a reference time
located in the past (R<S) or the future (S<R). Apt description of this
behaviour is given by the term "parasitic."34 What characterizes
QATAL and the predicative participle (as well as the modal forms)
is that they do not create their own reference time. They
necessarily relate to a point in time provided by the linguistic or
pragmatic context: the speech time in direct discourse, the time of
the main events in narrative, or a moment in the future in
predictive discourse. Second, it is important to realise that location
with regard to a reference point imposes a certain interpretation of
the process. Anteriority most often implies a process that is
complete and accomplished, while contemporaneousness usually
implies a process that has begun but is not yet accomplished and is
therefore typically ongoing. In other words, the anteriorcontemporaneous contrast has aspectual connotations. Such connotations can, in certain constructions, be exploited to stylistic effect
(see the next section, p. 31). They are nevertheless, from the point of
view of the verbal system, secondary phenomena.
A term that captures the anterior-contemporaneous opposition
while taking these considerations into account is time reference
(Zeitbezug). QATAL and the predicative participle are - TENSE but
+ TIME REFERENCE, the former expressing anteriority, the latter
contemporaneousness.

like "~~~" has appeared

The expression of anteriority and contemporaneousness may

therefore be considered the functions of QATAL and the predicative
participle respectively. Some scholars would add that posteriority
is expressed by YIQTOL and WEQATAL. These forms, however,
often refer to situations that are not posterior to the reference time,
e.g., when they express the general present or the habitual past,
and are better regarded as expressing modality.
The anterior and' contemporaneous functions have sometimes
been subsumed under the category of relative tense. This

34 This term was introduced in the study of the Hebrew verb by Hatav,
Semantics, 178 and elsewhere.

Preliminaries

28

The biblical Hebrew verb and aspect

Cohen, L'aspect verbal (1989); Comrie, Aspect (1976); Ewald, Ausfuhrliches
Lehrbuch (1870),349-350; Kurylowicz, "Verbal Aspect" (1973); Joosten, "Predicative
Participle" (1989); Steiner, "Ancient Hebrew" (1997).

Aspect is a term much used in linguistics and in Hebrew grammar,

although not always with the same meaning. To some, any verbal
meaning that is not purely tense-related can be described as
aspectual. Others use it in various more specific ways. Fortunately,
recent years have seen a convergence of opinions. Most Hebrew
grammarians agree in restricting the term aspect to the point of
view from which a process is represented. In this approach, aspect
is considered to be binary:
- the perfective aspect portrays the situation from outside,
without necessarily distinguishing any of the internal structure of
the situation;
- the imperfective aspect portrays the situation from inside, and
as such is crucially concerned with the internal structure of the
situation. 35
The aspectual distinction may be realised in different ways in
different languages. A special subcategory of the imperfective is
the progressive, which stresses the ongoing nature of a process and
its concomitance with regard to a reference point.
Aspect is considered by many grammarians to be the single
most important semantic category for the biblical Hebrew verb.
QATAL is said to express perfective aspect and YIQTOL
imperfective or, in an important variation, non-perfective aspect. 36
In spite of its popUlarity, this aspectual interpretation has little to
be said for it. Indeed, YIQTOL does not normally refer to processes
~
,fiot t() attendant
circumstances. 37 The non-use of YIQTOL in these functions is
.I..I..n.1.1..I..I.,v.l.J.f"

The definitions follow those of Comrie, Aspect, 3-4.

A some~hat special position is taken by Waltke and O'Connor. They view
the relatIon between QATAL and YIQTOL as a privative opposition with
YIQTOL as the non-marked member; see Waltke and O'Connor, Introduction,
475-478. According to this hypothesis, YIQTOL is non-perfective, meaning
that it is either imperfective or aspectually neutral.
37 See Rattray, Tense-Mood-Aspect System, 92: "The Prefix Form never refers to
~vents in progress, which are happening at that very moment. ... it is simply
mcorrect to describe the Prefix Form as 'incompleted' or 'imperfective'. In
35

36

Chapter 1

29

difficult to reconcile with the idea that the form has an

imperfective value, for the expression of the real present and of
concomitance in the past are typically imperfective functions. In
fact, the predominant use of YIQTOL is as a future/modal. The form
typically implies that the process has not yet begun but is merely
contemplated. A basic modal, irrealis function can account for
most of the uses of YIQTOL, including, notably, the expression of
repeated action in the past (see below, pp. 32-33).
.
For its part, QATAL is not the leading form in narrative, as one
might expect if it had a perfective value. Instead, in narrative, it is
used for expressing different types of detours and provides
background information. Among these, the retrospective,
"pluperfect" function is well attested. In discourse, too, QATAL
regularly has a retrospective, "present perfect" function. This
characterizes QATAL as a typical perfect, a verbal form expressing
anteriority with regard to the point of reference (E<R, see above).
The perfect mayor may not be regarded as aspectual, but in any
case needs to be kept well apart from the perfective. 38
The aspectual hypothesis is not more felicitous with regard to
the remaining finite forms. WAYYIQTOL is characterized as
a preterite that is aspectually neutral. It may take on a perfective or
an imperfective nuance as required by the context or by the
meaning of the verb. WEQATAL expresses irrealis as does YIQTOL,
with which it is closely related. The volitive forms, too cohortative, imperative and jussive - express modality and are
aspectually neutral (see below, pp. 32-33).
This leaves the predicative participle. The participle has rarely
been taken into account in the aspectual hypothesis. Nevertheless,
it is the participle which expresses functions that come closest to
?eing aspectua~. The default function of the predicative participle
IS the expreSSIon of contemporaneousness with regard to the
moment of speaking (E=R=S, see above). Two basic varieties exist:
the participle may follow (Su-Ptcp) or precede (Ptcp-Su) the
subject. These two sequences express the present tense in distinct
ways. The sequence Su-Ptcp represents a process as ongoing:

this respect the traditional name, Imperfect, is completely misleading. That is

the one thing it is not."
38 J oos t en, "F"mIte V erb al Forms."

Preliminaries

30

2 Sam 18:27

n;:;1'~-n~
- : -:

nN'
-.-

".l~
. -: n~~n
.:
- '~Nll'
-:
-

pii~-l~ r~~"D~ n~~9:P lirj~'lO

The sentinel said~ "I see the running of the first one; it is
like the running of Ahimaaz son of Zadok. "

The watchman describes to David what he is seeing at the moment

of the utterance. 39
The sequence Ptcp-Su does not imply that the action is
ongoing. Instead, a situation contemporaneous with the moment of
speaking is represented as a fact:
Gen 31:5

1~"~~ "~~-n~ ":;>~~ ntt' Iv~ 'tiNllj

ofzft,rj. t,bn~
: . "t,~
-.. 1~:r'~-"~.
:

':..

And he said to them~ "I see that you father does not
regard me as favourably as he did before."

Here Jacob is not communicating to his wives something he

actually sees. The verb i1~' does not refer to sense perception at
all, but to Jacob's judgment, which is represented as fact.
As will become clearer in Chapter VII, the opposition between SuPtcp and Ptcp-Su is manifested in different contextually
determined ways. But the main distinction is always between the
representation of ongoing processes and statements of fact. It
seems reasonable to describe this opposition in terms of aspect:
Su-Ptcp presents the situation as in progress, while Ptcp-Su
presents the situation as a complete whole. It must be conceded
that this aspectual opposition is not central to the system as
a whole. There are only about 120 cases of the sequence Ptcp-Su.
The
very rarely occur in the same context to
on the action, as aspectual forms
the
expression of aspect in the present tense is exceptiona1. 40
In narrative contexts, the sequence Su-Ptcp plays an important
role in expressing attendant circumstances. In this use, the predicative
participle opposes WAYYIQTOL or QATAL along aspectuallines. The
participle expresses the imperfective (or progressive) aspect, the other
forms the perfective:

In English, the verb "to see" does not easily combine with the progressive
forms. In Hebrew this restriction does not operate.
40 See Comrie, Aspect, 69-70.

39

Chapter 1

2 Sam 18:24

31
O"'l.v~ij "~~-1";,i :J~i"

il11

'~iQij lrt,~ i1~~ij '~:j

N ow David was sitting between the two gates. The
sentinel went up to the roof of the gate.

1 Sam 7: 10

nt,i17n nz,170

t,~1~rj

"n",

t,~,tZi"::l ;,~nz'~S"'i-ro ~.l" O"Mrj~~~

As Samuel was offering ~pT: ~he b~~~t- off~~ing'~: ~he

Philistines drew near to attack Israel.

In both examples, the predicative participle presents a situation

that was begun but not completed at the reference time, while
WAYYIQTOL and QATAL express complete events. Thus,
WAYYIQTOL and QATAL play the perfective to the participle's
imperfective. As argued above, it is not the primary function of
WAYYIQTOL or QATAL to express the perfective. But in a given
context, these forms may come to imply an aspectual reading.
The biblical Hebrew verb and mood
Lyons, Introduction (1968), 307-311; Bhat, Prominence (1999), 63-87; Hatav,
Semantics (1997), 117-162; Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996).

Mood, or modality, gives expression to the speaker's attitude

toward the process. A fundamental distinction found in many
languages is between realis and irrealis . Verbal forms expressing
rea lis imply that the speaker considers that the process actually did
take place, that it is taking place or, in some languages, that it will
take place, while forms expressing irrealis imply that the reality of
the process is somehow in doubt. In the classical languages, the
indicative mood expresses realis, while the other personal moods
- SUbjunctive, optative, imperative - express irrealis. Within the
realm of the irrealis, various other distinctions may be made.
Some linguists reckon with two main varieties only: epistemic
modality, having to do with the degree of knowledge (tiClm:~f.11J)
regarding a process, as in expressions of doubt, likelihood,
expectation or assertion; and deontic modality, having to do with
what makes a process a necessity (TO t5tov, that which is binding),
as in expressions of intention, volition, permission, or obligation.
Others propose a three-fold scale of modality: wish and intention;
necessity and obligation; certainty and possibility.
The status of mood in biblical Hebrew has been variously
evaluated. Some grammarians hold that the verbal forms are

Preliminaries

32

indifferent to mood, being interpreted as realis or irrealis

according to the requirements of the context. Others view modality
as the principal category expressed by the verbal system. Here
again it is important to distinguish between main functions
expressed by the form and subsidiary functions inferred from the
context. Taking the realislirrealis distinction as our guideline, it is
clear that WAYYIQTOL, QATAL, and the predicative participle
belong to the former. They imply, in the great majority of cases,
that a process really did come about, was coming about or is
coming about. On the other hand, the cohortative-imperativejussive group clearly belongs to the realm of irrealis: the forms
express commands, wishes, and contingent events, i.e., processes
that have not yet come about.
As was suggested above, YIQTOL, too, should be considered
a modal, irrealis form. And what is true for YIQTOL is true for
WEQATAL as well. Most frequently, these forms refer to actions
not yet begun at the moment of speaking. Even where YIQTOL and
WEQATAL refer to the present or past time frame, they never
represent a process as actually happening or having happened, but
rather as merely contemplated. The expression of contemplated
action accounts for the use of these forms as a general present:
1i111' iU'!)" o~n tC"~

Prov 16: 29

:l;~~~t,

111f i;"~ii1'1

The violent entices his neighbour, and leads him in a way

that is not good.

In statements of this type, the verbal forms do not indicate that

something is actually happening or has happened. Rather, they
express possible actions. Possibility may, of course, be subsumed
I
forthepast
Ex 18:26

i1~RiJ '~1iJ-n~ n,;r~~f o.r;v-n~ 1~~~1

'~1iJ-~~1 i1~b-~~ T1~":;l;

Oij 1tQ1SU/: Ib RiJ

And they judged the people at all times; hard cases they
brought to Moses, but any minor case they decided
themselves.

Adopting the reference point of the story, YIQTOL and WEQATAL

here express what would happen from time to time. The forms do

Chapter 1

33

not present the actions as happening at that very moment in the

past, nor as having come about, but as liable to happen.41
The modal subsystem turns out, then, to be made up of two
distinct tiers: YIQTOL and WEQATAL on the one hand, and the
cohortative-imperative-jussive group on the other hand. Both tiers
express irrealis, i.e., they imply that the actuality of process is in
doubt. Within the domain of irrealis , each tier has a distinct
meaning. The distinction is best described along the lines of
a privative opposition. The distinctive trait expressed by the
cohortative-imperative-jussive group is volition. Any form of this
group positively expresses that the speaker (or, very rarely,
another instance) wills a process to come about. In contrast,
YIQTOL and WEQATAL express irrealis without giving positive
expression to the will of the speaker.
NB. There is no form expressing the future tense in biblical Hebrew. As in
many other languages, futurity is assimilated to other types of modality.

Text-linguistic functions
Benveniste, "Les relations de temps" (1966); Weinrich, Tempus (1964);
Niccacci, Syntax of the Verb (1990); Longacre, Joseph (1989); Eskhult, Studies
(1990); Joosten, "The Indicative System" (1997).

In recent years, several scholars have argued that the verbal forms
of biblical Hebrew are not to be analysed in terms of tense, aspect,
or mood but in terms of their function within larger texts. This
approach is sometimes called "text-linguistics," or, with a different
emphasis, "discourse analysis." It has called attention to a number
of features neglected in more traditional grammar focused on the
clause.
A first concept proposed by text-linguists is Sprechhaltung,
"speech attitude." Verbal forms give information about the type of
text where they are found. The basic dichotomy is between
narrative and discursive texts, although each of these may be
further divided into subcategories. 42 In narrative texts, events are
related in a somewhat distant fashion; narration is concerned with

41 The use of modal forms in expressions of iterative action finds parallels in

many languages of the world; see Lazard, "Eventuel," 358; Mf.ijnnesland,
"Habitual," 73.
42 Poetry would have to be considered as a third type of text.

34

Preliminaries

what happened "once upon a time." The speech attitude is relaxed.

Discursive texts reflect the existential involvement of the speaker
and audience. The speech attitude is tense and moving. In some
languages, different sets of verbal forms are used in narrative and
in discourse; for example:
FRENCH

- narrative: passe simple, imparfait, plus-que-parfait

- discourse: present, passe compose, Jutur
ENGLISH

- narrative: simple past, past continuous, pluperfect

- discourse: present, present continuous, present perfect
Empirically, it is observed that stretches of text, in these languages,
dominantly employ only one set of verbal forms - either narrative
or discursive. This means, conversely, that the verbal syntax of
a text reveals the dominant speech attitude.
Another text-linguistic notion relevant to verbal syntax is that
of highlighting. In narrative texts, a distinction can often be drawn
between situations that are highlighted and situations that pertain
to the background. The foreground presents the main events of
the story, while the background is concerned with attendant
circumstances, states, and descriptive elements. Again, in some
languages, certain verbal forms are typically used to depict
foreground situations while other verbal forms paint the
background. In French narrative, it is normal to use the passe
simple for highlighted events, while the imparfait refers to
backgrounded events. The foregroundlbackground distinction is
not considered as relevant to discursive as to narrative texts.
A third important notion is textual continuity. A text can be
""'~"'"~~'~~"'~~~""""'-viewed-a5-a-ftOW-l,f e()nTnmnieaticm:-ftotlrin~nrrative and in
discourse, this flow may be controlled - sped up, slowed down,
or interrupted - in different ways. A text of any length will often
be broken down into smaller components sections or
paragraphs - so as to enhance communication. Once more, this
"packaging" of textual units will in many languages be effected, at
least partly, through the use of verbal forms.
There is much that is illuminating in the text-linguistic
approach. And much of it can be applied to biblical Hebrew.

Chapter 1

35

- Where WAYYIQTOL predominates, one is usually dealing with

narrative, while in discursive texts other verbal forms are more
) frequent.
) - Highlighting is effected in biblical Hebrew through word order:
the main events of a story are recounted with verb-initial clauses,
whereas background situations are expressed with non-verb-initial
clauses. In this case, position in the clause goes hand-in-hand with
a change of verbal forms: in narrative, verb-initial clauses are
almost always formed with WAYYIQTOL, while non-verb-initial
clauses cannot use this form.
- Continuity, too, is determined in Hebrew by the word order.
This creates some collusion between foreground and continuity,
background and discontinuity, although theoretically the two
notions are distinct. Non-verb-initial clauses are discontinuous and
very often contribute to the delimitation of sub-units in the text.
In the present study, no text-linguistic functions will be attributed
directly to verbal forms. Rather, a layered approach will be
proposed. On the level of the verbal forms, it is preferable to
formulate the analysis in terms of tense, time-reference, aspect,
and mood. On the higher level of the text, the verbal forms, in their
basic meanings, are deployed to serve certain textual strategies such as establishing speech attitude, distinguishing fore- and
background, and controlling continuity. There is no one-to-one
relation between verbal forms and text-linguistic functions. Thus it
will be held, for instance, that WAYYIQTOL by itself signals only
that the situation belongs to a moment in the past. With this basic
meaning, the form was fit to become the leading one in narrative
texts, where events are situated in a past period unconnected to the
moment of speaking. However, WAYYIQTOL could also be used in
a number of minor functions outside of narrative (e.g., in direct
speech) or apart from the main line events (e.g., in descriptions of
the background).
Text-linguistic functions and the interplay between verbal
forms in a textual perspective will be further explored in
Chapter x. Here it suffices to indicate that such functions are not
primary. They are secondary, context-conditioned functions, albeit
of a very important kind.

36

Preliminaries

Other functions

A few verbal functions remain to be discussed. They are not

expressed through contrasts within the verbal paradigm constituted
by the five main categories enumerated above. Some of them are
encoded in the verbal morphology of biblical Hebrew, while others
are not. All of them may influence verbal meanings and syntax in
different ways.
Voice
Benveniste, "Actif et moyen" (1966); M. Cohen, "Verbes deponents" (1955);
Joosten, "D Stem" (1998); Joosten, "Actif et moyen" (2000).

Voice or diathesis has to do with the relation of the grammatical

subject to the process expressed by the verb. In the active voice, the
process takes its point of departure in the subject and is
accomplished outside of it; in the middle, the subject is the seat of
the process; while in the passive, the subject undergoes the process
accomplished- by an external agent. In biblical Hebrew the diatheses
are not expressed as systematically as in classical Greek or some
modem European languages. The niphal often functions as the
medio-passive counterpart of the qal. But some verbs have a passive
qal instead, and for many verbs the niphal is not attested. Piel and
hiphil stems often have passtve counterparts in the pual and hophal
respectively, but again this correspondence is not systematic.
Another manifestation of voice in biblical Hebrew may be
indicated. A good case can be made for viewing qatil (and qatul)
verbs as middle verbs. The morphological class includes, aside
from stative verbs (e.g., i~f "to be heavy," lbi? "to be small"),
a number of verbs that cannot be described as expressing states:
e;g.,
". 5"~'''to
approach," ili::lt, "to put on," p::li "to cling to." All these verbs can
be classified as middle. Stative verbs, too, can be classified as
middle, since they express processes the seat of which is the
subject. Active counterparts of these verbs are at times provided
by the piel or hiphil stems.
Voice interacts with the verbal paradigm in various ways. For
example, with middle verbs QATAL at times leads to an atypical
"present tense" function. Also, middle verbs only rarely occur in
the Su-Ptcp construction to express ongoing action. Such
interaction between voice and tense-mood-aspect functions poses

Chapter 1

37

a challenge which a theory of the Hebrew verbal system needs to

address.
Aktionsart
Dobbs-Allsopp,"Biblical Hebrew Statives" (2000).

The German term Aktionsart - "mode of action" or, in recent

publications, "situation aspect" - ' refers to features of the lexical
meaning of a given verb. A process may be dynamic or static,
durative or punctual, bounded or unbounded,transformative or
not. It may come about in one single action or by a succession of
identical actions. None of these features is regularly expressed by
the inflectional morphology of the Hebrew verb.
A feature of verbal morphology that does need to be connected
to Aktionsart is the system of stem formations. Where several
stems are attested for the same root, one often finds they imply
differences of Aktionsart. E.g., It,;, in the qal means "to go" but in
the hithpael it means "to go about," with a durative nuance not
expressed in the qal.
A subcategory that needs to be mentioned separately is that of
Phasenaktionsart - phasal mode of action. This focuses on one
segment of the process, usually either its initial or final phase.
Aktionsart, like diathesis, interacts with the verbal paradigm.
For instance, the hithpael may lend to W AYYIQTOL a durative
nuance that is, otherwise absent. Again an attempt should be made
to accommodate such phenomena in a general theory of the
biblical Hebrew verb.
.~_. .~ ~~ ..~~,

"Functional Grammar" (1955), 97-99; Hatav, Semantics (1997), 37-88;

Goldfajn, Word Order (1998).

In a number of treatments of the Hebrew verb one finds the claim

that WAYYIQTOL and WEQATAL express temporal or logical
succession. Recently, the term sequentiality has been proposed to
describe this feature. If sequentiality is taken to imply that
a process expressed by WAYYIQTOL or WEQATAL is necessarily
subsequent to the process mentioned before, the notion is false.
Although the forms most often express events that are sequential,
both are regularly used for contemporaneous events.

38

Preliminaries

It is better to view sequentiality as a property of certain texts -

narrative, predictive, procedural. Sequentiality will then be considered

an important discourse function, closely related to that of
foreground and continuity. Like other discourse functions, it is not
expressed by the verbal forms as such. Rather, W AYYIQTOL and
WEQATAL are deployed in passages implying temporal succession.
The fact that it is these two forms, and not others, that are thus
deployed flows from their position at the head of the clause. In
Hebrew texts, verb-initial clauses imply discursive continuity, while
non-verb-initial clauses normally imply some type of discontinuity
(see Chapter x).

Conclusion
The above enumeration of verbal categories is far from exhaustive.
Several other verbal functions could be listed. 43 The ones briefly
presented in this chapter suffice, however, in the framework of the
present study.

CHAPTER II
THE VERBAL PARADIGM
Verbal systems are complex entities. No straightforward method
exists for interpreting them. There is no proof for the correctness
of any given theory. Nevertheless, the probability of an approach
can be enhanced through contrastive studies. If meaning in
language is effected through opposition, as postulated by de
Saussure, then the recovery of meaning must be based on
a retracing of the relevant oppositions. The most significant
oppositions are those between categories that are most closely
related.

The system in outline

In the previous chapter, the verbal paradigm of biblical Hebrew

was described as consisting of five main categories: W AYYIQTOL,

the active participle, YIQTOL-WEQATAL, and the volitives.
These could be structured in different ways. The most expedient
approach is to begin by distinguishing two sub-systems, an
indicative one and a modal one:
- indicative: WAYYIQTOL, QATAL, predicative participle
-modal: YIQTOL-WEQATAL, volitives.
Within the indicative system, two successive oppositions may
be recognized. First, W AYYIQTOL is opposed as a positively
characterized past-tense form to QATAL and the participle which
are indifferent to tense; second, QATAL is opposed to the participle
along the lines of time reference, with QATAL expressing
anteriority and the participle contemporaneousness with regard to
'the reference time.
QATAL,

43

See Jakobson, "Verschieber," for a systematic review of possible verbal

functions.

41

The Verbal Paradigm

40

Within the modal sub-system, YIQTOL and WEQATAL go hand in

hand to express mere modality (irrealis) as opposed to the
cohortative-imperative-jussive group which adds a volitive nuance.
All this can be brought into a scheme:
INDICATIVE

past-tense

WAYYIQTOL

non-volitive

anterior

contemp.

QATAL

participle

by the verb in a time

frame belonging to the past:

Cohortative-imperative-jussive - modal volitive

The volitives, like YIQTOL and WEQATAL, present the process as
not real, adding a volitive nuance; the speaker wants the process to
take place:
1 Sam 28:22

:l-Vl "ij;j o.,tp~fNij ~b~ .,~.,~ "ij;j

:l~i~ .,,~~ '1)~ i111i1; oQ~ n"~~ ro"~ "~:j
,"j:l "j~1 iMro~, ~1i1

QATAL - indicative non-tensed anterior (perfect)

QATAL depicts the process as being anterior to the

reference time

(usually, but not necessarily, the time of speaking):

r,P,O-i~O i1r;J~ oi",P,"~ '9~ '''~ij''~ '~~llj

ZO~~~ 1~~~-~~~ "r;1~~~ '9"l)"1~ i~~

He said, "Who told you that you were nak~d? Have y~~
eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?"

non:tensed contemporaneous
The predicative participle depicts the process as being contemporaneous with the reference time (usually, but not necessarily, the
time of speaking):
Num 11 :27

TT''9f1'- i;~~~ijl' :;r;J~T i;~~b n~~~

.,~~ n"~~1 "r;1~~~iP~ .,~~~ i1~~ ZOr:tR~l

rl~f

And it happened in the days when the i~dg'~s rul~d,' that

there was a famine in the land, and a certain man of
Bethlehem in Judah went to live in the country of Moab,
he and his wife and two sons.

'1"~1 '1~~ '~~llj i1Wb~ '~~j '.l1~ij rl~j

i1jn~~ O"N~jn~

And a young man ran and told Moses, "EI(i~d ~nd :M~d~d
are prophesying in the camp."

'''j~~ "M~~i1ni1-'~~ i1,i1" .,~~ '~~ll'

But he said to me, "The LORD, before whom I walk, will

send his angel with you and make your way successful.
You shall get a wife for my son from my kindred, from
my father's house .

YIQTOL-WEQATAL cohort.-imp.-juss.

W A YYIQTOL - indicative past (preterite)

W AYYIQTOL situates the process expressed

Gen3:11

Gen 24:40

volitive

Examples:

real at the

reference time:

MODAL

non-tensed

Ruth 1: 1

YIQTOL-WEQATAL - modal non-volitive (irrealis)

YIQTOL and WEQAT AL present the process as not (yet)

'9PO~~ ~ip~ i1r;J~-o~ ~r17~~ i1r;J.l11

t,;~~j oQ~-n~ '9"~~~ i1~~~1

"J1~ l'IJ .,~ 1J~ '9~ "ij",

N ow therefore, you also listen to your servant; let me set

a morsel of bread before you. Eat, that you may have
strength when you go on your way.

Contrastive studies
The basic scheme presented above makes up the theoretical
backbone of the present work. In the following, the theory will be
argued through a confrontation of verbal forms with one another.
WAYYIQTOL

and QATAL

Birkeland, "Imperfectum Consecutivum" (1935); Gross, Verbfonn (1976); Polotsky,

"Note" (1985); Niccacci, Syntax (1990),35-45; Hatav, Semantics (1997).

and QATAL often occur side-by-side with a similar

temporal function. This has led a number of grammarians to
postulate that these forms basically express the same meaning. The
difference between the two would be simply syntactical:
W AYYIQTOL occurring in clause-initial position when the clause
begins with the copula, QATAL occurring in non-initial position
and clause-initially without copula.! The functional distinction

WAYYIQTOL

See, e.g., JM 118a: "[wayyiqtol] has roughly the same values as the qatal
form, to which it mainly adds the idea of succession."

42

43

The Verbal Paradigm

between the two verbal forms, .in this view, would be of a textlinguistic nature. Clause-initial WAYYIQTOL normally expresses
sequentiality and foregrounding, while non-initial QATAL expresses
nuances of discontinuity and backgrounding. 2 In this approach, the
relation between QATAL and WAYYIQTOL is taken to be analogous
to that between YIQTOL and WEQATAL.
WAYYIQTOL and QATAL also occur in ways that set them
apart, however. On the basis of these usages, it was argued above
that QATAL and WAYYIQTOL do not express identical temporal
meanings. W AYYIQTOL is a preterite, while QATAL is a tenseless
expression of anteriority. The two functions are close: events or
situations that are anterior to the moment of reference are usually
located in the past. Some languages do not distinguish the
functions at all; thus, the Latin perfect or the Syriac suffix
conjugation are used in both historical narrative and reports of past
events. Other languages, like English or French, do distinguish
a preterite or narrative past from a retrospective past, although the
distinction is implemented in slightly different ways in every
language where it occurs. Hebrew is peculiar in that it has two
distinct forms yet allows partial promiscuity of the two. The
similar and the distinct uses of QATAL and WAYYIQTOL will
presentl y be evaluated.

expressed by WAYYIQTOL and the third by QATAL. Indeed, a negated

process, even when it is closely integrated into the main sequence of
events, can only be expressed by lo:J + QATAL. WAYYIQTOL can be
negated in no other way.
b) QATAL after an adverbial phrase of time:

t'-~'~A~~~-*~~-----""--~-'----~-

,~-,-,:"-_-',---"---,,--,,,"'"

~ oij":;l~ :Jtr~ ink-":p '''O~ 1Ni~j

l:i"rO" i':::l":'f 1"~" Nt" ink "1NjrO

n11~:p i~f "~iiYl~ lirO~iQ N~~j

'''r)~ N~; l~-"'"O~1 't?'.P. i~~ 1Nli?~j

't?'.P. :Jp~~ n!pk ii:l

The first came out red, all his body like a hairy mantle; so
they named him Esau. Afterward his brother came out,
with his hand gripping Esau's heel.
The births of the sons are successive events in the story. The
variation of the verbal form does not express any temporal or
aspectual difference in the recounting of the two. The switch from
WAYYIQTOL to QATAL is simply brought about by the use of an
adverbial phrase in clause-initial position. 3
A special case is when the sentence opens with wayhi:
Gen 39:7

''':J'~-nrO~ NrNrl' iI~~iI O"':J":'fil 'n~ "iI'"

T

-:

":""

T' -

":""

=,~i~:":~ Q"~;.p.-n~

And it happened after these things: his master's wife cast

her eyes on Joseph.

Functional similarity between QATAL and WAYVIQTOL

In a number of syntactic constellations, a real functional similarity
exists between QATAL and WAYYIQTOL. The two forms express
practically the same temporal-aspectual function in the following
cases:
In narrative
a) QATAL after the negation:
___- ___,__
37:4
'''O~

'.vrw

Gen 25:25-26

Gen 40: 1

ilP~~ ~Ntp" iI~~Q O"i~'tr 'lJ~ "0;1

O:l;;~ 1~9~ OV,,~,~~ iI~kQl O:j;;~-1~9

And it happened after these things: the cupbearer and

baker of the king of Egypt offended their LORD the king
of Egypt.

These examples illustrate a rare syntactic slot where QATAL and

W AYYIQTOL are equally possible. There seems to be no semantic
difference between wayhi + temporal phrase + QATAL and wayhi +

ft ,

But when his brothers sa~ :tha~ his f;the~ loved hi~
more than all his brothers, they hated him, and could not
speak peaceably to him.

Seeing, hating, and being unable to speak are successive processes

representing stages in the plot of the story. Yet, the first two are

See more fully in Chapter x.

The adverbial phrase of time may follow the verb, in which case WAYYIQTOL
can be used; see, e.g., Jos 10:26 1;J-~J.O~ l1~ii1; o~:j; 1 Sam 24:9; Jer 34:11.
Adverbial phrases more often precede the verb, however. The adverbial time
phrase may also precede WAYYIQTOL: '~~~.v.-n~ 0v1~~ ~~~j ~iQ~~tjJ oi~~ (Gen
22:4); see also: 1 Sam 4:20; 2 Kgs 25:3; Isa 6:1; 20:1; Jer 7:24-25; 52:6; Ps
138:3; Dan 1:18; 2 Chr 13:1; 25:27; 28:22. The latter construction is a very
special one, however, with the temporal phrase functioning as a casus
pendens; see Gross, Pendenskonstruktion, 50.

44

The Verbal Paradigm

te~poral phrase + WAYYIQTOL.The constructions are free syntactic

vanants, although the latter is more frequent. 4

c) Object/Adverbial fronting
F?r ~ifferent reasons, a constituent other than the subject may be
hlghhghted and therefore positioned before the verb: 5
Gen 1:5

. i1~;~ NlR lrg;'~1 0;" ';N~ O"H~~ Nli?~j

God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

In this example, the indirect object of the second clause is fronted

because it is topicalized. 6 Since the first position is occupied by an
element other than the verb, WAYYIQTOL cannot be used. 7
d) Fronting of a focussed or topicalized subject:
The subject too may be fronted for highlighting. The clearest cases
occur where an explicit contrast is established between two
subjects:
~~l~O-~~ rV~~ i1rgb~ Phl~ 04;0 ib~:j

Ex 20:21

Then the people stood at a distance, but Moses drew near

to the thick darkness.

The opposition between the people and Moses caused the subject
..:_ +1-_ ..... ____ ... _.-:1

_1 _____

L_

1~

.................................. _--._.....

....

....

11

45

. There is no reason to think that the following actions are

' ..'' ..,..,..o':ionted any differently, even though they use WAYYIQTOL. In
other words, the temporal-aspectual value of the two verbal forms
Is, once more, practically identical.
Categories (a) through (e) show that QATAL and WAYYIQTOL can
be used in closely related ways, Both forms refer, in these
examples, to complete events belonging to the past time frame. If
there is a difference in meaning, it can be ascribed to the word
order: WAYYIQTOL is clause-initial while QATAL usually is not.
Functional differences connected to word-order pertain to sequentiality,
to the foreground-background distinction, or to the prominence of
the verbal idea in the clause. 8 As far as tense, time-reference,
aspect, or mood are concerned, however, the two forms have an
identical reading. 9
Functional differences between QATAL and WAYYIQTOL
Apart from the syntactic situations reviewed above, QATAL and
WAYYIQTOL usually express distinct functions. The distinction can
plausibly be related to what was posited in Chapter I: QAT AL
implies a nuance of anteriority with respect to the reference time,

46

47

The Verbal Paradigm

Gen 5: 24

!J~~"~1 o.,;;t,~Q-n~
o.,;;t,~

liJQ l~ij~~j
ink MR7-":P

Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, for God

had taken him.

i!~l:Pij-t,.li :lp~:-n~ '~.v. Ob~~j

''':l~ i~'~ 'rDN
Now Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing' wi~h

Gen 27:41

which his father had blessed him.

Gen 18:33

oQl~~-t,~ '~j~ il~:P 'rg~~ i!~i!; l~~j

And the LORD went his way, when he had finished

speaking to Abraham.

Gen 39: 5

in"~:p

ink i"i1~0 t~~ "0;j

i!~i!; T1:t;j it,-rO~ ,~~-t,f t,.li1
=,~i" t,'1:;l "j~iPij n"~-n~

From the moment that he had made him overseer in his

house and over all that he had, the LORD blessed the
Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake.

Alternatively, the subordination may be indicated merely by the

word order. This happens in circumstantial clauses,l1 the
characteristic structure of which is: we + subject + predicate. The
subject is not focused or topicalized:
Num 11:4

i:ll1P:P ,~~ ='9~~~Q1

t,~'fli" "J:ll on !J::J:l"' !J:lrO"'
. ,~~ '~Jt,:JN" .,~ .~,~~;,

subordinate nature of the clauses and the temporal nuance of

anteriority is with a perfect participle clause:
Num 11:4
The rabble having had a strong craving, the
Israelites also wept again.
Num 17:15
And Aaron returned to Moses at the entrance of the
12
tent of meeting the plague having stopped.
NB. When clauses of the type we + subject + QATAL have a focused or
topicalized subject, they do not express anteriority: 13
Gen 31:47
i.v.7~ it, NjR ::l~~~1 NI;l1ili~ i~;

1;7 ;t,-Njf?~j

Laban called it J egar-sahadutha, but Jacob called it Galeed.

The second clause here belongs with contrastive clauses discussed above.

14

It is

to be considered a main clause.

Retrospective QATAL versus narrative WAVYIQTOL

As was first pointed out by H. J. Polotsky,15 passages may be
found where identical events are presented with W AYYIQTOL in
narrative and with QATAL in direct speech:
NARRATIVE

2 Sam 12:26

li~.li "~:P n~j:p :l~i" Clj~~j

i!:J!Jt,~i! '''lrn~ i~t,,,,

Now Joab fought against Rabbah

took the royal city.

i!~~tl 11~l;10

of~he:Am~oni~es, a~d

REPORT

2 Sam 12:27

The rabble among them had a stro~g cr~~i~g; ~nd: th~

Israelites also wept again, and said, "If only we had meat
to eat!"

,~~"' "":T-t,~ O":J~t,~ :l~i" n'~~j

O"~i! ;"li::'n~ T"n'~t,-o; :i!:llj~ "1:1~Ij'~~

J oab sent messenger~ Tt~ D~vid': a~dl ~~id, "I ha~e fo~ght
against Rabbah; moreover, 1 have taken the water city."

Num 17:15
i!!Jn~i!'
T" - - :

And Aaron returned to Moses at the entrance

of meeting, and the plague had stopped.

the tent

In such clauses, the use of QATAL implies anteriority with regard

to the reference point. The reference point is usually provided by
the most closely connected W AYYIQTOL form, which may either
follow (as in Num 11:4) or precede (as in Num 17:15). A correctthough inelegant-English translation bringing out both the

11

See Chapter N.

On the textual level such clauses are very common at the beginning (e.g.,
Num 11:4) or at th~ close (e.g., Num 17:15) of a narrative section. !h~y
signify some kind of break in the main line of events. See Eskhult, Studles m
Verbal Aspect, 45-57.
.
13 Zevit argues that all clauses of this type, whether they are contrastIve or not,
express anteriority. On Gen 31:47, he writes: "Use of the preperfect ~e~e
indicates that Jacob had named the place in Hebrew before Laban named It In
Aramaic." See Zevit, Anterior Construction, 24. His interpretations are often
strained, however.
14 Other examples: Gen 4:2; 11:3; 13:12; 29:17; 45:14; Ex 9:20; 1 Sam 20:39;
with different verbs in the contrasted clauses: Gen 18:33; Ex 20:21; 1 Sam
15:34; 23:18; 26:25.
15 See Polotsky, "Sequential Verb-Form."

12

48

49

The Verbal Paradigm

NARRATIVE

1 Kgs 16:9-10

:J~lO n"~t;r~ ,~ "j~t ;,~~ '''~.v 'fQ{?~j

';:!)ili i1n~ i1~'n:J N!Ji1'

i1~Il)~ n:~i:r~~~ . .,~~ TN~l~ n.,i

1i1tl"~:j !Ji1~!7' "'~r

N:J!7,

But his servant Zimri~ commander of half 'hi-s ch~riot~c~nspired agai~st him. When he was at Tirzah~ drinkin~
hImself drunk In the house of Arza~ who was in charge of
the palace at Tirzah~ Zimri came and struck him down
and killed him.
REPORT

1 Kgs 16:16

"j~t

,rgR

'bN~ c"~htT c.vO l.'~r;f~j

l~~tT-n~ i1~0 C~1

And the t.roops who were encamped heard it said~ "Zimri

has conspIred and he has killed the king."

These examples show that WA YYIQTOL and QATAL have distinct

fun~tio.ns. It is to be noted that QATAL occurs not only at the
begInnIng of the report-where there is not much choice l6-but
also in the following clause, reporting an event that happened in
sequence. 17 What dictates the use of distinct verbal forms is the
oPPos.ition between the narration of events belonging to a more or
less dIstant past, and the reporting of events from the point of view
~f the present. Whereas WAYYIQTOL projects events into a past
tIme-fr~me, QATAL connects the events to the time of speaking,
presentIng them retrospectively.
Semantic distinctiveness versus syntactic constraints
On t~e one han?, QATAL and WAYYIQTOL occur side-by-side
seemtngly expressIng the same meaning. On the other hand, a number
or retrospective
meaning different from that of WAYYIQTOL. How can this
contradiction be resolved?
The answer to this question is tied up with the well-known fact
that both WAYYIQTOL and QATAL submit to certain syntactic

constraints. WAYYIQTOL can only occur at the head of its clause. 18

This creates a problem. In biblical Hebrew, a number of factors
may lead to inversion of the word-order with nominal or adverbial
elements preceding the main verbal form. In such cases
WAYYIQTOL cannot be used. If the temporal-aspectual function of
WAYYIQTOL is needed, another verbal form must be used. The
solution is to have QATAL supplement WAYYIQTOL in non-verbinitial clauses. The main categories have been reviewed above (see
sections a to d, pp. 42-44): in such clauses, QATAL expresses
contemporaneousness with a moment in the past in exactly the same
way as does W AYYIQTOL. This function, however, is not intrinsic to
QATAL, but is forced upon it by the context.
QATAL, too, is constrained by rules of Hebrew syntax, though
not to the same extent as WAYYIQTOL. Although QATAL can occur
in both initial and non-initial position, it was avoided in initial
position when the clause was to be connected by means of the
copula for fear of confusion with modal WEQATAL. In direct
discourse one would expect past events relevant to the moment of
speaking to be expressed by QATAL. This is indeed what one finds
in a number of passages (see above, pp. 47-48). In the examples
quoted (2 Sam 12:27; 1 Kgs 16:16), QATAL is rendered possible in
the second clause by the use of the particle gam, which pushes the
verbal form to second position. 19 Without this particle, or another
buffer between waw and the verbal form, the syntax would be
unclear. One finds a number of cases in direct speech of we +
QATAL expressing retrospectivity:
Gen 31:7

c"~b n1fP,~
Your father has cheated me and changed my wages ten
times. 20

Much more often, however, a transition from QATAL to WEQATAL

in direct speech implies a shift from past to future:
For some exceptions proving the rule, see Gross, Pendenskonstruktion, 50,
107.
19 Other examples with gam: Gen 30:6, 8; 37:7; Ex 3:9; 33:12; Deut 26:13; Jos
2:24; Jud 17:2; 1 Sam 13:4; 1 Kgs'I:45-47; 21:19. In some of these cases the
particle seems to lose some of its original force, being used solely as a
syntactic element permitting the verb to be moved to second position.
20 Other possible examples: 1 Sam 10:2; 12:2; 24:11; 1 Kgs 8:47; 2 Kgs 14:10.

18

16

17

WAYYIQTO~ never occurs at the beginning of direct discourse no doubt

because a dIscourse rarely begins with "and."
,
For other examples and more ample discussion, see Niccacci, Syntax of the
Verb, 41-45. In Jos 7:11, a sequence of six QATAL forms is found.

"r:11f~~-n~ '1~OiJ' .,~ ~PiJ l~"~~j

50

The Verbal Paradigm

2 Kgs 9:26

'''~~ "~l-n~l ni::l~ "~l-n~ N~-O~

iI'iI"-O~J iC~~ "n"N'
nNrtl TiIR~6~ -;[$ "~l:1~~~1

Did I not see the blood of N aboth and the blood of his
children yesterday, says the LORD, and I will repay you on
this very plot of ground. 21

In the absence of clear contextual indications, therefore, WEQATAL

in a report is ambiguous:
1 Sam 15:28

iI~iI; 17jR ~~1~~ '''~~ 'tiNllj

oilltl '9"~.v~ ~~l~: n1::J~~~-n~
i~~ ::li~tl '9~,~ n~t;1~i

QATAL

The basic opposition

QATAL and the predicative participle are verbal fo~ms ~hat tend to
occur in the same syntactic slots. Both are frequent 1n d1rect speech
nd in subordinate clauses in narrative. The difference between the
:wo has been defined above in terms of time-reference: QAT~L
expresses anteriority, the parti:ip.le ~ont~mporaneo~sness w1th
regard to reference time. 23 The d1stInctIon 1S most easIly observed
where the forms occur with the same verb:

1 Sam 8:8

Other examples: Gen 17:16; 4:14; 9:13; 17:20; 27:45; Ex 12:17; Num 3:12;
10:31; 1 Sam 17:36; 2:]:12; 1 Kgs 20:42; 2 Kgs 5:6.
22 Compare Gen 31:7 quoted above with Gen 31 :41.

ifD l1-'iC~ O"fl717~iI-~::J~

iIriI OilliI-i~j O:j~~~ OOk "i;S~b Oi~~
.,' - o,,"n~ 'O"ii~~ 1i:;l~~j "~~~~~j
,~-o'~ O"~ 17 MTb' 1~

. . -:

Just as they have done from the day I brought .them up

out of Egypt to this day, forsaking me and servIng other
t 0 you. 24
gods, so a Iso t h ey are dOlng

iI;,tl n:~tl-n~ iI~l ,~~ ,~~~tl O~~ "~

iIM17 ink o.,~, Of.l~ iI~1 liiC~jO iii::l=?~
Who is left among y~u that saw this house in its former

Hag 2:3

glory? And how do you see it now?

1 Sam 12:2

O~"~E?~ 1~ij~~ ,~~tl i1~iJ iII!1~l

O~r;1~ O~iJ "~~1 "r:J~tg~ "r:J~Rt "~~j

iIriI OilliI-i~ "jV~~ O~,,~~~ "l:1=?~ij~iJ "~~j

And now, see th~,' king~ is walki~g b~fo~e you; I am old

and grey, but my sons are with you. I have walked before
you from my youth until this day. 25

See Chapter I.
. 'h
Note that the actions of forsaking the LORD and servmg other gods, WhiC
continued during the whole period in the past, are ~xpresse~ by WAYYIQ~OL
and not by the participle. The opposition between sI~~le actlOn and ~uratIon
is not normally expressed by QATAL and the particIple. In ~arratIve, the
participle may express attendant circumstances to.t~e sI~gle actlOn ?f ?ATAL
(and WAYYIQTOL), but this function of the partiCIple IS most1~ ll1n~ted to
subordinate clauses. See the following paragraph and the dIScussIon of
"contiguous" processes in Chapter IV.
.
... .
25 Other examples: Ex 16:29; 33:12; Deut 3:20; Jos 1:15; 2 Kgs 1.6, 17.41, Isa
45:19. For the sequence participle-subject see Jud 2:22.

23

24

21

and the predicative participle

Gross "Partizip" (1975).

And Samuel said to him, "The LORD has torn the

kingdom of Israel from you this very day, and has
given/will give [?] it to a neighbour of yours, who is better
than you.

The second clause of Samuel's speech could refer to the past or to

the future. While in 1 Sam 15:28 the temporal ambiguity implies
no significant loss of clarity-the main point being that Saul would
lose his kingship-it is understandable that a language would
generally avoid this type of syntax. One alternative was to put gam
or another element between the copula and QATAL. However,
a much more convenient way of continuing a report was to use
WAYYIQTOL in subsequent clauses (see above e, p. 44).22 And
indeed, in the great majority of cases one does not find the peculiar
syntax illustrated by 2 Sam 12:27 and 1 Kgs 16: 16 but, rather, the
continuation of a report by means of WAYYIQTOL. WAYYIQTOL in
such examples unambiguously refers to the past. At the same time,
a retrospective nuance is lent to it by the context.
In conclusion, it turns out that QATAL and WAYYIQTOL do
may be used
instead of the other-and vice versa-in certain syntactic
situations.

51

Chapter 2

The Verbal Paradigm

52

In some similar cases, the participle refers to actions that are about
to begin. This use of the participle as an imminent future is
conditioned by the context or by the meaning of the verb and does
not contradict the idea that the participle basically expresses
contemporaneousness with reference time (see' Chapter III, pp. 118-

Causal clauses

~~1~: "ij~~ n'~~~ M1M; '~~-M!:J 1~~

'::l~~c~~l ~~~ '~i.i-~~ 1p-i:l "~~0
'1~~ '~i.i-~~ "l:11R~ ,~~~

Therefore, thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel:

"I am going to punish the king of Babylon and his land,
as I punished the Icing of Assyria. "26

Rehoboam went to Shechem, for all Israel had come to

Shechem to make him king.

2 Kgs 9: 16

Circumstantial clauses

1 Sam 29: 11

"e~-l~ p~~ ~l~j

"'b~~ ~~'fzi" Mfz1lr'iZf~-~:!I n~

-:: T

T:

": -:

..

~~~--,-,~~~-----~---~~~~~to~~~~J~~6~~~~H~rr~t~ralr1~ha~~:sr~~p-lhaddoneto

the Amorites.

Ex 18:14

O.r;~ Mfyl1 N1M-'~~-~f n~ MrtJb 10M Ni~j

Moses' father-in-law sawall that he was doing for the

people.

'R!li~ n~~~ '''~~~j ~1M '11 O~~~j

~N.vl\: 1t,.y 0"I:1~~~1 0"I:1~~~ rj~-~~ :::l1ra~

So David set out with his men early in the morning, to

return to the land of the Philistines, while the Philistines
had gone up to J ezreel.

Gen 18: 16

0'1t? ., ~~-~ J} 1~P~~j O"rQ ~~Q O~~ 1~R~j

O~~iQ~ 0i?ll
OQ1~~1

"n

Then the men set out from there, and they looked toward
Sodom, while Abraham went with them to set them on
their way.
NB. One often finds two circumstantial clauses co-occurring, one containing
QATAL and the other containing a participle. In this case, the temporal implications
may conform to expectation:
r~:~~ 11~~~ o":;1~;' o~ll N~~~ij o.vvl iJ~ rO~i"l t,1N~1
1 Sam 13: 16
1lJ7f:t~~ ilO O"r:J~~E;l1

Relative clauses

Num22:2

Mi?~ :::l~rz.; 01'" .,~ M~~.vl\: '~~j ~1M~ :::l~l~j

Then Jehu mounted his chariot and went to J ezreel, for

J oram was lying there.

The distinction between QATAL and predicative participle also

holds when different verbs are used. Cases in direct discourse
where the participle refers to anterior situations are extremely
rare. 27 Cases where QATAL refers to contemporaneous situations
.are more common. They are almost invariably conditioned by the
meaning of the verb.
QATAL and participle in subordinate clauses in narrative
The examples listed above have the moment of speaking as their
reference time. When the reference time is a moment in the past,
the two' forms express anteriority and contemporaneousness with
regard to that moment. As was already stated above, this typically
happens in subordinate clauses.

N~ O~~ .,~ O~~ o.r;~ljl '~~j

ink '''~~jj~ ~~1~:-~~

1 Kgs 12:1

119):

J er 50: 18

53

Chapter 2

Saul, his son Jonathan, and the people who were present with them were
staying in Geva of Benjamin, while the Philistines had encamped in Michmash.28

Here the participle clause describes a situation contemporaneous with reference

time while the QATAL clause relates an event that happened before reference time.
However, it is much more common to find this combination of QATAL and
participle expressing "contiguity," with one event happening while the other
event is still going on:
2 Kgs 2:23
'''llv-r~ iN~~ o"~~i? O"1.v~1 1j:J~ il7,l1 Niil1 t,~-n"~ o~~ t,.!7~J
He went up from there to Bethel; and while he was going up on the way,
some small boys came out of the city.

See also: Jer 32:42; 44:30.

27 A cla?se like Ex 5:8 OiO~rq t,i~r;'I o"iql1 Oij 'W~ o"~~~ij n~~~~-n~l, "The quantity
of bncks that they were making previously," is highly exceptional in CBH
prose, even in a relative clause. Deut 5:5 is probably to be treated as a kind of
historic present.
26

This type of complex sentence and the function of the verbal forms it contains
must await discussion in Chapter N.
28

See also: 2 Kgs 9:16.

The Verbal Paradigm

54

QATAL referring to contemporaneous situations

It has already been noted that QATAL can, with certain verbs, refer

to situations contemporaneous with reference time. This characteristic,

which sets QATAL apart from W AYYIQTOL, brings it close to the
predicative participle:
2 Kgs 17:26

'b~~ '1rz.;~ '17~7 1'~N~j

l;'~fV ",~:p ~~;Mj I;1"~~0 ,~~ o:;~ij

r1~O "Hr,~ ~~~~-n~ '1111: N'

on;~ o"n"~~ O~il' n;"'~il-n~ o:!l-n~~"j

r1~O "H~~ ~~~~~n~ C-~~1; "ct~ ,~~~

So the king of Assyria was told, "The nations that you

have carried away and placed in the cities of Samaria do
not know [QATAL] the law of the god of the land; therefore
he has sent lions among them; they are killing them
because they do not know [participle] the law of the god of
the land. 29

Although it would be possible to give a temporal interpretation to

the difference between QATAL and the participle,30 the syntax does
not impose such a reading. With the verb l1i", QATAL can refer to
the present. But if both '1111: and 0"3;1; refer to the moment of
speaking, the question arises how these forms differ. And if they
should express the same meaning, how could this be reconciled
with the view that QATAL basically expresses anteriority? These
questions are particularly relevant with regard to "adjectival" verbs
and verbs expressing activities of the inner person.
The answer to this question is bound up with the semantics of
the verbs involved. Their specificity lies in the fact that they may
express either a state of the subject, or the coming about of that
state. Thus the verb i:l~ may mean either "to be heavy" or "to
,
"to take a liking
to, to fall in love." This ambiguity explains, at least theoretically,
the present-tense function of QATAL with verbs of these classes:
Gen 18:20

29

30

Compare also 2 Kgs 18:211~ I;lr;T~; i1~D i1I;l.il with Jer 7:8 C~7 c""rpl1 ctl~ mD.
The former might be rendered "you have put your trust," the latter "you are
manifesting your trust."
In the Septuagint, the' QATAL form is translated e:yv(j)o(J.,v, while the participle
phrase is rendered Oto(J.,o\V.

Chapter 2

55

ik~ iTi:l~ "::J on~~n'

Then the LORD said, "How great is the outcry against
Sodom and Gomorrah and how very grave their sin."
:

Jud 16:15

TIT

T-:

"r;1~ 1"~ '9:P~1 '1"l:1ilij~ '~NM '1"~ ,.,~~ '~NMj

Then she said to him, "How can you say, 'I love you,'
when your heart is not with me?"

Although the forms are correctly rendered with present-tense

forms in English, the Hebrew implies a nuance of anteriority: "it
has become (and now is) grave" and "I have fallen in love (and
now I love)." It is this notion of anteriority that is absent from the
predicative participle. In most cases, this difference can clearly be
felt:
1 Sam 19: 14
ij,-n~ nr:tr~~ 0"~~7~ '1~rf n~~~j
N'1iT iT,n
'~NM'
"."
0:
_
When Saul sent messengers to take David, [Michal] said,
"He is sick."

1 Sam 30: 13

"P~i?~ iV"~7 i~V. "~j~ "1~~ 'l)~ '~N~j

iliV,iV O;~il "n",n "::J "J"~ "J~Uj~'
T:

-..

-:

"

: -

--

He said, "I am a young man of Egypt, servant to an

Amalekite. My master left me behind because 1 fell sick
three days ago."

While the participle represents the state of sickness as

contemporaneous, the QATAL form takes in the coming about of
the state as well: "I have been sick for three days (and still am)."
Similarly, in a past-tense context:
~~r:-t~-'~ n;~1ij7 1iT~~~ '17~j

1 Kgs 18: 2

l;'~fV:p Ptt;r :l~101

So Elijah went to present himself to Ahab. The famine
was severe in Samaria.

Gen. 41:57

=,~;.,-,~ ,~~~ il~;j~~ 1~~ rl~O-'~l

rl~O-r,~:P :l~10 prt;r-.,~

All the world came to Joseph in Egypt to buy grain,

because the famine had become severe throughout the
world.

It has to be admitted, however, that it is not always possible to find

the notion of anteriority with

QATAL.

Particularly in poetry, the

56

The Verbal Paradigm

QATAL of adjectival verbs at times has a function very near to that

of the participle: 31
Song 2:9
o.,~~~y '~.li~ iN .,:;~~ "iii i'19i~
My beloved is like [participle] a gazelle or a young stag.

'~Q~ i'1Q9110~ip l1~r

Song 7: 8(7)
This your stature is like [QATAL] a palm tree.
Perhaps such cases represent an archaic use of QATAL. It is
generally agreed that QATAL originated in a certain type of
nominal clause: ~ - 7"J~ is structurally identical to i1~~ t,ii~. In any
case, such examples do not put the basic opposition between
QATAL and the participle into doubt.
NB. In performative expressions, too, QATAL refers to the moment of speaking.
In this usage, however, there is little competition between QATAL and the
participle. In CBH only QATAL is properly performative, signalling that the action
comes about through the utterance itself. The use of the participle in
performative expressions is limited to LBH (and post-biblical Hebrew).32
The sequences subject-participle and participle-subject
Joosten; "Predicative Participle" (1989); Buth, "Verbless Clause" (1999).

The comparison with QATAL shows that the predicative participle

33
expresses contemporaneousness with the time of reference. In the
absence of markers setting the reference time in the past or the
future, the participle will refer to the present. This is true whatever
the clause structure,34 yet a question arises with regard to a basic
dichotomy between the sequence subject-participle and the
sequence participle-subject. The former, Su-Ptcp, is clearly the
more common, being about ten times as frequent as the opposite
sequence,
that the
36
preposed participle implies contrastive focus. This view is
applicable only to a limited number of examples, however:

Chapter 2

57

Ex 7:27(8:2)

.,~~ .,~~~ i1~i) lJ~~~ i'1~~ 1~9-0~1

0" .irrl~~~ "T[~1:l~ -t,f-l1~

If you refuse to let them go, I will plague your whole

country with frogs.
Here one may reasonably claim that the participle is focused: if
you refuse (as opposed to accepting to let the people go). In other
cases, this claim is not possible:
i1~~f l1lj-l1tl:P~ i1rf~ :lPt?~ Jj~"-o~

O"~lJ .,~ i'1i?~ r1~O l1;j:p~

If Jacob marries one of the Hittite women such as these
one of the women of the land, what good will my life b;
tome?

Gen 27 :46

No perceptible emphasis or contrastive focus attaches to the participle.

The force of the conditional particle falls on the entire clause.
What is unthinkable is that Jacob should marry a Canaanite woman.
It is true that word order in biblical Hebrew mostly submits to
pragmatic factors,such as the marking of focus or topic (see
Chapter X). But the case of the predicative participle is peculiar.
Whereas the other verbal forms contain in their most basic
expr~ssion both the ~ubject and the predicate, the participle
provIdes only the predIcate: i'1~.v means "he has done"; but "he is
doing" is i1~11 N1i'1 (see above p. 51, 1 Sam 8:8). The order of
subject and participle may therefore be viewed as a property of the
verbal syntagm and not of the clause. This opens up the possibility
that the two sequences express a distinction of tense, aspect or
mood. 37
A~ thi~ point it may be observed that the sequence Su-Ptcp
often Imphes a progressive meaning, stressing the ongoing nature
o~ an action, while the progressive nuance is almost always absent
wIth the sequence Ptcp-Su. Note the following examples with the
same verb:
Gen 16:8

.,~~O i1~~111N~ i1t~-.,~ "j~ l1lJ~rQ ,~O '~~!lJ

nljjz .,~~~ "r:1l:;~ "j~ .,~~~ '~~r:1J

31 See Rubinstein, "Adjectival Verbs."

32 See Rogland, Non-Past Uses, 114-117.
33 See also the next section: participle and YIQTOL.
34 In certain cases, the participle may, within its context, refer to the imminent
future; see Chapter III, pp. 118-119.
35 See Chapter VII.
.
36 See, e.g., Driver, Treatise, 169.

37 Similarly, in Syriac, the participle followed by the perfect of the verb 'to be'
and t~e. participle preceded by the perfect of the same verb are to be regarded
as ~Is~mct tenses. See Th. NOldeke, KurzgeJasste syrische Grammatik
(LeIpzIg 18982; repro Darmstadt 1977), 196-197, 260-261, and 207, 277.

The Verbal Paradigm

58

And he said, "Hagar, slave-girl of Sarai, where have you

come from and where are you going?" She said, "I am
running away from my mistress Sarai."

Jer 4:29

i"S;V-'~

nljj!ll

n~R ii~i1 rzj'l~ 'iP'~

ii:liTli i"liii-'~ i'li O"5J~:li O":lli~ i~~

T

-:

... -

T -:

rzj"~ liJ~ :l~i"-r~'

At the noise of horseman and archer every town has fled,
they [i.e., the inhabitants] have entered thickets and
climbed among rocks. All the towns are forsaken, and no
one lives in them.

The clauses containing the predicative participle are structurally

very similar. Both refer the action of fleeing to the moment of
speaking. 38 In Gen 16:8, the. sequence Su-Ptcp expresses the
fleeing as an ongoing process, focusing on the fleeing person. In
Jer 4:29 the sequence Ptcp-Su represents the fleeing as a static fact
explaining the emptiness of the cities.
The fact that certain types of subordinate clauses tend to select
one or other sequence confirms that the difference between them is
not a matter of pragmatics. The sequence Su-Ptcp is used in
relative and circumstantial clauses, whose typical function is to
39
describe concomitant situations:
Gen 47:14 o:j~~-Yj~~ ~~~~iJ ='i~fiJ-'f-n~ ='iQi" ~p~;j

c"i~fzj Cij-i~~ i~~~ P}~:P yj~~i

Joseph collected all the money to be found in the land of
Egypt and in the land of Canaan, in exchange for the
grain that they bought [i.e., were buying during this
whole period].

1 Kgs 19:19

~~~-1~ li~"~~-n~ ~~~~j O~~ l~~j

~_._~ __._____._________~__.~______~~_______~__~~~~~-*~.~=~...~. ~jh

So he set out from

Shaphat, who was ploughing.

Niii1

son of

The sequence Su-Ptcp is also the only one found with the
presentative particle ii~iJ. This particle stresses the actuality of the
situation (see Chapter III):
2 Sam 19:9(8)

See, the king is sitting in the gate.

Conversely, the sequence Ptcp-Su is systematically used in

co~diti~nal. and causal clauses. In these clauses, the factuality of
a sltuation lS relevant rather than its ongoing nature:
Deut 5:25

39

In Jeremiah, the reference time is that of the prophetic vision.

There is one exception with the sequence participle-subject in a relative
clause, in Job 6:4.

ij"H'~ iiJii; 'ip-n~ .i7bif~ 1j"~~ c"~l?oj-o~

1jn~'

If we continue to hear the voice of the

shall die.

LORD

,ili

our G~d we
'

~iiiiJ ~":;l~iJ "i:l'-'~ li~rzjn N'

Deut 13:4(3)

~iniJ OiSnii ~hin~'N i~

O~I:'1~ O~"H'~: M'ii~ Mt::Jj; .,~

-r:o~ must not heed the word of that pr~phe~ or Tth~ o~~ ~h~
dIVInes by dreams; for the

LORD

your God is testing you.

The se~uence Ptcp-Su is also the normal one in interrogative

clauses lntroduced by the particle it Here, too, it is the factuality of
the situation that is relevant:
Num 11 :29

.,~ M~~ N~R~iJ ii~b i, i~N!!j

And Moses said to him, "Are you jealous for my sake?;'

There is no reason why the participle in conditional clauses should

always express contrastive focus while it should never do so in
relative clauses. The difference between the two sequences is to be
sough~ .on a different plane. In Chapter I it was argued that the
0pposltion between the sequences can best be described in terms of
aspect. Su-Ptcp expresses the imperfective and Ptcp-Su the
perfective aspect.
The predicative participle and YIQTOL
Gross "Partizip" (1975); JM (20062), 122; Joosten, "Finite Verbal Forms" (2004).

The predicative participle and YIQTOL express similar functions

and ma~ be found in clauses where they appear to be equivalent,
notably In reference to the imminent future:
l~ lIjj '9.,tf'~ iiJii; i~~ Yj~O-'~ N:lI;1-"~
Deut 17: 14
~~en you come into the land that the LORD YO~Ir God is
gIvIng you

Deut 18:9
38

59

Chapter 2

'9.,tf'~ iiJii;-i~~ yj~O-'~ N~ M~~ .,~

l~ lIjj

The Verbal Paradigm

60

When you come into the land that the

giving you.

LORD

your God is

Because YIQTOL is much more frequent than the participle, many

treatments of the Hebrew verb simply ignore the latter. Others
state that the two forms are functionally similar, while attributing
to the participle an additional durative or continuative nuance.
However, passages where YIQTOL and participle of the same verb
co-occur indicate a clear distinction between them. In some cases
this distinction is of a temporal nature, the participle expressing the
present and YIQTOL the future:
Jos 22:22

n,n" O"ii"N "N n,n" O"ii"N ,,~

""~1n"" "N:'~'" v,~:: N1M
T

The LORD, God of Gods! The

knows, and Israel will know. 40

17;"

LO~D,

Go<i"

~f" G~ds!

He

Chapter 2

essentially a modal form characterizing situations as non-real or

non-actual. This distinction is confirmed by the fact that a number
of indicative functions can be expressed only by the participle.
This is notably the case for the real present and for concomitance
in a past-tense context. Conversely, certain modal functions cannot
be expressed by the participle but only by YIQTOL or other modal
forms.
The expression of the real present
Most grammar books state that YIQTOL is regularly used in
reference to situations contemporaneous with the moment of
speaking.43 This is true only within strict limits, however.

a) YIQTOL is used as a general present, referring to situations that

come about from time to time, or to universal truths:
Num 12:8

Or the participle refers to the imminent future and YIQTOL to the

more distant future:
Jer 16:16

o1i~1 o"i~~ O"~j~ n'v;~ l~-"jO~l

Ex 23:8

I am sending for many fishermen, says the LORD, and

they shall catch them; and afterward I will send for many
hunters, and they will hunt them. 41

Deut 12:8

ti'~0 ns c"fq17 1jr:t~~ i~~ ''!:If 11fz1~O ~"

You shall not act as we are acting here today. 42

Or the participle expresses the more immediate present and YIQTOL

the more general present:
. iro""
.. - : i~N~
... -: As a parent disciplines a child, so the LORD your God is
disciplining you.

r*'~-'-'~"'-"W'"'~-'~"""""~""----~~~~'r-----'_iiIITU~iiIftiIIf~orcr"""O(..."f-'''''''IIIOf'-''''''''''''~~'~N

All these examples are satisfactorily explained by the hypothesis

advanced in Chapter I. The participle is an expression of contemporaneousness with the moment of speaking while YIQTOL is

See also: Ezek 8:6; 33:31; Deut 21:18.

See also: Deut 11:17; '16:18; Jer 20:4; Isa 66:22.
42 See also: 2 Kgs 6:22; Mal 2:2.

41

O"Tji?~ ij.p; ilJ~tT ":p MRD ~" ilJtOl

O"P"'~ "j~' 'l,Q",

And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the officials
and subverts the cause of those who are in the right.

In such clauses, the reference is not to situations contemporaneous

with the moment of speaking. Although many languages use
present-tense forms in such statements, others do not. 44 From the
typological point of view there is nothing odd about the fact that
biblical Hebrew should use a non-indicative, modal form.
b) In reference to actions that are really going on at the moment of
speaking, YIQTOL is used in questions: 45
Gen 37: 15

1n"N~!'!' nifo:;, nl111 n~n' ~"N 1nN~~!'!'

" T:"-

43 See, e.g., Driver, Treatise, 33, 28;

44

40

n'''M:l
~",: "
nNi~1
;:;'-i:lliN
nS-"N
ns":
" :
:: ".' -...
":
":
to":ll" n,n" n.:l~n1

With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly a~d: no-~"" in

dark speech; and he beholds the form of the LORD.

o1l"il n1n;-o~~ O"~j o"~~,~ lJ;'fzf "~~;:t

In other cases, the participle refers to the present while YIQTOL has
a modal, prescriptive function:

61

45

": T-

~"~;t;1~M~ ibN~ "~T,,~O

GKC, 315, 107f; Waltke-O'Connor,

Introduction, 504-505.
In English it would be perfectly acceptable to render Ex 23:8 "a bribe will
blind the officials."
This was observed already by Davidson, Syntax, 68. For other examples, see
Chapter VIII.

The Verbal Paradigm

62

And a man found him wandering in the fields; and the

man asked him, "What are you seeking?"

1 Sam 11:5

1l>:l" .,~ Oli~-i1~ t,1~rV ,~~!\,

And Saul said: "What ails the peopie, ~ha; they -are w~p~?'~

Again, this usage does not provide a basis for the claim that
YIQTOL'S basic meaning is the real present. There is something
inherently modal about questions. The examples above could be
translated "What might you be seeking" and "What ails the people
that they should weep?" Cross-linguistic comparisons also indicate
46
that questions may induce the use of modal forms.
c) Finally, YIQTOL occurs with reference to the present with the verbs
t,:;)., "to be able" and lij" "to know," especially when they are
followed by another verb in the infinitive. Since these verbs lexically
express modality, this usage can be subsumed under the modal
meaning ofYIQTOL as well (see below in ChapterID, pp. 93-94).

63

Chapter 2

a) Most often, YIQTOL in a past-tense context implies repeated or

habitual action. This 'iterative' use of YIQTOL is found in main
clauses:
Gen 31 :39

i1~~lj~ "~j~ 'TJ"?~ .,tl~~jJ-~t, jj~jtp

il~~ i?;~ "1~~

.
That whICh was torn by wild beasts I did not bring to
you; 1 would bear the loss of it myself; of my hand you
would require it.

The usage is also regular in subordinate clauses:

O"::J'~~ o:;)rV .,t,li::J 4t, 1~"fzi!\'

Jud 9:25

1"T~ OjT~~: '!:l~~~"~~::'t,~ n~

The lords of Shechem set ambushes on the mountain tops;

they robbed all that would pass by them along that way.

Gen 29:2

jjrzjt,~ orzj-jj~jj'
T

In all other cases 47-starting with the answers to questions

formulated with YIQTOL-the real present is expressed with the
predicative participle in biblical Hebrew prose:
rD~;~ .,::;>~~ .,r::t~-n~ '~~!\j
"I am seeking my brothers," he said. 48

Gen 37:16

The expression of attending circumstance

The expression of concomitant action in a past-tense context is
49
also ascribed to YIQTOL in a number of reference works. The
possible examples of this usage are very few, however, and most
of them can be explained differently.50 The regular functions of
YIQTOL in a past-tense context are different.
See, e.g., W. Chafe, "The Realis-Irrealis Distinction in Caddo, the Northern
Iroquoian Languages, and English," in J. Bybee and S. Fleischman (eds.),
Modality in Grammar and Discourse (AmsterdamlPhiladelphia 1995), 349365,350.
47 There may be some exceptions in poetry.
48 Similar examples with YIQTOL in the question and the participle in the answer:
Gen 16:8; Jud 19:17-18.
49 See Driver, Treatise, 31-33,206; GKC 107b, d; Waltke-O'Connor, Introduction,
503-504; Garr, "Driver's Treatise," l-li; Eskhult, Studies, 32, 64, 101. By
contrast, Kuhr very lucidly points out that the use of the prefix conjugation in
circumstantial clauses, so typical of Arabic prose, hardly finds any parallels in
biblical Hebrew; see Kuhr, Konjunktionslose Hypotaxe, 37.
50 In Ex 8:20 one should consider reading WAYYIQTOL with the Septuagint. Other

46

~t,n~' O"';';~ "rV~' ~;

: T

jjjW:!l '~::J jj~jj' ~,!\,

:iJ"~'~ -O"~~~ l~~~"jl~

O"il~iJ 1P~~ ~'0jJ '~~jJ-l~ "::p

As he looked, he saw a well in the field and three flocks of
sheep lying there beside it; for out of that well they used
to water the flocks.

The iterative use of YIQTOL is compatible with the idea that

YIQTOL expresses modality. Modal forms are used to represent
repeated actions in the past in a number of languages. In English,
the examples above could be translated with "would + infinitive"
("I would bear the loss of it. .. ").
b) Another well-represented use is the prospective one. In a pasttens~ context, YIQTOL indicates what was expected to happen at
the tIme of reference. Most examples are in relative clauses:
2 Kgs 13: 14

4:!l

M10"

'iP~ 4"~n-n~ jjt,n lirzj"t,~,

And Elisha fell sick with the ill~es~ ~f w'hTich he ~~s t~ di~~':

c) Finall~, YIQTOL occurs with potential, volitional or obligative

nuances In past-tense contexts:
1 Kgs 1:1

difficul~ cases: Ex 19:19; 1 Sam 1:10; 13:17-18; 2 Sam 15:37; 23:10; and with '
a negation: Gen 2:25; 2 Sam 2:28. See also: Gen 37:7' Deut 2:12' 1 Kgs 20'33'
21:6.
'
,
. ,

The Verbal Paradigm

64

is co: ~Si c"i~~~ 1i1~~;1

Now King David was old and advanced in years and
although they covered him with clothes, he could not get
warm.

ni~fij "~O:;, '1"~~ ~S l~

t:hiC1'''::l i1,i1" n~~~-S~

2 Kgs 23:9

But the priests of the high places' -~ere .not ~lIo~ed

come up to the altar of the LORD in Jerusalem. 51

t~

The uses listed in (b) and (c) are natural extensions of the basic
modal function of YIQTOL.
The expression of attendant circumstance, im~lying that a sit.uation
really obtained at the moment of reference, IS expressed wIth the
predicative participle:
:l,11::l i1~"o C"~N~~ij "~iQ 1~:l~1
Gen 19:1
....,' T

:C.,o:"';~iC::l

The two angels came to Sodom in the

was sitting in the gateway of Sodom.

Jos 3: 17

:lrZ.;;

~iSi

~ve~i~g, a~d Lot

i11i1;-n"i~ li'~O "~~j C"~O:;'ij 1i~.l1~1

l~O rn~ij lin~ i1:tlO~

i1:l,n::l c"':l17 SN'tzi"-S~i

The priests who bore the ark of the ~~~en~~t of ~h~ .~O~D
stood on dry ground in the middle of the Jordan whIle all
Israel were crossing over on dry ground.
T

Modal functions not expressed by the participle

Functions of YIQTOL that cannot be expressed with the participle are
situated in the modal domain. YIQTOL is very frequent in
prescriptive discourse:
Six days you shall labour.

Ex 20:13
You shall not murder.

In biblical Hebrew, the participle cannot be used in this way.

YIQTOL is also used exclusively in subordinate clauses introduced

65

Chapter 2

by modal particles such as ,,:l11:l or 111~S "in order that," :lpl1

"because,"52 It) "lest".
In conclusion it may be stated that YIQTOL and the predicative
participle share some common ground. Both YIQTOL and the
participle occur in clauses referring to the imminent future, the
general present and repeated action in the past. Both forms occur
in questions referring to the moment of speaking. Other usages are
exclusive to the one or the other, showing that their functions are
clearly differentiated in biblical Hebrew. The participle implies
a nuance of reality and actuality that is absent from YIQTOL. While
the predicative participle basically expresses contemporaneousness
with the moment of reference, YIQTOL is essentially a nonindicative, modal form.
Volitive and non-volitive modality
Shulman, Modal Verb 'Forms (1996).

In Chapter I, a preliminary sorting of the verbal forms led to the

suggestion that the biblical Hebrew system distinguishes two types
of modality. The cohortative, imperative and jussive team up to
express one type of modality, while YIQTOL and WEQATAL express
another type. The former set of forms is marked for volitivity
while the latter is unmarked for volitivity. The basic distinction is
well illustrated by the contrast between the following passages:

i1itzi n",:!) ".J::l n", i1N' '~~!l' 1i1~':l'"

c:~~ij ~~~ -c~~S~O ~7::'H?~1 :i11;;; i~':l~" ~~~
iCi"~l Hl :lil rj~O "~~~~1
c"~~7 '97 lP1:l~:1 C"~.l1 '91iil.l7~
'9~~ "~~ '97 1'O1:l~:1 '9"n~7 '''~~ ino

Gen 27:27-29

And he blessed him, and said, "Ah, the smell of my son is

like the smell of a field that the LORD has blessed. May
God give you of the dew of heaven, and of the fatness of
the earth, and plenty of grain and wine. Let peoples serve
you, and nations bow down to you. Be LORD over your
brothers, and may your mother's sons bow down to you.

Gen 27:39-40

,,,~~ '~~!l1 '''~~ PO~: 1.l1~1

'9~rfi~

51

See further examples in Joosten, "Prefix Conjugation Referring to the Past."

M;;:T:

52 This particle is followed by QATAL in Num 14:24.

rj~O "~~~~ i1~iJ

:
The Verbal Paradigm

66

'11~ O"~Wil '~~1

'!:l~t1 'Tl"l:n~~-n~l ~ir;tn' ~~i1J-S~l

'9'~~~ ,~~ i~~ t1i?j~i '''it1 '~~;J il;;:q

Then his father Isaac answered him, "See, away from the
fatness of the earth shall your home be, and away from
the dew of heaven on high. By your sword you shall live,
and you shall serve your brother; but when you break
loose, you shall break his yoke from your neck."

YIQTOL and WEQATAL are found in wishes and requests, it is

extremely rare to find a cohortative, imperative or jussive in
predictions or in statements of eternal truths and habitual action.
This distribution of the forms is explained by the theory of
markedness: whereas the marked member of the opposition
positively expresses the relevant feature-in this case volitivitythe unmarked member is used both when the feature is absent and
when the feature is present but unstressed. 55

In vss. 27-29, Isaac happily agrees to pronounce the blessing upon

his-as he thinks-firstborn son. The verbal forms used are
jussives and an imperative. 53 By contrast, in vss. 39-40, Isaac has
no choice but to announce what will happen to the son who has
been robbed of his blessing. The verbal forms used are YIQTOL and

Jud 6:23

ni0t1 ~, N1"l:l-'~

'97 Oi'~ il~il; i' '~~!l1

But the LORD said to him, ~~peace be to you; do not fear;

you shall not die". 54

2 Sam 13:26

coh'/imv./juss.

unmarked

YIQTOLIWEQATAL

Two notable uses where both types of modality are found are
prohibitions and imperative sequences.
Prohibitions
Prohibitions can be formed either with ,~ + jussive or with ~, +
YIQTOL. 56 The semantic difference between these two constructions
is hard to define. In general, the former is used in ad hoc injunctions
while the latter implies a permanent interdiction:
o~.,t,~-,~ i1'~~n il~ 1il:S;i~; Ov7 '~~!l1
2 Kgs 19:6
I!1S;i~~ ,~~ o"i~lij .,~~~ N1"l:l-'~ il~il; ,~~ il~

1jI!1~ ~r'~: ~,~ Oi'~~~ '~~!l1

'Ink '1W~-1~~ "l~~ 1~1~ ,~~

Isaiah said to them, "Say to your mast~~, 'Thus sa'ys th~
LORD: Do not be afraid because of the words that you
have heard, with which the servants of the king of
Assyria have reviled me. '"

lipll ,~: ilip7 l7~ij i' '~~!l1 "r:1~ iij~~

2 Kgs 17:35

In spite of all this, there is some

the two
paradigms and in some passages it is hard to tell the difference
between them. It is important to realise that this overlap is almost
entirely limited to the semantic domain of the volitive forms: while

'b~~ 01;;;:1 n"':::l Or-J~ il'il" ni~!l'

o"'n~:
... O"MS~
. -:: iTN,"n
: . ~~
-:

A brief presentation of markedness theory can be found in E. van W olde

"Lingu~stic Motivation and Biblical Exegesis," in E. van Wolde (ed.):
Narratlve Syntax and the Hebrew Bible, Biblical Interpretation Series 29
56 (Leiden 1997), 21-50, in particular 25-26.
There. are some exceptions such as ~z, with jussive in Gen 24:8; 1 Kgs 2:6, or
z,~ WIth long forms of the prefix conjugation: 2 Sam 13:12; Jos 1:7; Prov
23:22; Gen 19:17.
55

The third person verbal forms are morphologically indifferent. The fact that
they occur at the head of their clause marks them as jussives, however. See
Chapter I.
54 See also: Gen 37:21-22 "We should not kill him" (~t, + YIQTOL) - "Do not
shed blood" (t,~ + jussive).

marked

YIQTOLIWEQATAL

Then Absalom said, "If not, please let my brother

Amnon go Uussive] with us." The king said to him,
"Why should he go [YIQTOL] with youT'

53

NON-VOLITIVE

VOLITIVE

WEQATAL.

The two paradigms express different sets of functions.

Cohortative, imperative and jussive mostly occur in wishes or
requests concerning the here and now of the speaker, while
YIQTOL and WEQATAL have a much wider application, being
found in predictions and in the statement of eternal truths and
habitual action. Where the two paradigms occur in the same verse,
the difference can often be indicated without much difficulty:

67

Chapter 2


The Verbal Paradigm

68

The LORD made a covenant with them, and commanded

them, "You shall not fear other gods."

This basic opposition illustrates the volitive/non-volitive distinction

well. Ad hoc injunctions are represented as the expression of the
speaker's wish. Permanent interdictions, on the other hand, are
represented as proceeding from a more general necessity. Of course,
it-fTI:"l ~~ does not signal the absence of volition-God wants his
people not to fear other gods. But it is not the will of the speaker that
is presented as making the interdiction binding.
A number of difficult cases exist, however. One finds ~~ +
jussive in legal discourse, where the reference is to permanent
prohibitions:
Lev 19:29

i'!OiJ~iJ~ '1I;1:;l-n~ ~~Ij~-~~

Chapter 2
See also, with third person prohibitions, Ex 34:3; Jud 13: 14.

These difficult cases do not imply that no functional difference

exists between the two constructions. What they do show is that
~heir meanings are similar and partially overlapping. The precise
Import of an unexpected construction has to be established by the
exegesis of the passages concerned.

Imperative sequences
Fassberg, "Sequences" (2006).
Anothe~ are~ ~here t~e two types of modality can be distinguished
only wIth dIffICUlty IS after an imperative. Following an initial
imperative, biblical Hebrew allows either another imperative or
WEQATAL:

Do not profane your daughter by making her a prostitute. 57

2 ~gs 8: ~ 0

And ~~ + YIQTOL occurs in interpersonal discourse, where one

expects to find injunctions connected to the present situation:
Gen 28: 1

ii11~;1 ink Tl~;1 ::l~P,:-~~ PO~: ~li?~1

l.i)~f niJ~~ i1~~ n~I:"l-~t, i~ '~~!l1

2 Sam 7:4-5

o~n

,.u

You shall not spread a false report. You sh~il n~t

hands with the wicked to act as a malicious witness.

Lev 10:6

n~i1~

j~i~

1~i!jM-N~ C~""::li 111'!jrl-~~ C~"rzj~,

~~~_____~n~o~h~~~;~~~~~e~;
1 Kgs 20:8

c.vO-~~l C"~P:~iJ-~f ,.,~~ i'~~!l1

Then all the elders and the people

listen, and do not consent. "59

n::lNM ~it" ll1~rO rI-t,~

s~'id

to hi:U,

~'D~

'11-t,~ "":i~~-S~ 1!1i~~i

"n",

.,;. ib~S: l~rS~

But that same night the word of the LORD came to

Nathan, "Go, say to my servant David, 'Thus says the
LORD: Are you the one to build me a house to live in'?"

As these examples show, it is not easy to attribute a distinct

function to each sequence. It would seem difficult to claim that
~l~~l implies a lesser degree of volition on the part of the speaker
than does 'b~. Once more, such near-equivalence is accounted for
?y the t~eory of markedness. The examples do not imply that we +
Imperative and second person WEQATAL have identical functions.
~oreov.er, other examples exist showing that the sequence
ImperatIve-WEQATAL may imply a different nuance from
imperative-imperative:

not

59

See also: Ex 23:1, 7; Lev 11:43; 18:24; 19:4, 19, 31; 25:14, 36. Thistype of
injunction is not found in Deuteronomy, but it is frequent in Proverbs.
58 See also: Gen 24:37; 28:1. 6; Num 20:18; Jud 11:2; 2 Sam 18:3; 1 Kgs 2:36;
20:8; 2 Kgs 4:28; 6:22; 9:3.

57

i1'n:-'~, "0:1 ~ini1 n~"~~

"r:J~~~ n:~ "~-i1~~r:J i1l!1~iJ i14i1; ,~~ n~

One even finds examples where the two constructions co-occur,

both in legislation and in conversation:

.u~l-Cll '1'1: nrg ~-~~ ~1~ .u~r;; ~'1) ~~

. n~2I:"l i1~O i~-'9~ .,;. 11~"~~ ,.,~~ '~~!l1

ElIsha saId to hIm, Go, say to him, 'You shall certainly

recover' ."

The Isaac called Jacob and blessed him, and charged him,
"You shall not marry one of the Canaanite women. "58

Ex 23: 1

69

T.he second injunction is probably meant to be stronger than the first: "do not
hsten and don'~ you dare consent." Compare also 1 Kgs 3:26 where
'nD~I?r;'l-r,~ n~vl IS spoken by the mother in her entreaty, and 3:27 where
,nD:I?r;'l ~6 n~vl is sp~ken by the king in his command. Similarly, Moses uses
r,N III Num 14:42 whIle the same command with God as speaker is expressed
with ~~, according to Deut 1:42.


The Verbal Paradigm

70

Gen 19:2

O:t:'f:Jli n"~-t,~ ~j i'iO "j"~-~~ i1~i1 '~N'"

O~:P1'~ :C~=?~~j C~9~U;;:tl O~"~~j ,~b'l ~~"~i

T

And he said: ((Please, my lords, turn aside to your

servant's house and spend the night, and wash your feet;
then you can rise early and go on your way."60

While the three imperatives positively express the desire of the

speaker, the following WEQATAL forms merely express what is
expected to happen. In this passage, the use of imperatives instead
of WEQATAL might have sounded rude, since they would imply
that the host wanted his guests to move on as soon as possible. 61
In other examples, WEQATAL is used for commands to be
performed in a future time frame further removed than the
immediate future aimed at by the imperative: 62
1 Sam 16: 17

'It, ~j-1~' '''i:Jli-t,~ t,i~id '~N'"

. .,~~ C~i~"~011i'~~ :J"~"~ "~.,~

So Saul said to his servants, "Find me someone who can

play well, and bring him to me."

While the action to be taken immediately is represented as

proceeding from the will of the speaker, the action to be carried
out later is presented by a non-volitive form.
Conclusions of the contrastive studies

Scientific hypotheses are born at the interface between theory and

practice. Both deduction and induction are necessary. The general
outline of the biblical Hebrew verbal system spelled out at the
beginning of this chapter is obviousl y indebted to theoretical
considerations. The present case studies show that the actual
distinctions between the verbal forms are compatible with the
~4~,-~-,--.-~~~~-.--.global theor~. ~mmparisQD between YlQIQL. and .the prydicative
participle clearly puts the former on the modal and the latter on the
indicative side of the paradigm. The contrast in effect delineates two
subsystems, since there is little doubt that WAYYIQTOL and QATAL
are indicative, like the participle, and that the volitives are modal, as
is YIQTOL (and its faithful companion, WEQATAL).

60

Chapter 2

71

Within the indicative group, the three forms make up a constellation

which, taking a global view, is paralleled in the modem European
languages: a past tense stands opposed to a perfect and a present.
Structurally, the following rough equivalences might be
established:
WAYYIQTOL ..... he killed;63
QATAL ..... he has killed;
Participle . . . he kills/is killing.
Of course in the actual use of verbal forms many differences exist
(as they do among the European languages mutually).
The semantic differentiation within the modal subsystem also
finds analogues in many languages of the world. Admittedly, the
opposition of a volitive to a non-volitive set of forms is not attested
as such in any of the modem European languages. But that does
not make it implausible from a general linguistic point of view .
These considerations do not imply that the verbal systetp of
biblical Hebrew is after all rather simple and run-of-the-mill. Many
problems of the Hebrew system appear to be unique. Nevertheless,
biblical Hebrew is a human language, and as such it answers to
certain rules and tendencies that can be universally observed.

Historical perspectives
Bauer, "Tempora" (1910); Kurylowicz, Apophonie (1962); Rundgren, Intensiv
(1959); D. Cohen, Phrase nominale (1975); idem., Aspect verbal (1989); Cook,
"Grammaticalization" (2001); Bybee et aI., Evolution of Grammar (1994).

A side-product of the contrastive studies is the mapping out of a

number of "grey areas," where different verbal forms are used
side-by-side, with seemingly identical meanings. Partly the
impression of functional identity may be indicative of our lack of
familiarity with biblical Hebrew syntax. To native users of the
language, many nuances will have been clear that escape the
modem scholar. Partly, however, the identity may indeed be real.
Similar cases of "overlap" exist in the verbal system of every
language. They can often be explained, to a certain extent, from
the history of the system. Verbal paradigms evolve, with new
forms coming into existence and old forms falling from use. New

For an example with YIQTOL instead ofWEQATAL, see Gen 18:3-4.

61 Other examples: Gen 21:43-45; Jud 1:3; 19:9; Amos 7:12.

62 See Shulman, Modal Verb Forms. See also Ex 4:3-7 in contrast with verse 9.

63

The aspectual opposition between perfective and imperfective in the past

tense is not grammaticalized in Hebrew; see Chapter I.

.
72

The Verbal Paradigm

verbal forms entering the language do not displace the older forms
all at once. There is a period of co-existence when either form can
be used with the relevant meaning, although usually the new form
will be felt to be more expressive. A reconstruction of these
diachronic developments may therefore shed additional light on
the functioning of a verbal system.
A historical view of the Hebrew verb is made possible by
a number of circumstances. First, Hebrew is a Canaanite dialect.
Certain features of earlier Canaanite can be retraced in the
Canaano-Akkadian language of the Amarna letters, notably in
regard to the verbal system. 64 U garitic, although it is somewhat
further removed from Hebrew, also reveals certain features that
must have characterized proto-Hebrew. 65 Second, the comparison
of Hebrew with other Semitic languages contributes to an appreciation
of what is old and inherited from proto-Semitic and what is new
and developed within the Canaanite branch. Third, the Hebrew
language itself has evolved, through the Archaic, Classical and Late
biblical stages into post-biblical Hebrew. Later developments often
illuminate earlier stages of the language. Fourth and finally,
typological study has identified a number of processes that tend to
occur in similar ways in different languages. Without being dogmatic,
it is possible to indicate certain probabilities, which may serve, in
confrontation with the facts, as eye-openers for diachronic study.66
In the following, a number of diachronic considerations will be
evaluated that throw light on problematic areas of the biblical
Hebrew verbal system.
Trajectories of the perfect

Typological studies have shown that languages tend to create new

to
See Moran, "Hebrew Language," 61-66; Rainey, Canaanite; see also the most
65 recent analysis ~~ th~ verbal system in the EI Amarna texts: Korchin, Markedness.
Whether U garltIc IS to be regarded as Canaanite or represents a different
bran~~ in Semitics is still somewhat moot. For a recent analysis of the
UgarltIc verbal system, see Greenstein, "Forms and Functions."
66 Grou~?breaki~g work has been done in this respect by Kurylowicz and, in the
SemItIc domam, by Rundgren and D. Cohen. A fairly recent treatment from
the point of view of general linguistics is Bybee et at, Evolution of
Grammar. Both the renewal of the perfect and the renewal of the progressive
are discussed by all these' authors.
64

Chapter 2

73

the time of reference. This function has been termed the perfect. A
good example is provided by the evolution of the Latin language.
In classical Latin one and the same tense form, the peifectum, is
used as a perfect and as a preterite: fecit is both "he has done" and
"he did." In late Latin, a new form, habet factum, comes into
existence with the specific meaning "he has done." In this stage of
the language, the older peifectum serves as a preterite only, mostly
in narrative. Similarly, in Syriac one observes that alongside the
preterite cbad "he did, he has done," a new form is created, cbid
leh, literally "done (is) for him," with the meaning "he has done.,,67
Such a renewed perfect sometimes takes its origin in a stative
form. This is the case with Classical Greek, for instance, where the
perfect tense 1te1toillK<X "he has done" has evolved from an old
form expressing state. 68
The renewed perfect very often enters into competition, so to
speak, with the preterite. The Late Latin perfect habeo factum ends
up, in the later stages of French, for instance, pushing out the
earlier preterite of the type feci. In spoken French, if a fait is both
a preterite "he did" and a perfect "he has done"-the old preterite
if fit "he did" (the passe simple) becoming obsolete. 69 A similar
development is attested in some neo-Syriac dialects, where the cbid
leh perfect has superseded the no longer attested preterite cbad. In
some of these dialects, other, more recent constructions are used to
express the perfect. 70
These typological indications are relevant to the history of
Hebrew QATAL:
- QATAL is originally a stative verbal form. This can be shown
particularly from Akkadian, where the cognate form of Hebrew
QATAL is the so-called stative or permansive. 71 Most scholars think

67 See E.Y. Kutscher, "Two 'Passive' Constructions in Aramaic in the Light of

Persian," in Proceedings of the International Conference on Semitic Studies
in Jerusalem 1965 (Jerusalem, 1969), 132-151.
68 See, e.g., P. Chantraine, Histoire du paifait grec (Paris 1927).
69 The passe simple is still used in writing but it has become rare in spoken
French.
70 See many examples in D. Cohen, Aspect Verbal.
71 The connection between the West and East Semitic suffix conjugations has
been much discussed in recent studies; see J. Huehnergard, "'Stative',
Predicative Form, Pseudo-Verb," JNES 46 (1987), 215-232; W. Diem,
"Suffixkonjugation und Subjektspronomina: Ein Beitrag zur Rekonstruktion

t
74

The Verbal Paradigm

that the origins of the suffix conjugation (Hebrew QATAL and the
Akkadian stative) lie in simple nominal clauses with adjectival
predicates: kabid-ta "you (are) heavy," kabid-aku "I (am) heavy,"
etc. In Akkadian the form does not imply any nuance of pastness
or anteriority but simple stativity.
- In West Semitic, the suffix conjugation turned into a form
expressing anteriority (Arabic, Aramaic, Ethiopic). Very probably,
the transformation of a stative into an anterior passed through the
intermediate state of the perfect. The development is thought to
have started with transitive verbs: QATAL-ta "you are a killer"
evolved into QATAL-ta "you have killed." In biblical Hebrew, this
intermediate stage is still attested: QATAL basically expresses the
perfect.
- However, the renewed perfect has already started, even in
biblical Hebrew, to encroach upon the domain of the older
preterite. The early Semitic preterite is the short form of the prefix
conjugation, yaqtul. This is attested in Akkadian where iprus "he
decided" is the regular preterite; in Arabic, preterite yaqtul occurs
with the negative particle lam, lam yaqtul "he did not kill." In
biblical Hebrew, preterite yaqtul is attested in early poetry: 72
Deut 32:8-11

cl~ .,~~ ii"'l~iJ~ c:i~ li"~.v. t,lj~iJ~

t,N'fzi" "j~ ,eo~t, C"~li rit,:l~ :l~"

in~o:~ t,~O :lP~~ :i~~ 'n1it; p'~lj ~~

1~~; t,~; 1itn~1 '~l~ r1~~ 1iT~:;;~:

ij".v.

liil.;"~:p 1it~1: 1it~~i:l; 1it~~~b;

='}ljj; '''~ti~-t,~ i~p ,.,~; '~~:p

inl~~-t,~ 1iT~': 1iTlJj:?: '''~~:p fvi~:

When the Most High apportioned the nations, when he
divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the
of Israel.
own portion was his people, Jacob his allotted

Chapter 2

share. He found him in a desert land, in a howling

wilderness waste; He shielded him, cared for him, guarded
him as the apple of his eye. 73 As an eagle stirs up its nest,
and hovers over its young, He spread his wings, took him
and carried him on his pinions. 74

In classical prose, preterite yaqtul is preserved only in the

WAYYIQTOL form. The renewed perfect QATAL "he has killed"
enters into competition with the preterite W AYYIQTOL, expressing

more and more of its functions. The development will result in the
disappearance of WAYYIQTOL from the verbal paradigm in
mishnaic Hebrew.
These historical considerations illuminate certain problematic
features in the use of QATAL. The origin of the form in a purely
stative expression may explain its occasional reference to the present
with verbs of quality (see above, e.g., Song 7:8 itI;l~l "resembles").75
The tendency of renewed perfects to supplant earlier preterites
also explains certain features of the relation between QATAL and
W AYYIQTOL. While. the two forms clearly have distinct functions,
QATAL is sometimes used as a stand-in for WAYYIQTOL. In this
connection it is interesting to note the occasional use of we +
QATAL in an indicative meaning (e.g., t,~~1 "and it fell" in Jud
7:13). While such cases are rare in CBH, they begin to multiply in
the later chapters of 2 Kings and continue to proliferate in LBH.
This indicates that within biblical Hebrew the development is
under way which will lead to the eventual replacement of
WAYYIQTOL by we + QATAL. This latter situation is found in
mishnaic Hebrew, as has already been stated.
Admittedly, in biblical Hebrew we also find that WAYYIQTOL
sometimes takes on the function of QATAL. This is contrary to
what one would expect from typological study. But, as was said

The three prefixed forms in verse 10b are yaqtulu forms, as is indicated by the
fact that they take the suffix by means of an epenthetic nun; the lack of this
nun in the second form ~m~1:;, is probably due to avoidance of three
successive nun for euphonic reasons. These long forms express attendant
circumstance. See further in Chapter XII.
74 For other possible examples of short prefixed forms without waw expressing
the preterite, see Robertson, Linguistic Evidence.
75 With stative verbs, QATAL is used to refer to present states, albeit usually with
a view to the coming about of the state. In Arabic, Aramaic, and Ethiopic, the
present-tense use of the suffix conjugation with stative verbs is obsolescent.

73

72

des Ursemitischen und zur Geschichte der Semitistik," ZDMG 147 (1997),
10-76; J. Tropper, "Die Endungen der semitischen Suffixkonjugation und
der Absolutivkasus," JSS 44 (1999), 175-193; R. Voigt, "Die beiden Suffixkonjugationen des Semitischen (und Agyptischen)," ZAH 15/16 (200212003),
138-161; J. Huehnergard, "Features of Central Semitic," in A. Gianto (ed.),
Biblical and Oriental Studies in Memory of William L. Moran, Biblica et
Orientalia 48 (Rome 2005), 155-203, in particular 168-169.
See Rainey, "Prefix C.onjugation," 15-16; and more generally, Robertson,
Linguistic Evidence.

75

76

The Verbal Paradigm

above, there is no reason to be dogmatic about language evolution.

Sometimes water flows uphill for a short while.

And the participle very often functions as an adnominal adjective:

Gen 1: 11 17ji .11"iV~ :J~.P. ~Wl rj~O ~r;;1(1 c"HS~ '~~llj
Then God said, "Let the earth put forth vegetation:
plants yielding seed."

The renewal of the progressive

Another point where languages tend to introduce new forms is the

expression of actions in progress at the moment of speaking. Such
new forms may be termed progressives. An excellent example is
provided by English, where the present progressive "he is doing"
is clearly a new form, replacing the earlier simple present "he
does" in some of its uses. Another example is spoken Palestinian
Arabic where the relatively recent forms hifeal "he does, is doing"
and cam hifeal "he is doing" replace the earlier present tense ifeal
"he does, he will do, may he do" when the reference is to actions
that are really happening at the moment of speech.
The old present tense can remain as a general present, as is the
case in English. Or it can be preserved in modal functions as in
Palestinian Arabic (ifeal "may he do").
A very similar development affected early Hebrew where the
participle, originally a purely nominal form, was used to renew the
progressive function formerly expressed by the long form of the prefIx
conjugation (yaqtulu, corresponding to biblical Hebrew YIQTOL). The
Hebrew participle preserves a number of nominal uses, e.g., where
it functions as the subject or the object in a verbal clause:
1~~: iiY~ 0'1~ii 0'1~O 0, 1~fzj
Whoever sheds the blood of a human, by a human shall
that person's blood be shed.

Gen 9:6

Gen 12:3
I will bless those who bless you.

the participle
is the clausal predicate:
Gen 42:34

.,~~ lCO RiJ o~"Tj~rn~ 1~"~Ol

OM~ c.,t,l\j~ ~S "::J i117i~'

Bring your youngest brother to me, and I shall know
that you are not spies. 76
-:

76

77

Chapter 2

T:"

The nominal nature of the participle in this example is revealed by the fact
that it is negated with N\ not rN; verbalized participles are almost always
negated with the latter; see Chapter VII.

Moreover, the inflection of the participle is nominal: the form is

inflected for gender and number but not for person.
NB. In one case, the subject pronoun is shortened and attached to the predicative
participle as a proclitic:
Num 11:15

liiJ N~ '~~'liJ ,~ il~17-~~ il~f-c~1

If this is the way you are going to treat me, put me to
death at once.

This remarkable phenomenon may indicate that the morphology of t1?e participle
is being "verbalized," but there are no other signs of this process in biblical
Hebrew.

In regard to function, however, the participle has clearly moved into

the verbal sphere. In the representation of a process as ongoing at
the moment of speaking, only the participle can be used:

Gen 4: 10

'9"Tj~ "~1 Sip l;1"~.v i1~ '~~llj

i1~'1~O-F~ .,~~ C"j1~5&

And [the LORD] said, "What have you done? Hear, your
brother's blood is crying to me from the ground."

The use of another verbal form instead of the participle would here
entail a different temporal-aspectual nuance: the YIQTOL form
'P17~" would imply something like "will cry" or "cries habitually,"
the QATAL form 'P17~ would imply "has cried."
The predicative participle is also the obligatory form, at least
in prose, to express attendant circumstance in the past. ~oth the~e
functions are clearly progressive in nature and accord WIth what IS
known about the renewal of verbal systems in a typological
perspective.
Originally a progressive, the participle encroaches upon other
functions originally expressed by YIQTOL: imminent future, general
present and repeated action in the past. In CBH, YIQTOL is still far
more frequent in all these functions than the participle. In LBH,
Qumran Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew, one witnesses successive


78

The Verbal Paradigm

stages of a process whereby the participle extends its functions,

ending up practically as the default tense in Mishnaic Hebrew. 77
The historical perspective explains the fact that YIQTOL
expresses the real present in a number of well-defined syntactic
environments, notably in questions. Such present-tense uses are
residual in biblical Hebrew: they are the last traces of earlier usage,
when the participle had not yet penetrated the verbal system and
YIQTOL was the regular form for the expression of actions ongoing
at the moment of speech. Apart from these residual functions,
YIQTOL has become a modal form in biblical Hebrew.
Conclusion

Language evolution affects the grammar of biblical Hebrew in

different ways. Every language is at the same time a synchronic
whole and an intermediate stage in diachronic perspective. Biblical
Hebrew may be expected, therefore, to mix conservative and
innovative elements to a certain extent. Exceptional verbal uses
may at times be indicative of archaism, particularly in poetry or
elevated speech.
Another issue is the composite nature of the biblical corpus.
The Bible was not all written at one time. Even the Classical
Biblical Hebrew (CBH) corpus, the prose parts of the books of
Genesis - 2 Kings, contain texts that were written over a period
covering perhaps four centuries. Linguistic developments may
very well have left visible traces within this corpus. Nevertheless,
it must be admitted that the language of the CBH corpus is
remarkably stable. Developments are much easier to discern in the
comparison of CBH with the LBH of books like Chronicles, Esther,
and Ecclesiastes (see Chapter XI).
rIt"'~"-~-"'-~-"~"""~"""~"'"-"~'''-~''~''''''''''''-''''''''~--ml~e-orre~.errrsc:~cti:un:-nVO-~\TeliOPlme"nts "halVe been singled out
because they are typologically plausible and can clearly be
recognized in Hebrew. The history of the Hebrew language may
well show other-less systematic or less visible-instances of
development affecting verbal usage. Some of these will be
indicated below (see Chapter XI). Others probably remain to be
discovered.

77

For the mishnaic Hebrew verbal system, see M. Mishor, The Tense System in
Tannaitic Hebrew, dissertation Hebrew University, Jerusalem 1983.

CHAPTER III
VARYING VERBAL MEANINGS
According to the approach espoused in this book, verbal forms are
expressive of discrete verbal meanings.! At the same time, verbal
forms are never found in isolation. They are necessarily bound up
with a lexical item, with indications of number, gender and person,
and with a specific context. All these other elements affect the basic
verbal meaning. Th~ present chapter will explore the parameters of
this process and define some of the variations to which verbal
meanings submit.

Introduction: The realization process

Rundgren, Abriss (1961); Eskhult, Studies (1990), 28-35; Isaksson, Studies
(1987), 11-22. ,

Verbal meanings could be described, at their most basic level, as

clusters of semantic features. Although it is correct to say that each
verbal form of biblical Hebrew has a well-defined meaning, it is
also important to stress that that meaning is composite. Thus
W AYYIQTOL contains an indicative feature in comparison with
modal forms such as YIQTOL and the jussive, as well as a pasttense feature in comparison with QATAL and the participle; in
addition, W AYYIQTOL expresses a feature of aspectual neutrality,
as opposed to the progressive aspect expressed by the sequence
subject-participle. Each of these features may itself be complex.
And what is true for W AYYIQTOL is true, mutatis mutandis, for the
other verbal forms.
A corollary of this analysis is that each verbal form
incorporates a potential for polysemy. Anyone of its semantic

1 For

a recent defence of this view, see Loesov, "Review," 628.

p
80

Varying Verbal Meanings

features, or a combination of them, can be stressed over the" other

features, thus modifying the basic meaning in this or that direction.
This phenomenon is not indicative of "fuzzy logic," nor does it
impair the expressivity of the Hebrew language. Rather, such
modification, present in any language, constitutes an important
asset. It means that with a relatively small number of forms a great
many verbal meanings can be covered.
The process by which the basic meaning of a verbal form
varies according to its contextual use has been termed "realization"
in general linguistic writing. When verbal forms are employed in
a given text, the basic verbal meaning is "realized," linking up
with a number of other factors. Often the process of realization can
be described in terms of activation or suppression of features
making up the basic meaning. The contextual meaning of the
verbal forms is never simply identical with their" abstract
paradigmatic function, although usually the latter can still be
recognized in the former. Occasionally, however, the contextual
transformation of the basic function may be so radical that it is
hard to see a connection. 2
The main factors operative in the realization process are
lexical meaning, context, and pragmatic speech situation. The
interplay between these factors and verbal meanings is endless and
can in no way be captured in one chapter. What will be attempted
here is merely to illustrate two aspects of the realization process.
On the one hand, the combination of the paradigmatic function
with other factors often brings out certain characteristics of the
former. In this respect, the process may shed light on the function
of verbal forms in the same way as the comparison between verbal
forms discussed in the previous chapter. On the other hand, the
tl'rr"'""~""-~-~~"-"~1nnISfiorrrra1imI-crr-~r"rerbaJ:-tlmc;t1C'rr"m~ly'lrr' ce:rtaln cases"be so
radical as to "mask" or "bleach" the basic function almost
completely. Such cases cannot always be explained. The least one
can do, however, is to note them down.

Chapter 3

The interaction of grammar and lexicon

Jenni, "Aktionsarten" (2000); Dobbs-Allsop, "Statives" (2000); Vendler, "Verbs
and Times" (1957); Lloyd, Anatomy (1979).

The forms making up the inflectional paradigm of the biblical

Hebrew verb necessarily occur intertwined with a specific lexeme.
Thus N1::!l (Gen 1:1) is not only a 3 m.sg. QATAL form but also
represe~t~ the qal of the root N1:l meaning "to create" . The
combination of grammar and lexicon leads to an interesting
chemistry, with an interplay between grammatical function and
lexical meaning. What is particularly of relevance in the present
connection is the extent to which lexical properties constrain or
transform features of the verbal meaning.
A difficulty in addressing this question is the variety of lexical
meanings. It is no exaggeration to state that every lexical item has
its own specific semantics. Obviously, it would not be expedient to
discuss the interaction between grammatical and lexical meaning
for every verb separately. Linguists have therefore attempted to
divide verbs into semantic classes so as to be able to treat the
problem systematically. One approach is to follow the lead of
morphology. Hebrew verbs clearly fall into a number of
morphological classes. Within the qal stem, two main categories
can be recognized: qatal-yaqtul (e.g., 1:lp - 1:lp" "to bury") and
qatal-yaqtil <1nJ - In" "to give") verbs stand opposed to qatilyiqtal (e.g., i:l::J - i:l::J" "to be heavy") and qatul-yiqtal (e.g., l~P
- l~P" "to be small") verbs. 3 Usually the distinction ~etween th~se
two main groups is defined as one between dynamIC and statlve
verbs. 4 This approach is problematic, however, because the second
group contains many verbs that are dynamic (or at least nonstative) on any account; note: l1~r!i "to hear," t,iJ "to flow," n::Jr!i "to
forget," ~r!i~ "to strip," t,Nr!i "to ask," i~t, "to learn". A minority of
scholars have therefore adopted a different solution: the verbs of
the second group are middle verbs, expressing a process affecting
the subject or of which the subject is the seat. 5

The facts are more complicated; see in detail JM 41.

Occasionally the verbs are defined as transitive and intransitive respectively,
but this is even more problematic.
5 See Joosten, "Actif et moyen."
3

On a very general level, Koschmieder established a distinction between

Hauptfunktion, "basic function," Nebenfunktion, "secondary function," and
Leerlauffunktion, "suspended function." See Koschmieder, Zur Bestimmung.

81


82

Varying Verbal Meanings

Verbs expressing states or qualities can easily be viewed as a

subclass of the middle category, since the state or quality they
express is always that of the subject. If the second group is middle,
the first group is to be viewed as comprising non-middle or active
verbs, a definition that fits most of them very well. 6
Morphological classes that are even more clearly marked than
the varieties of the qal are the derived stems. Unfortunately, the
precise semantic implications of the verbal stems are not always
clear. Nevertheless, a few generalities may be mentioned. The piel
of active qal verbs often implies an expression of verbal plurality:7
plurality of agent or patient, or an iterative or intensifying nuance.
With middle qal verbs, the piel is usually factitive. The hiphil
often has a causative or factitive meaning. The niphal almost
always expresses a reflexive or passive nuance. The hithpael is
a reflexive or passive counterpart to the piel.
Morphology is not always a reliable guide, however. Some
morphological distinctions seem to have no semantic implications.
Conversely, many semantic features find no morphological
expression whatsoever in the verbal forms. Another method has
been, therefore, to start from semantic criteria. Here the problem
has been to find criteria that are sufficiently general and at the
same time relevant enough to be noted. A popular approach is that
of Vendler, who classifies all verbs into four "situation types,,:8
states, activities, accomplishments and achievements. States are
non-dynamic ("Ann lives in New York"); activities are dynamic
and durative but unbounded ("He walked"); accomplishments are
durative and bounded ("She made a chair"); achievements are nondurative and bounded ("He found his earring").9 A weakness of
this scheme has been indicated by Verkuyl and others, who
""~"-""W~'~'~'""~W""""~"W"~'~'-"pointed"-Otlt'"tha:t~wsitua:tiorrwbtypesW'"are""not~to-'be"'attributed solely to
verbs but to verb phrases. While "he walked" is an activity, "he
walked a mile" is bounded and should therefore be considered an
accomplishment. "Situation aspect" is "compositional" in nature.

The morphological facts have been partly obscured by historical factors, however.
See Joosten, "Functions ofthe Semitic D Stem" (with literature).
8 "Situation aspect" designates approximately the same category as the German
Aktionsart (see Chapter I).
9 To these, a fifth category of semelfactives is sometimes added: verbs that are
non-durative and unbounded ("He hit him on the head").

83

Chapter 3

In recent years, the Vendlerian scheme and its variations have

tentatively been applied to biblical Hebrew. But the benefit from
this type of research for studies on the verbal paradigm is yet
unclear. The organizing principle in the present section will be the
different grammatical categories of the verbal paradigm. For each
form, characteristic manifestations of the interaction between
grammar and lexicon will be noted.
WAVVIQTOL

The WAYYIQTOL form situates a'process in a past time frame.

Most often this happens within a narrative text implying a sequence
of events. As a result, grammarians often attribute a "punctual"
nuance to this verbal form: one has the impression that it represents
processes as if they were dots making up a line through time. As
will be argued later, this impression is not entirely true. A process
expressed by WAYYIQTOL is not necessarily complete by the time
the process expressed by the next WAYYIQTOL form sets in. What is
of interest at this point is to show that WAYYIQTOL does not imply
punctuality, at least not in the lexical sense of the word. A process
expressed by WAYYIQTOL can, of course, be punctual:
Gen. 12:4
So Abram went,lO as the

iqiT; ,.,~~ '~".'J 'W~:;P t:ll~~ l~~j

LORD

had told him.

But it can just as well be durative:

2 Sam 3:16 t:l"itt~-j-p O"lO~ iT~~11i~O ii~"~ ii~~ 1~~j
But her husband' went with her,ll weeping as he walked
behind her all the way to Bahurim.

In fact, WAYYIQTOL can be used with verbs expressing activity,

accomplishment or achievement without affecting either the lexical
meaning or the meaning of the verbal form. The durative nature of
the process may even be underlined by an adverbial expression such
as "all day" or "all night":

Jud 19:25

itV~~"~f rzj"~O pr.O~j

iTI:1i~ 111"~j 1"1MjJ t:lv"~~ ~~~j
'R!lljJ-j-P iT7;~ij-Z,f ii~-1Z,~.pI:'l:j

10
11

Note the aorist in the Septuagint translation: Kat s1topeu81) A~paf..L.

Note the imperfect in the Septuagint translation: Kat s1topeue'to 6 <XvTtP au't"~
J.LE't' ai)'tfJ~,


84

Varying Verbal Meanings

The man seized his concubine, and put her out to them.
They knew her, and abused her all through the night
until the morning.I 2

This brings us to a more difficult question: can WAYYIQTOL also

represent states? Or, formulated more precisely, are stative verbal
meanings compatible with WAYYIQTOL? This is not an easy
question to answer. States do not usually belong to the main line of (
events in a story, but to the background material. Consequently,
verbs expressing states tend' to be rare in narrative WAYYIQTOL
clauses, which typically carry the main story line. Non-dynamic
processes are more often expressed in circumstantial or other types
of subordinate clauses, which do not use WAYYIQTOL.
Where stative verbs do occur within the narrative, they usually
acquire an inchoative interpretation. The qal of t"" "to be great"
may be considered a typical stative verb. In WAYYIQTOL clauses,
however, t"" never means "to be great" but "to become great, to
grow": 13

85

Chapter 3

strong," o~n "to be hot," ,on "to be lacking," lren "to be dark," ,iTto
"to be pure," :lto" "to be good," N~to "to be impure," re:l" "to be dry,"
='j11" "to be tired," 'p" "to be dear," ,:l:J "to be heavy," Nt,~ "to be
full," pM~ "to be sweet," N~~ "to be thirsty," '~p "to be short," iTiZip
"to be hard," iT:l, "to be numerous,"
"to be high," pn' "to be
far," nnre "to be low," ':Jre "to be drunk," ot,iZi "to be whole," l~re
"to be fat," t,~re "to be low," O~M "to be complete".
Nevertheless, it seems we are dealing with a tendency rather
than a grammatical rule. Indeed, the inchoative nuance is not
always present in the WAYYIQTOL of stative verbs. In a small
number of examples, it appears this form can indeed represent
(past) states. The most striking cases in CBH prose would seem to
be the following: 14

0"

O""!T~iT

1 Kgs 8:8

1 Kgs 7: 14

Gen 21:8

iT~~i? Mr::t~ iT~:t:p-o~ ":p t,~-1"~ iZil71

i~S; r,1~t:1j y~.r::t;j iT~R ,~~

,,~~~~ iT~~~ N1iT iT~~~~ iT~~-l~

He [Hiram] was the son ~f ~-wido~ ~fthe trib~ ~fNaphtali;

whose father, a man of Tyre, had been an artisan in bronze;
he was full of skill, intelligence, and knowledge in working
bronze.

Of course, the inchoative reading of stative verbs is not limited to

the WAYYIQTOL form: YIQTOL, WEQATAL, volitive forms, infinitives
and even QATAL may express "becoming" as well as "being" the
quality designated by the verb. Yet with WAYYIQTOL, the tendency
luward~.~jn~e.func1iQnjS-PattiClllar1y.clear .. Many stative
verbs invariably take on an inceptive reading in the WAYYIQTOL
form: "N "to be light," oreN "to be gUilty," ,:l" "to be strong," t,t"
"to be wretched," o~, "to be silent," Ipi "to be old," pin "to be

Other examples: Num 11:32; Jud 16:2; 1 Sam 15:11; 19:24; 31:12; 2 Sam
2:32; Isa 51:13; Ps 73:14; cf. 1 Sam 23:14.
13 See also: Gen 21:20; 24:35; 25:27; 26:13; Ex 2:10, 11; Jud 11:2; 13:24; 1 Sam
2:21; 3:19; 2 Kgs 4:18. The only possible exception is 1 Kgs 10:23
rJ~;;:r ,~~~ ,~~ i1fj,~ 17~iJ '1~~j, "King Solomon excelled over all the kings
of the earth."

1:J'N!!'

MiZihJ re,h ",~-re"N ''':IN'

iTJ1:lMiT:MN' n~:Jn~-MN Nr,~~,
Mreh~~ ~:JNS~-S~ Mi~~~ M~"!TiT~MN'

But the poor man had nothing but one little ewe lamb,
which he had bought. He brought it up and it grew up
with him.

~,~,~~-,~w.".'."M

O""!T~iT

The poles were so long that the ends of the poles were
seen from the holy place in front of the inner sanctuary.15

The child grew, and was weaned.

2 Sam 12:3

"iZiN' 1N,Il,

. -- . '''~1ij T~.~~_t,~- ~lp;j~l~

Lev 10:3

'bN~ iT~iT; ,~,-,~~ N1iT liO~-t,~ iTWb '~Nllj

liO~ C~~j ':;;lf~ o.r;y-t,~ ,,~~-t,~1 re'R~ "~ii?~

Then Moses said to Aaron, "This is what the LORD meant

when he said, 'Through those who are near me I will show
myself holy, and before all the people I will be glorified. m
And Aaron was silent.

2 Sam 7: 19

iT~iT; "~.,~ '9"~"~~

MNi ,il1 Itpj?t:1j

pinl~~ '9;t:t~-M"~-t,~ o~ '~'l;1j

And yet this was a small thing in your eyes, 0 LORD GOD;
you have spoken also of your servant's house for a great
time to come.

12

14

15

I n poetry, see Ps 16:9; 45:8.

See perhaps also 1 Kgs 8:7; 6:27 l1~m (compare the Septuagint's

Kat l11t'tE'tO).

2
Varying Verbal Meanings

86

tlv7.~ ,.,~~ n~~ nk~~ N~~1

nii; iZi~O O~~ nk~~~ 1~;~~ n~~~ :ljtlj
Portions were taken to them from Joseph's table, but
Benjamin's portion was five times as much as any of theirs.

And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not
ashamed. 19

Gen 43:34

::l~~r;1~1

OlJO lin:p

1 Sam 10:23

nSl1~' i~~rz.;~ Ol1n-S::;,~ rI:ill'"

When he [Saul] took his stand :;~ong ~he pe~pl;, 'he

head and shoulders taller than any of them. 16

~~;

With verbs expressing position:

'''~~ "11)~ rj~:p ::lp~~ :l~~j

Gen 37:1

And Jacob dwelt in the land where his' father was a

stranger.I 7

Ex 20:21

S~1~O-S~ iZJ~~ n~b1 ph1~ OlJO 'b~:j

o";iSNn OiZi-1iZJN

-:: T

... -:

And the people stood at a distance, while Moses drew

near to the thick darkness where God was.l 8

n~;~jj-S~1 N1njj Oilljj-Sf OlJO OR;1

,Sten-nN 1~ONlI' n1nWjj oi" S~i
And the people stood all th~t- da~ and- ;;igh~ T:;nd all th~

Num 11 :32

next day, and they gathered the quails.

l1j.!jj n~~: is ~~ ":p HiN 17'~j

n~1N nniZi, ,"nN nrVN-SN N:l1-0~j""[""j""[i

But since Onan knew ~h~t th~ ~ff~pring ~o~ld ~ot be h{s~
he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in
to his brother's wife.

Ex 1: 17

'O"i:1S~o-n~ n'~~~jj TNj"I:Ij

0:1~~ 1~~ nT~~ 1fl 1~~~ 1falJ ~S1
T

feared Sod, they-ditln6tdoas the king

of Egypt commanded them.

.""~.-~".~--..-.~...~~~. ".....-~.-'---'HtrrTlrnIntdwives

In all these examples, the W AYYIQTOL form refers to a nondynamic situation already obtaining at the reference time and
continuing thereafter. Admittedly, in most of the passages, the
state in question somewhat paradoxically acquires the status of
an event. In 1 Sam 10:23, for instance, the tall stature of Saul
becomes relevant at this moment in the story. In English diction
one could render the verse: "he turned out to be taller than the
others." In Lev 10:3, the continuing silence of Aaron is presented
as a reaction to what Moses said. In the other passages too-except
perhaps 1 Kgs 8:8-the process takes on a measure of dynamicity
within the flow of the narrative. The event-like character ties in
with the textual function of W A YYIQTOL, a form mainly used to
recount the main line of a story. Processes expressed by
W AYYIQTOL are typically foregrounded and closely integrated into
the chain of events. On the lexical level, however, the examples
show that a stative verbal meaning can indeed, when the necessity
arises, be combined with a W A YYIQTOL form.
QATAL

With verbs expressing mental states:

Gen 38:9

87

Chapter 3

. And with the verb n"j1 "to be":

Gen 2:25

The main peCUliarity of QATAL in regard to lexical matters has

already been signalled above: with stative verbs, QATAL may
imply contemporaneousness in a way that recalls the function of
the predicative participle (above, Chapter II). The phenomenon
reflects an ambiguity inherent in the verbal form. Its basic function
is that of expressing anteriority with regard to reference time
(E<R). With this basic function, attention can be focused on the
"event," on the process belonging to the time-frame preceding the
reference time; where this component is strong, QATAL will
approach W AYYIQTOL in its function. But the attention may also
be drawn to the reference time itself, to which the process is
anterior. To the extent this is the case, QATAL will connote the
state resulting from the process:
Gen 22:20

'9"f:'Tt$ 1in~~ o"~~ N'0-0~ nf~~

iT17: n~0

Milcah also has borne children, to your brother N ahor.

See perhaps also 1 Kgs 5: 11.
NRSV: "And Jacob settled ... " But this does not accord with the context.
18 NRSV: "Then the people stood ... " But they were already standing, according
to verse 18.

16

17

19

See also: Gen 39:6.


Varying Verbal Meanings

88

The clause not only implies the process of Milkah's bearing

children but also the state of the children's having been born. In
context, the ensuing state-the fact that N ahor has children-is
probably more relevant than the process as such. This function is
very frequent with QATAL. Now with highly transitive verbs like
''''', the state implied by QATAL is naturally one affecting the direct
object. With intransitive verbs, the state in question will usually
affect the subject:
2 Sam 17:20

ll;l~iit"j r~~"f)~ it~~ !J'~Nllj

C"~it ,,~,,~ 1':117 itrN~it Cit" '~Nr-J'

They said, "Where are' TAhi~a~z a~d io~~th~~?" ':Th~

woman said to them, "They have crossed over the brook
of water."

Here the QATAL form occurs in the explanation of the absence of

the two young men: they have crossed the brook and are, therefore,
out of reach for Absalom's men.
Stative verbs are intransitive and they have the additional
peculiarity that they may express the coming about of a state or the
state itself. A verb like ':l~ means "to become or to be heavy". The
"stative" implications of QATAL naturally link up with the meaning
of these verbs to express contemporaneousness:
Jud 4: 19

Chapter 3
,;r;r~~-n~ l;l"tQ Sf ,~~
I am not worthy of the least of all the steadfast love and
all the faithfulness that you have shown to your servant.

One might detect a nuance of "having become small" in this

example by supposing that Jacob started feeling small when God
showered him with steadfast love. Alternatively, one may simply
accept that "r:-qbR here is more or less synonymous with "~~ lbR (cf.
itI;l~ lbR 1 Sam 15:17). Similar cases, where QATAL seems to
express mere contemporaneousness, are more frequent in poetry
than in prose texts.
NB. When the verb is in the 3 m.sg., QATAL is hard to distinguish from the
cognate adjective on the formal level as well. Forms like 1m, ,:;;~, ~~7t and lOR
could just as well be adjectives as QATAL forms. 21 This morphological
peculiarity shows that QATAL originated in a nominal clause with a verbal
adjective as predicate (see above in Chapter II, pp. 73-74).

Perhaps it is worthwhile to point out that QATAL with stative verbs

does not always imply contemporaneousness with the reference
point. When the need arises, it can very well refer to states
obtaining prior to the reference point:

"l)N~~ ":P c:~-o~~ ~~-"~"l?~lJ O"~~ '~Nllj

Gen 28: 16
1 Sam 26:21

The verb ~~~ means "to be or become thirsty". What is implied by

the QATAL form is both that the speaker has become thirsty (the
anterior process) and that he is now thirsty (the resultant state at
reference time). From this perspective, it turns out that the

",-,,~~ :l!JiC "n~on "!J~iC '~NIl'

. T .:
T'9T~ 17j~-N~ ,,~

,117

itilJ CilllJ '9"~".v.~ "rQE;J~

njw: ,~~ nljI::l

Then Saul said, "I have done wrong. Come back, my son
David, for I will never harm you again, because my life
was precious in your sight today."

2 Sam 1:23

resulting from the peculiar semantics of the verbs in question. This

is not to say that the function is rare. 20 Moreover, as was indicated
above in Chapter II, in a number of occurrences the contemporaneous function of QATAL dominates to the point of obscuring any
thought of an anterior process:

C~"li~lJl C"~O~~lJ ll;l~iir"j "!J~rf

!J"!j~ N" cni~:l!J Cit"lln~

!J';'~ 'ni"l~~ 1~R C~',~~~

Saul and Jonathan, beloved and lovely! In life and in

death they were not divided; they were swifter than
eagles, they were stronger than lions. 22

Gen 32:11
Examples from classica1.prose texts: Gen 6:13; 18:13,20; 26:16; 27:2; 38:26;
Num 17:2; 1 Sam 5:7; 14:29; 25:10; 2 Sam 7:22.

"1:1111: N" "~~~1 itilJ cip~~ it4it; rzj~ 1~~

Surely the LORD is in this place--and I did not know it.

Then he said to her, "Please give me a little water to

drink; for I am thirsty.~'

20

89

21
22

See Jenni, "Adjektive."

See also: Lam 4:7.


Varying Verbal Meanings

90

Participle
The predicative participle represents processes as contemporaneous with the reference time. The sequence subject-participle,
which is about ten times more frequent than participle-subject,
adds a nuance of ongoing action comparable to that of the English
progressive tenses. It stands to reason that, with such a meaning,
the participle should be more frequent with verbs that imply
duration than with punctual verbs. The shorter the process, the
smaller the chance that it should be contemporaneous with the
reference point. The facts agree with this: the predicative participle
is more frequent with activities and achievements (in the
Vendlerian sense) than with accomplishments. An illustration is
afforded by o'p and '~l', two verbs of similar meaning of which
the first usually implies an inceptive, punctual meaning ("to stand
up") and the second a durative meaning ("to be standing"). While
'~l' occurs in a participle clause 29 times in Genesis - 2 Kings
alone, o'p is found in such a clause only twice, in Mic 7:6 and Ps
3:2. Similarly, ~::lJ hiphil "to look" never occurs in the predicative
participle, while i1N' "to see" is frequent in participle clauses.
Other punctual verbs that combine rarely, or not at all, with the
predicative participle are 'ON "to bind," "i1 "to kill," npt, "to
take," l"J "to touch," i1~J hiphil "to hit," "0 "to tum aside," l"!j
"to encounter," nn!j "to open," N'P "to call," l"P "to tear," o.,tv "to
put," ,::lrV "to break," ::l,rV "to return".
Another interesting phenomenon in this regard is that the
participle of verbs with a punctual meaning may in some cases
take on a durative meaning. The most striking instance is that of
the verb t,!jJ. In the finite forms, this verb almost always has the
~~=_ _,~,,____~_,-ID!!!t!!~~Co fall" an~only e~ception~llx the durative "to
lie" (e.g., 1 Sam 19:24). For the-pai1IcIple~"Iiowever, the reverse is
the case: it rarely means "falling" and far more often "lying down":
Jos 7: 10

1~ OR .t:~;i1;-t,~ i11i1; '~N!lj

~.,~~-t,.t: t,~~ i1I!1~ i1t i1~~

The LORD said to Joshua, "Stand up! Why are you lying
upon your face?"

Other verbs showing this peculiarity are: '::IN "to perish," i1Jn "to
encamp," NfliJ "to lift up," "0 "to close," Y::l, "to lie down," ::l~'
"to mount". The phenomenon is complex, since for most of these
verbs the durative-stative meaning is not limited to the participle,

91

Chapter 3

nor is the participle invariably durative. 23 Even if it is only

a tendency, however, it does show up the clash between lexical
punctuality and contemporaneous time-reference.
. This. clash ~oes not imply that punctual verbs are in principle
ureconcIlable WIth the predicative participle. When the need arises
to describe a punctual, or near-punctual, process as being
contemporaneous with the reference point, no other verbal form
~an be used. This may happen in a narrative when a punctual action
IS represented as contemporaneous with an event in the story:
1 Sam 9: 14

'''~y1in~o''~~ i1~iJ '''~y 1t,~~j

OON1i?~ N~oj t,~1~~ i1~i)1

So they went up to town. As they were entering the 'town~

there was Samuel coming out toward them.

The process of Samuel's coming out of the town is observed, so to

speak, through the eyes of the protagonists; although the action is
punctual, it is represented as contemporaneous with reference time. 24
Where the reference point is the time of speaking, the participle
may be used to describe a punctual action observed as in a vision; see
perhaps:
P~ 29:5

o"~1~

,:;rz.; i11i1; t,ip

LIsten, the LORD is breaking cedars.25

~ore u~ually,

however, a punctual process described by the participle

WIll be Interpreted as belonging to the immediate future:
Jud 6:37

Ijn~ '~~iJ ntrn~ l"~~ .,:;>~~ i1~i)

I am going to lay [lit. I am laying] a fleece of wool on the

threshing floor.

The process, which still lies in the future, is represented as

contemporaneous with the moment of speaking. 26
At the other end of the scale, stative verbs, too, create problems for
the participle. As has been stated, the sequence subject-participle
represents a process as ongoing. This nuance is difficult to reconcile
with stative verbs which imply no change or development. Stative
~: For the participle of the verb t,5:)J with the meaning "falling," see Gen 15: 12.
Other examples: Gen 15:12; Jud 20:33; 1 Kgs 19:5.
26 NRSV: "The voice of the Lord breaks cedars."
Other examples: Ex 4:23; 7:17; 1 Kgs 11:31; 2 Kgs 2:3, 5; Jer 44:11; 49:35;
Ezek 37:12.
25


Varying Verbal Meanings

92

verbs therefore occur more often in the sequence participle-subject,

which represents processes as facts:
1 Sam 19: 14

'r:rn~ nr::rR~ o"~~~~ t,1~~ n~~~j

~1i1

nt,h

'~~r:'lj

When Saul sent messengers to take David, she '~aid,'''''He

is sick."

In Genesis - 2 Kings, the verb ;,t,n "to be ill" occurs three times in
the sequence participle-subject (see also: 1 Kgs 14:5; 2 Kgs 8:29)
and only twice in the sequence subject-participle (Gen 48:1; 2 .K~s
8:7). This distribution is remarkable since the latter sequence IS In
general much more frequent than the f~~er. Th~ rea.son for the
relative frequency of the sequence partIcIple-subJect IS probably
the stative nature of the verb.
In the case of 11'" "to know," the difference in sequence
implies an interesting difference in meaning:
2 Sam 17: 10

Chapter 3

often in the sequence predicate-subject (e.g., Gen 42:21; Lev 11:4, 5, 7, 38;
1 Kgs 18:27; Jer 33:10; Hag 2:14). The sequence subject-predicate is mostly
limited, with this type of adjective, to clauses requiring that word order (e.g.,
circumstantial clauses: Gen 18:11; Ex 17:12; 1 Kgs 3:20; Isa 6:1; relative
clauses: Deut 7:19; Jer42:11).
YIQTOl and WEQATAl

In biblical Hebrew prose, YIQTOL and WEQATAL usually refer to

processes not yet begun; they express futurity and other modal
nuances. In a small number of usages, however, these forms
appear to refer to processes contemporaneous with the reference
time (see above, Chapter II, pp. 61-62). One of these is relevant in
the present context: with the verbs t,:l" "to be able" and 11'" "to
know" YIQTOL may express a process obtaining at reference time.
In direct speech the reference time is the present: 28
Gen 24:50

"TI"~~ ';::lr"~ t,~r~~:-t,f .p1';-"~

Then Laban and Bethuel answered, "The thing comes

from the LORD; we cannot speak to you bad or good."

1 Kgs 3:7

O"~j O"i~;ij-"~ .p1'; .,~.,~

"~s; n;t,s; 'R~ijl1~~ijl

Many stative verbs have no participle of the form qotel but instead exhibit
a verbal adjective of the form qatel (historically qatil). Whether or not this
verbal adjective is to be considered a participle, it certainly does occur relatively

NB.

27

In 2 Sam 7:10, the Septuagint has

'YtvO)O'KEt, "he perceives."

OiOEV,

"he knows," but in Gen 33:13

"TI;r~~-n~ 1!1=?~~iJ ;'1!1~ "ijt,~ ;'4i1; i11!1~1

~::l4 n~~ 171~

N' l~R ,~~ "~j~l .,~~ "1 nr::rtl

And now, 0 LORD my God, thou hast made thy servant

king in place of David my father, although I am but a
child; I do not know how to go out or come in.

My LORD knows that the children are frail and that the
flocks and herds, which are nursing, are a care to me.

A moment's reflection will show that the verb 11'" is used in two
different ways in these verses. In 2 Sam 17: 10, the knowledge
referred to is antecedent: "All Israel knows and has always known
that your father is a warrior ... ". In Gen 33:13 the ~owledge is
formed at the moment of speaking: "l\1Y,L()R?p~rceivest~at the
"'""'~'-~-~~-~-~n are frail. .. ".2? The siitive-nliance""is "'expressed by the
sequence participle-subject, the dynamic nuance by the reverse
sequence.

'~lij ~;;: ;'4i1;r~ 1'~~llj t,~1n~1 1~~ l~~j

::l;~-;~ l1j "TI"~~ '~:J '~1j ~,

;r:'l~ ,rzjN t,"n-"j::l1

For all Israel knows that your father is ~ ~~~rio~-, ~~d
that those who are with him are valiant warriors.

Gen 33: 13

93

In narrative the reference time is the time of the story:

Gen 48:10

n;~1~ '~1" ~t, lpf~ 1'~f t,~l~: "~".v.l

,.,t,~ onN rzj nll,
T

.. - -

N ow the eyes of Israel were dim with age, so that he

could not see. 29 So Joseph brought them near to him.

It is a plausible suggestion that the particular semantics of the

verbs involved allowed YIQTOL to be used in these examples. Both
verbs serve to add a modal nuance to another verb, usually
expr{(ssed by the infinitive construct. Although YIQTOL translates

is particularly frequent with :':l~; the following cases come from Genesis:
Gen 19:19, 22; 24:50; 29:8; 31:35; 34:14; 44:26. Cases with 17'~ are rarer: Ex
10:26.
29 Other cases: Jos 15:63Q; 1 Sam 3:2; 2 Sam 17:17; Jer 44:22; Ezek 47:5; with
17'~ perhaps Job 37:15.
28

It

Varying Verbal Meanings

94

into English as a present tense, the verbal phrase YIQTOL + in~initive

does not in fact refer to situations contemporaneous wIth the
moment of speaking.

Chapter 3

With the same basic function, the imperative can be used with
stative verbs:
Isa 44:27
Who says to the deep, "Be dry."

NB. When t,::l~ is not construed with an infinitive but means "to prevail," the
YIQTOL form always refers to the future: Jud 16:5; 1 Sam 26:25; 1 Kgs 22:22.

Volitives
The volitive forms, cohortative-imperative-jussive, rarely occur
with stative verbs, as has been observed particularly fo: the
imperative. An explanation for this rareness ~as been soug?t In the
notion of "control" or "agentivity": the subject of a stabve verb
often has no control over the state in question, and is therefore not
an agent. One cannot command one to "be small" or to "be old"
since these processes do not proceed from the will of the subject. 30
There may be some truth in this explanation..Yet Hebrew does
allow non-agentive verbs to occur in the imperative:

Deut 32:49-50

",i:lr'iJ iT'!iJ

r::J~i~~O 'iJ-~~ iT~~

"'l.!}~f rl~-n~ iT~"'1

'9~p.!}-~~ .,t;l~ijl iTi~ iT~l: iT~~ ,~~ 'Of Mrt.1

Ascend this mountain of the Abarim, Mount Nebo ... and
view the land of Canaan ... ; you shall die [lit. and die]
there on the mountain that you ascend and shall be
gathered [lit. be gathered] to your kin.

Ezek 16:6

l:rtl~ n99i~~~ l~"'~1l:~S; ':J~~1

~:O l:~l~ l~ '~k1

I passed by you and saw you flailing about in your

blood. As you lay ,in your blood, I sal'd to you "L'Ive.I"

hand than

was in the hand of

the throw-away baby of the
like these
show that the main function of the imperative is not to comma?di.e., to act upon the will of the hearer-but to express the wlll ~f
the speaker regarding the addressee. 31 In Deut 32:50 n~ means I
t l0 'lve
" .32
want you to die" and in Ezek 16:6 ~:O means "I wantyou

Prov 27:11
Be wise, my child, and make my heart glad.

In these examples as in the preceding ones, the imperative

expresses a process willed by the speaker rather than commanded
to the hearer. 33

Syntagmatic determination: Temporal adverbs

Lexical meaning links up with contextual factors to create many
shades of meaning. Particles, verbal arguments (subject, object,
indirect object), adverbial specifications, and inter-clausal relations
all combine to bring about an infinite amount of semantic nuances.
In the present section only a small, though significant, part of the
process of contextual determination can be discussed: the combination
of verbal forms with temporal adverbs and interjections. 34
As with the lexical factors, temporal adverbs usually entail the
underlining of one or other semantic component of the verbal
form. In one case only does the combination lead to a function not
otherwise attested (see t~ with YIQTOL).

"now"
In biblical Hebrew, the adverb iTnli "now" almost always implies
contemporaneousness with speech time. It never occurs in
narrative. At least three functions have to be distinguished:
i11"117

iTnli qualifies the clausal predicate (temporal iTnli);

iTnli, usually in the form iTnli1, indicates that a conclusion is
drawn on the basis of what was said before (rhetorical iTnli);35
- iTnli introduces the apodosis to a counterfactual condition
(logical iTnli).

See also: Isa 54:14; Jer 25:27; Hos 10:8. See further Warren, Modality, 170.
For other aspects of the syntagmatic determination of verbal forms, see
Chapter IV and Chapter x.
35 See Gross, Satzteilfolge, 131-132.
33

34
30

31
32

See Dobbs-Allsopp, "Statives," 37.

See Garr, "Driver's Treatise," lxiv.
"
Other examples: Gen 42:16 ~'t?~iJ "be imprisoned"; Num 5:19 "i1ei) "be clean.

95


Varying Verbal Meanings

96

Chapter 3

And if the man said, "Let them burn the fat first, and
then take whatever you wish," he would say "No, you
must give it now. "

For our purposes, the most relevant function is the temporal one.
Where temporal Mn17 qualifies a verbal form, a number of interesting
phenomena may be observed.

J os 9: 19

Mi17M-t,~-t,N O"N"tz;~M-t,~ 1'~Nllj

t,N'tz;" ~Ht,N ~i'~~~ on~ ~;~~~~ 1:;1:l~~

T

. T:' .. .:: on~ ~~JS Tt,~1~ ~" ir~17i

But all the leaders said to all the c~r:g;eg~tio~, "We h~~~
sworn to them by the LORD, the God of Israel, and now
we may not touch them."

As was seen above, YIQTOL is idiomatic with t,~" in present-tense

clauses.
In all other cases the temporal reference of the verbal form is
to the future. While the presence of the adverb may lead to
a notion of imminence, YIQTOL implies an action not yet begun:

Ex 6: 1

Num 22:4

His wife J ezebel said to" hi~, ,:W~uld yo~ -:~ow gove~~
Israel?"
T

These examples clearly demonstrate the modal-future function of

YIQTOL. If YIQTOL were capable of expressing contemporaneousness or imperfective aspect, the combination with Mn17 "now"
might be expected to bring out these functions. In fact, however,
Mn17 + YIQTOL is never "now you are -ing."
QATAL

While the combination of Mn17 with YIQTOL implies the near

future, with QATAL the reference is to the immediate past:

Esau said, "Is he not rightly named Jacob? For he has

supplanted me these two times. He took away my
birthright; and look, now he has taken away my blessing."

2 Sam 19:10

"N~w y~~ sh~il se'~ ~ha~ i

All the people were disputing throughout all the tribes of

Israel, saying, "The king delivered us from the hand of our
enemies, and saved us from the hand of the Philistines;
and now he has fled out of the land because of Absalom. "37

And Moab said to the elders of Midian, "This horde will

now lick up all that is around us, as an ox licks up the
grass of the field."

1 Sam 2: 16

::l~ljjj Oill~ 11'''~i?: '~R rl7"~v '''~~ '9 Nll j

The mechanism is the same as with YIQTOL: the adverb points to

the moment of speaking, drawing the process to the here and now.
But the basic function of the verbal form-anteriority in the case
of QATAL-is preserved. 38 With adjectival verbs and verbs

'TJ~~~ Mj~I;1 ,~~~ 'TJ~-nRl

11:.1t1 ir~.t1 "~ Nt, '~~1
37

36 Other examples: Gen 11:6; 19:9; 29:32; Ex 32:30; Jud 15:18; 17:3; 1 Sam
13:12; 27:1; 2 Sam 20:6; 1 Kgs 12:26.

'bN~ t,~lf?': ,,~~~-t,~~ lii~ o.vv-t,~ "iJ;j

1J~;k =-J~~ 1J~"~iJ l~~jj

O"r;i~~?f =-J~~ 1J~~~ NiMl
Oit,~~~ t,3)~ rJ~v-l~ n"j~ ir~.t11

t,j:li~jj 1~O~; ir~.t11;1~ "~i?~-t,~ ::l~i~ '9Nll j

M"jj PJ~ n~ ,iiSjj lh~~ 1J"n!J"~t?-t,f-n~

In these examples, YIQTOL may

to express simple futurity,
or a modal nuance may be attributed to it (commitment, menace).36
In other examples, the modal nuance is more prominent:

NlR "~O '9Nll j

nR~ "t1l~~-n~ o:~~~ M! "~~i?l1:j
"t1~1~ nR~ i1~.t1 M~iJl
::l~~: i~~

Gen 27:36

Mrl7b-t,N M'M" '~Nllj

Ml1'!Jt, Mfzi17N 'rl7~ irN,n MFl17

The the LORD said to Moses,

will do to Pharaoh."

iMrzlN t,::li"N ,,,t,N '~NM'

t,N'fzi,,-t,17 M~1S~ M~ ~t1 nn17 ':MMN

1 Kgs 21:7

YIQTOL

Although temporal Mn17 occurs with YIQTOL well over a hundred

times, the implication is never that of an action going on at the
time of speaking. Contemporaneousness with speech time is found
in one example only, with the verb t,~" "to be able":

97

Note the use of the perfect

1tECPE'U'YEV

in the Septuagint.

38 Other examples: Gen 26:22; 31:28, 30; 32:11; Deut 10:22; 26:10; Jos 5:14;
14:10; 22:4; Jud 6:13; 8:2; 1 Sam 17:29; 1 Kgs 5:18; 22:23; 2 Kgs 5:22; 19:25.

Varying Verbal Meanings

98

expressing activities of the inner person, a present-tense translation

is required:

1:Jr.lN~ oi"~ 1:J"t1f~ il'ik 1:Ji:~~0 00 1:J~~~ i1!

.
rD::" i1~i1 i1r-Jli' o~.,~~ l'i~~t,
Here is our bread; it was still w~~~ ~henT ~~ t~ok it f~~~

Jos 9: 12

our houses as our food for the journey, on the day we set
out to come to you, but now, see, it is dry.

Ex 18: 11

O"i:it,~O-t,f~ i14i1; t,iir":p "1:1l?'~ M1=;1.11

Now I know that the

LORD

is greater than all gods.

However, even with these categories of verbs the notion of

anteriority clearly exists: the bread was fresh, but now it has
become dry; Pharaoh did not know that the LORD was great, but
now he has come to know this.
Participle
The adverb i1l'ili is found less frequently with the predicative
participle. Where the combination occurs, the reference is to a process
contemporaneous with the moment of speaking or represented as
such:
2 Sam 17:9

o"DO~ij l'ir:t~~ N~r:trN1i1 M1=;1.11 i1~0

l'ibipipij ir:t~~ iN

Even now he has hidden himself [better: he is hiding] in

one of the pits,' or in some other place.

1 Kgs 18: 11 ~i1~~~ i1~0 '9.,t'N~ 'b~ l~ '~N M1=;1~ M1=;1.111

But now you say, "Go, tell your
here."39

LORD

that Elijah is

i1'!ij l'i:~ij-l'i~ M~l ,~~ '~~~ij o:?,~ .,~

M1=;1.11 il'ik c,,~, ctl~ i1~1 lilVNiO ;i;:l~~
RI1rilhit'4"~~""-'~"-"--"-'----~'--"--"_~"H__Wfttr-is-~ef~mGDH~that--saw.this..house. in its former
glory? How does it look to you [literally: do you see it] now?

Hag 2:3

These few examples confirm that the predicative participle

40
presents situations as contemporaneous with the reference time.

39 See also: verse 14; 2 Chr 13:8.

40 With rhetorical i1M111 the participle also refers to the present: Num 24:14; Deut
10:12; 1 Sam 12:2; 1 Kgs 2:16.

99

Chapter 3

WAYYIQTOL
Since i1l'ili implies contemporaneousness with speech time it

cannot normally be used in narrative. It is no surprise, therefore,

that the adverb combines with WAYYIQTOL rarely. As was noted in
Chapter II, however, WAYYIQTOL is not limited to narrative. In
direct speech, WAYYIQTOL continues QATAL in reference to
situations that are anterior to the moment of speech. In this
function, the collocation with i1l'ili is theoretically possible. And
a few cases are indeed attested:
l~i~-='~~ 1j~~~j i14i1; 1:J~~~ Mtl.111
But now the LORD has cast us off, and has given us into
the hand of Midian. 41

Jud 6: 13

Note also the following, with i1l1li ili "until now":

Gen 32:5(4)

'f?'.v.~ .,trN~ P'9Nl'i i1~ 'bN~ oI;lk '~;j

"I:1'l~ 1~~-01l :lp~~ "T!';r~~ ,~~ i1~
iU"IV-'V
TT
-

,nN'
--T

And he instructed them, saying, "Thus you shall say to

my LORD Esau, 'Thus says your servant Jacob: I have
lived with Laban as an alien, and stayed until now'. "42

The last example is reminiscent of a construction found a number

of times, the combination of WAYYIQTOL with the adverbial
expression 0,"i1 iV "until today":
2 Kgs 16:6
M!ij oi~ij '.11 o~ 1::l~:j l'i~"~ 1Nf O"~j~j
And the Syrians came to Elath, and lived there to this
day. 43

The passages involved show a transition from story to commentary

that is rather exceptional in biblical narrative. In as far as the
verbal syntax isconcemed, it is probably correct to state that the
reference to speech time is secondary. The verbal form primarily
expresses that a situation belongs to a moment in the past: the
Syrians came to Elath-at that moment in the sequence of events.

41 See also: Gen 45:8. WAYYIQTOL also combines with OWi "today": Gen 24:42;
2 Sam 3:8; Jer 34: 15.
42 See also: Ruth 2:7.
43 See Deut 2:22; 11:4; Jos 4:9; 2 Sam 4:3; 1 Kgs 8:8; 2 Kgs 16:6; 1 Chr 4:43;
2 Chr 5:9.


Varying Verbal Meanings

100

This having been stated, a link is then created with the time of the
narrator: the Syrians still are in Elathtoday.
iT)iT

The deictic particle itjit is very frequent in biblical Hebrew. It

introduces single words or clauses in a lively way, often implying
new or unexpected information. 44 Like itnl1, itjit refers to the here
and now. But unlike itnl1, it does occur in past- or future-tense
contexts: while itnl1 is necessarily connected to speech time, itjit links
up with reference time-the moment of speaking in direct speech, the
time of the story in narrative, the future in predictive discourse.
Since itjit is clause-initial,45 it cannot be combined with
46
WEQATAL or WAYYIQTOL. The particle is rare with volitive forms.
It occurs fairly frequently with YIQTOL, QATAL and the participle.
YIQTOL
With YIQTOL, the particle is found only in direct discourse, where
speech time and reference time coincide (except in Gen 37:7, see
below). The verbal form usually expresses a process situated in the
future:

Gen 27:39
1~~i~ it:;:t: Yj~;:t ~~~~~ M~i)
See, away from the fatness of the earth shall your home be. 47

A conditional meaning may be implied:

1 Sam 9:7

iZ.h~~ ~~~rit~1 ,~~ M~i)l i'~~7 ~1~~ '9~~j

Then Saul replied to his servant, "But if we go, what can

we bring the man?"

~'!"~i!iw~,

_ _ _ _ _" ._ _ _ _

Literally, what Saul says is "we will go." The conditional nuance
arises from the context. 48
~,"~",,~
~l'llUle2 the r~frrel1ce iJ9~tl!t?~g~!l~[~lpresent:
__

1 Sam 20:2

lbR ,~, i~ ~i'~ ,~, ~~~ Mfy ~~-Nr, M~i)

Chapter 3

101
~jr~-n~
it~l~
~~,:
: T
...
.. :

Look, my father does nothing either great or small

without disclosing it to me. 49

The predictive, potential and general-present functions are regular

for YIQTOL. In all the examples presented thus far, the particle Mjit
does not affect the basic function of YIQTOL.
Two other examples are more problematic:

it1~ij ,in~ o~rp~~ o~~~~~ 1j1';i~~ it~i)l

Gen 37:7

it~~rO~l ~I:1~~~ M7tR it~i)l

~I:1~~~~ l~Jql:J~r;1j O~~t1~~~ M~"~~~ M~i)l
T

There we were, binding sheaves in the field. Suddenly,

my sheaf rose and stood upright; then your sheaves
gathered around it, and bowed down to my sheaf.

The analysis of the meaning of the YIQTOL form in this verse is

difficult. In the report of his dream, Joseph uses both the
predicative participle, representing the events as if they were
unfolding before his eyes ("we are binding"), and WAYYIQTOL,
representing the events as preterite ("and they bowed down").
Whereas these two modes of discourse are usual in descriptions of
dreams,50 Mjit + YIQTOL is unique. 51 None of the usual readings of
YIQTOL-prospective, iterative, modal-seems to be possible here.
Until a satisfactory solution is found the case will have to be
classified as a local anomaly.

1 Sam 21: 15(14)

l1~Mrz.;~ rz.;~~

1N,n

M~M

.. ~-~:~. ink' 1~~~~ it~~

And Achish said to his servants, "Look, 'you see th~ m~~
is mad; why would you bring him to me?"

Here, too, the interPretation of the YIQTOL form following itjit is

not easy. 52 If it were to be taken as a real present, this would be the
only such case in prose. Possibly one should attribute a modal
nuance to the verbal form: "Look, you can see he is a madman."

44 See, e.g., R. Garr, "lil" Revue Biblique 111 (2004), 321-344; somewhat
differently, C. H. J. Van der Merwe, "A Cognitive Linguistic Perspective on
ilp,iJ in the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges and Ruth," Hebrew Studies 48 (2007),
101-140.

45 The particle may be preceded by other clause connectors.

46 See Jer 4:16; Ps 134:1; Prov 1:23.
47 See also: Ex 32:34; Jos 44:27; 1 Sam 14:43; 20:21; 2 Sam 19:38.
48 For the conditional use of ilJil, see BDB, 244b.

49 The verse is quoted according to the qere. For the ketiv, see Driver, Notes, 160.
50 See, e.g., Gen 28:12-13; 41:1-4.
51 Cf. Driver, Treatise, 27y.
52 The Septuagint renders the verbal form as an imperative, the Vulgate as
a perfect and the Targum as a preterite circumstantial clause.

102

Varying Verbal Meanings

Alternatively, a conditional reading may be possible: "If you see

a madman, why do you bring him to me."53
In spite of these two difficult cases, it is clear that i1Ji1 does not
normally lead to a real-present interpretation of YIQTOL: i1Ji1 +
YIQTOL never implies a process actually coming about at the time
of reference. This is strong confirmation of the view set out in the
preceding chapters that YIQTOL in biblical prose is essentially
a modal form.
NB. The use of the syntagm mil + YIQTOL is a feature as regards which prose
and poetry clearly differ. While this combination does not express the real
present in prose, it does in poetry:
tzj~, 1N~~ ,;r~~1Q91 11'~iJ; '9'~;iN m;:t-':p
Ps 83:3
Even now your enemies are in tumult, those who hate you have
raised their heads.

Although one might argue for an iterative or general-present reading, it is more

reasonable to take mil + YIQTOL here as an expression of what is actually going
on. Perhaps what the YIQTOL form implies in this poetic usage is a degree of
subjectivity. The modality would be interpreted as an expression of excitement:
"your enemies are grumbling-how dare they."s4 Alternatively, the presenttense use could be qualified as archaizing.

QATAL

The particle i1Ji1 combines with QATAL much more often than with
YIQTOL. Also, a much greater variety of functions is attested with
QATAL. In the first place the reference time may be identical with,
anterior to, or subsequent to the time of speech, depending on
whether the syntagm occurs in direct discourse, in narrative, or in
legal casuistry. These three types of discourse will be taken in tum.
~f<----~--""<~"~~~,-,*~---~tefeReEHime-i6eAfieal.witA-Sf>eeeM~time'- ~

In direct discourse, the syntagm i1Ji1 + QATAL regularly expresses

processes that have just been accomplished:
Num 22:38

103

Chapter 3

Ex 3:9

.,~~ n~~~~1~:-"~f nR~~ n~;:ti1l!1,vl

N ow then, the cry of the Israelites has come to me. 55

With adjectival verbs and verbs expressing activities of the inner

person, a present-tense translation is often preferable:
2 Kgs 18:21

'9~ 1!1r;t~; n~;:t i1l!1,v

i1iiJ r1~10 i1~~iJ n~~~-~,v

See, you are relying now on that broken reed of a staff.

But the fundamental value of the verbal form is the same in this
example as in the preceding ones. A precise rendering of the
Hebrew would be: "you have put your trust."
With the verbal form in the first person, the QATAL form often
expresses an action that is brought about by the statement itself:
Gen 1:29

t:l::l~ "rJnj
.: T

nan

t:l"ii~N '~~ll'

;:n ~'t :J~~~~f~n~

God said, "S~e, 1 have given you every plant yielding seed."

Since no earlier act of giving has been recorded, it is perhaps better

to translate: "See, I am giving you." In any case, that seems to be
the practical implication of the expression. In pragmatic terms, the
words "r:'la~ i1~0 are "performative": the act of giving is effected by
the verbal expression of giving. 56 In the following example, the
temporal reference is to the future:
2 Sam 14:21
i1~i1
":-

:J~i"-~~ l~WiJ '~~llj

':J"':ti1-nN "n"fZ111 NJ-nan
T

T-

...

And the king said to Joab, "Behold now, 1 have done this
thing."

When David pronounces these words he has not yet had the
occasion to act according to Joab's proposals. One is tempted to
translate "I will do this thing." Perhaps the clause is to be
considered a performative,57 or perhaps the implication is like that
of the English expression "Consider it done."58

'9.,~~ "l)N;-n~;:t p~~-~~ t:l.v~~ '~~llj

Balaam said to Balak, "I have come to you now."

55 See also: Gen 18:27; 27:6; 37:9; 48:11; in other cases, the syntagm refers to
events that are more distant: Gen 16:2.
53 See
54

above, note 48.

This interpretation w~mld fit the other examples of this usage well; see
Isa 60:2; Jer 4:13; Zech 9:9; Ps 11:2; 59:8.

56 For the performative use of QATAL, see below p. 120 and in Chapter v!.
57 Note the NRSV: "Then the king said to Joab, 'Very well, 1 grant this'."
58 See Chapter VI on the perfect of confidence.

Varying Verbal Meanings

104

Reference time prior to speech time

In biblical narrative, the particle ilJil often serves to introduce
a fact perceived by the characters in the story. The clearest cases
are those where the ilJil clause is prepared by the verb ilN' "to
see." But the presence of the latter is not required. The functions of
QATAL are the same as in direct discourse except that the reference
time is determined by the point of view of the characters. The
QATAL form refers to processes that have just been accomplished:
...

..

.,':

il;rli~'"

105

In cases like this, the syntagm appears to function as a more vivid

equivalent of W AYYIQTOL. It expresses the preterite rather than
anteriority with regard to reference time. The origin of this usage
may perhaps be found in the oral narrative style. Indeed, several
occurrences are found in imbedded narration by a character of the
story:
2 Sam 14:7 ... ~'~N!!j 1(.10E?~-t,.l1 ilO~~~iJ-t,~ n9R n~;:t'
Now the whole family has risen against your servant.
They say ... 62

t:l~"iit,N il'il"t, cnNcon

nan, N'N'
t,lTS)'" t:l~~ on"~;
Then I saw that you had indeed sinn~d -ag~i~st "~he ~o~~
Deut 9: 16

Chapter 3

In any case, these instances seem to represent an extension of the

use of QATAL in narrative. 63

your God, by making for yourselves an image of a calf. 59

ilrr!b '~1 ,~~~ liQ~ nR~j

t,Jjij n~;:tl t,ORiJ 1ir-1-t,~ r1~j

NB. The "performative" function of QATAL is not attested in narrative contexts.

As it appears, this function is necessarily connected to speech time.

So Aaron took it as Moses had ordered, and ran into the

middle of the assembly, and 10 [Le., Aaron saw that] the
plague had already begun among the people.

Reference time subsequent to speech time

In the Levitical laws a number of cases are found where ilJil
introduces QATAL in a discourse with future reference:

Num 17:12 (16:47 NRSV)

t:l-Vf ~~~iJ

With adjectival verbs and verbs expressing activities of the inner

person, the process appears to be contemporaneous with reference
time:
ir-1~ ,~~ t:l-VO-t,~l t,1N~ PV.1~j
1 Sam 14:20
1ilS)'::l rd"N ::l,n nn"n nan, il~nt,~il-il1 1N::l!!'
.. ..:
. ....,' TIT ....
:~~ii~ -il~1il;

ikO

Then Saul and all the people who were with himT rallied and
went into the battle, and 10 [they saw] everyone's sword
was against his fellow; there was a very great confusion. 60

Once more, this reading arises from the "post-terminal" value of

QATAL: "the sword had begun to be and therefore was ... "
the useS-In narrafiV1istecf"InusIar, we find a small
number of examples where ilJil + QATAL seems to present an event
that is closely integrated into the narrative sequence:

'~~"~"--'=~--~~"~~~'~(Jveranoa15ove

nan,
t,~1~:-1~'~ ::l~~~~~'~

""9 N!!j

And look, a certain prophet came up to king Ahab of

Israel and said ... 61
59

n:f~ S)~~iJ n~~ n~;:tl il~11 FJ~iJ N~1

N'il

n'N~~ nS)'~

The priest shall go and make inspection; if ~he di~e~se h~~

spread in the house, it is a spreading leprous disease. 64

The reference time here reflects the point of view of the priest
carrying out his projected inspection. Otherwise the function of the
syntagm ilJil + QATAL remains the same: it expresses a process that
has just been accomplished.
Participle
The combination of ilJil with the predicative participle is almost as
frequent as that with QATAL. 65 Also, as with QATAL, the reference
time may be identical with, anterior to, or posterior to the time of
speech. The particle ilJi! always selects the sequence subject-

Wl\.j inN N"::lJ

1 Kgs 20:13

60

Lev 14:44

See also: Gen 8:13; 19:28; 22:13; Jos 8:20.

See also: Gen 22:13; Ex 34:30.

See also: 1 Kgs 13:1 (cf. verse 4 in the Septuagint); Ruth 2:4. For Gen 38:29;
2 Sam 13:36, see Chapter IV.
62 S
ee also: 2 Sam 1:6; 1 Kgs 20:39.
63 See further in Chapter VI.
64 Similarly Lev 13:5,8,13,17,25,32,34,36,53,55; 14:3,39,48.
65 Only clauses with a definite subject have been included in this section.
61

106

Varying Verbal Meanings

participle. 66 Throughout the variety of usages, the basic function of

expressing contemporaneousness with reference time remains clear.
Reference time equals speech time
In direct discourse, the primary function of the sequence subjectparticiple is to present processes really going on at the time10f
speech. This function is well attested for the participle in
combination with nJn:
1 Kgs 17: 12

) 4liTt .,~-~~-o~ '9"ijt,~ iqn;-"lJ '~NMj

nlJ~~~ 1~W-~l}9!J i~~ n~R-~;l Nt,9-0~ .,~
o"~.v. o:~~ n~~P9 "~~01

to the near future. 68 In a few cases, the reference to the future is

made explicit by means of an adverbial expression:
Ex 9: 18

Ex 14: 17 (10) o~T~".v.-n~ t,~1f?':-"~~ !JNf?'~j :J"l!?iJ nli1~!J

on",nN
O"'~O
... ..-: - liO~
-"
. - : . Mzn,
... ,
As Pharaoh drew near, the Israelites looked back, and
there were the Egyptians coming after them.

1 Sam 17:23

Gen 38: 13

,bNt, '~nt, in"'

In other passages, the syntagm nJn + participle in direct speech

refers to a process that is imminent (futurum instans):
Gen 6:17

rj~Q-t,l} o:~ t,!J~~iJ-n~ N":;~ "~~0 "~~j

For my part, I am going to bring a flood of waters over

the earth.

Although it is very frequent, this usage does not correspond to the

basic function of the predicative participle. In fact, what the
grammar implies is contemporaneousness with speech time: "I am
'il!ll
~i!j-~-~-""~'"-~---"--~'-ging:ll-1t1:s-tmly1:he-speeeh-sitttation~that"indicates the reference

nt,4li C":l:llM rzi"N nzn, OWli '~i~ N!Jn,

.~
.- .. - . ... 4:~it/ .,MiO~S~ n"t,;
:

4JN~ rl~ nQ~9l:1 n~~ 1~~O ni.~

Tamar was told, "Your father-in-law is going up to

Timnah to shear his sheep. "67
.

,"eooo ":l:ln

i: will ca;'~e ;he h~~vies't 'hail' i~

Reference time prior to speech time

In narrative, the use of nJn + participle is analogous to that of nJn
+ QATAL. It serves to introduce events from the point of view of
the characters. The events are invariably contemporaneous with
reference time ("historic present," see Chapter VII):

nothing baked, but only a handful of meal in a jar, and a

little oil in a jug; I am now gathering a couple of sticks,
then I will go home and prepare it for myself and my son,
and we will eat it and die."

ik~ i:J~ i'~ 'n~ nli~

Tomorrow at this time

fall. 69

!JJn~' !JnJt,:JN' "J:Jt" .,t,!Jn"n"flili' "nN:J!J

But she said, "As ~h; L~'~~ -:yo~~' God li~es', -j ha~e

i"I'

107

Chapter 3

.:.: -

T: T

As he talked with them,70 the champion, the Philistine,

Goliath by name, came up.71

Reference time posterior to speech time

In a handful of cases in direct discourse, MJn + participle refers to
future events not as imminent but, by virtue of the reference time,
as established in the context. The phenomenon is very similar to
that described in the preceding section (on the "historic present"):
the syntagm nJn + participle presents an event that will be
perceived by the characters of the projected situation in the future
("fictional present"):
1 Sam 10:8

'9.,~~ ij" ":;>~~ M~;:t1 t,~~~iJ ,,~~~ I;l-!1:1

And you shall go down to Gilgal ahead of me and 10 [you

will see] I am coming down to you.

At the end of a long predictive discourse describing in detail what

will befall Saul in the future, the participle clause hardly expresses
imminent future. It is better to view the syntagm nJn + participle
66

67

Amos 7:4 is not an exception, for mil here, as often, contains a virtual
expression of the third person pronoun. See J. Tropper, "Die hebraische
Partikel hinneh 'siehe!': Morphologische und syntaktische Probleme"
KUSATU 3 (2002), 81-121.
Other examples: Gen 24:13, 43; 27:42; 29:6; 42:22; 45:12; 48:1; Ex 5:16; Jud
9:31; 1 Sam 12:2; 14:11,33; 16:11; 23:1; 24:10; 2 Sam 16:3; 17:9; 19:2,9;
1 Kgs 1:25; 5:19; 11:22; 2 Kgs 17:26.

The imminent future use represents an extension of the basic present-tense

function, a development attested in many other languages.
69 See also: Ex 10:4; 1 Kgs 22:25.
70 Here the participle is used in a circumstantial clause; see Chapter IV.
71 For further examples, see Chapter VII.
68

108

Varying Verbal Meanings

as an expression of action contemporaneous with the reference

time in the future. 72

109

Chapter 3

narrative contexts.74 Typically, the syntagm introduces a new section

of the narrative:

tN

Deut 4:41

The temporal deictic adverb t~ "then" points to a moment situated

at some distance from speech time, in the past or future time
frames. From the temporal meaning, a logical meaning developed
which is found in apodoses to conditional clauses ("if... then ... ").
In its temporal meaning, t~ affects verbal forms in a way that is
entirely expected, except for one sizeable group of instances where
YIQTOL refers to past events. 73

w~~ i10"'1~~ i1"'1~ij '~.P.f

Then Moses set apart on the eastside of the Jordan three
cities ...

YIQTOL
In classical Hebre'Y prose, t~ + YIQTOL refers with almost equal

1 Kgs 3:16

TT:

1 Kgs 9: 11

2 Sam 5:24

i11lJ~ ~ip-n~ '9~9~:P "0'"

f1t7t1 T~ O"~~fij "W~lf

When you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the
balsam trees, then you shall be on the alert.
There is nothing in this usage to contradict the basic notion that
Past reference

o"tl~ "~~~ i1fj~~-n~ ~~~ ,i;-"I~~ ol""

i:;:Jn-~::l~ :li1T:li o"wi':l ":;l1:li

~"~?ij fl~f '''~ O"i~ '''Ol''~~ i1t;~~ "I~~ij: T~~-:r~

King Hiram of Tyre having supplied Solomon with cedar

and cypress, timber and gold, as much as he desired,
[then] King Solomon gave to Hiram twenty cities in the
land of Galilee. 76

Future reference

But any slave who has been pu~chas~d willT: be

circumcised: then he may eat of it.

-:--

But a few cases are found where the syntagm occurs within
a narrative sequence:

In future contexts, t~ + YIQTOL refers to events subsequent to, and

contingent upon, another future event:
='9f-n~i?~ w"~ '~.v-~~,
i:::l t,::lN" t~ ink i1rh~i

T:

Later, two women who were prostitutes came to the king

and stood before him. 75

frequency to past and future time frames. The temporal

interpretation is never in doubt, being sufficiently indicated in
every instance by the wider context.

Ex 12:44

"I~~ij-~~ nijf O"~~ O:(l~ i11N:l~ T~

'''j:J~ i1j,bl1M'

These uses of t~ + YIQTOL can be paralleled exactly with examples

of t~ + QATAL, as will be shown below.
The instances of t~ + YIQTOL referring to the past are difficult to
explain. As can be seen from the examples quoted, there is no
room for a durative or iterative interpretation. The YIQTOL form
refers to single complete events. Aspectually, the most straightforward reading is the perfective one. 77 It is equally impossible to
attribute a modal or prospective function to the verbal form. In
other words, t~ + YIQTOL referring to the past is neither
imperfective, nor present-future, nor modal. The syntagm is
incompatible with most approaches to the Hebrew verbal system,

In the entire biblical corpus, the syntagm t~ + YIQTOL refers to the

past twenty times (including the two cases of t~ + jussive in 1 Kgs
8: 1 = 2 Chr 5:2). Fifteen of these occur in CBH, all of them in
In Ps 126:2 and Job 38:21 this usage occurs in direct discourse, showing that
the limitation to narrative passages in CBH may be due to accident.
75 Also Ex 15:1; Num 21:17; Jos 8:30; 10:12; 22:1; 1 Kgs 8:1; 11:7; 16:21; 2 Kgs
12:18; 15:16; 16:5; 2 Chr 5:2; 21:10.
76 See also: 2 Kgs 8:22.
77 The Septuagint generally renders the YIQTOL form with an aorist.
74

72

73

See also: Ex 7:15; 8:16; Jud 9:33; 2 Chr 20:16.

The adverb never combines with WAYYIQTOL, probably because WAYYIQTOL
by itself contains a reference to the past.

#
110

Varying Verbal Meanings

including the one championed in the present work.78 Several

explanations have been essayed:
- Rabinowitz has drawn attention to the fact that the narrative
section introduced with t~ + YIQTOL is often not the chronological
sequel of what has been related just before. 79 The point of time
indicated by the adverb is situated somewhere within the preceding
narrative sequence. The rendering of t~ in these cases is not
"thereupon" but "this was when." Rabinowitz' observations are
accurate, but they do not explain-as he claims-the use of the
YIQTOL form. If t~ + YIQTOL implied some type of "backtracking"
or "flash-back,~~ one would expect the QATAL form to be used. 80
- A different angle is taken by those grammarians who wish to
view the problematic verbal form not as YIQTOL (*yaqtulu) but as
the short form (*yaqtul).81 If the verb were the short prefixed form,
the preterite meaning would be simply a trace of earlier usage. 82
The syntagm t~ + prefix conjugation would be a close analogue to
WAYYIQTOL. The problem with this approach is that it does not
accord with the facts. Although we find one case of the marked
short form among our examples (1 Kgs 8:1 = 2 Chr 5:2), there are
eight occurrences of a clearly marked long form (Ex 15:1; Num
21:17; Deut 4:41; Jos 8:30; 1 Kgs 11:7; 2 Kgs 12:18; 15:16; 16:5);
the remaining cases have non-distinctive forms. In grammatical
studies on a dead language it is reckless to disregard the line-up of
the data in favour of a preconceived theory.83
- The most common position is to see the preterite use of t~ +
YIQTOL as an archaism. The use of the long form of the prefix
conjugation to narrate single events is well attested in U garitic. 84
Perhaps, then, such a usage was known in proto-Hebrew as well.

The occurrences of t~ + YIQTOL in reference to the past might then

be regarded as vestigial. Even this view is not free from problems,
however. The precise function and import of the syntagm is not
explained. 85 Moreover, none of the passages where the syntagm is
found is obviously early, and some are decidedly late. 86
QATAL

In combination with QATAL, too, this adverb can refer to the future
or to the past. Unlike YIQTOL, however, the function of QATAL is
never problematic in t~ clauses; the anterior function is always
clear.
Future reference

Where t~ occurs in a future-tense context, QATAL naturally expresses

anteriority to reference time. In prose there is only one example of
such a construction:
2 Sam 5:24

O"~~~iJ "W.~1~ i11lJ~ t,ip-n~ 1~~~f "0'"

1"~~~ i1~i1; ~~~ ttt "~ r1q~ t~
o"MiVt,~
i1jn~::l
.
.. -: - ni:l?i1t,
:

.:

When you hear the sound of marching in the tops of the

balsam trees, then you shall be on the alert, for then the
LORD has gone out [i.e., will have gone out] before you to
strike down the army of the Philistines.

Past reference

In chapter II it was shown that QATAL regularly occurs with

a preterite meaning after an adverbial phrase of time. 87 It is no
surprise therefore to find QATAL with a preterite meaning after the
temporal adverb tR Like t~ + YIQTOL, we find t~ + QATAL introducing
a new narrative section:

imr~-~"'''''''~''''''''~''''''''''-'''''-''~""-"''''''''"""'''""''/lr"''5rl''''''ii1~el;asl"s~G;r"ulsa~:es""nroeilirs-;""iome""gramiiialfians have decided that the

Hebrew verbal forms express no precise function at all but need to be read
according to what is required by the context; see, e.g., Hughes, "Another
Look." The proposed solution is far too radical, however.
79 Rabinovitz, ,,:Jaz."
80 See Chapter VI.
81 Bauer, "Tempora," 27; Bergstrasser, Grammatik, 33-34; Schtile, "Deutung."
82 See above in Chapter II.
83 Some have thought that the long form could have been introduced by later
scribes who were no longer familiar with the use of the preterite short form
after t~ (Bergstrasser, Grammatik, 34). It is to be noted, however, that later
scribes faithfully preser.ved the short form in W AYYIQTOL, in most cases.
84 See Greenstein, "Form and Functions."

111

Chapter 3

1 Kgs 8: 12

t,~1~~ 1~~~ ,~~ i1~i1; i1fjt,~ ,~~ ttt

Then Solomon said, "The

dwell in thick darkness."

LORD

has said that he would

Rundgren has compared the use of YIQTOL in this syntagm to the French
impaifait de rupture, throwing into relief the point in time when an event
took place (A vingt-cinq ans, Racine entrait dans la gloire); see Rundgren,
"Emeuerung," 88-89. The suggestion is brilliant, but difficult to demonstrate.
86 This is underlined by Schtile, "Deutung."
87 See also Chapter VI.
85

112

Varying Verbal Meanings

The loose chronological connection with what precedes is attested

also, just as it is with t~ + YIQTOL:
Jos 10:33

rzj"~~-M~ 't~~ 't~ l~ti OlM

;,7.v t~

Then king Horam of Gezer came up to help Lachish.

What is recounted in this verse must have occurred before the

conquest of Lachish narrated in verse 32.88 The correct translation
of t~ is not "then" but "this was when."
In the light of these uses of t~ + QATAL, it becomes more of
a question why QATAL was not used in the preterite examples with
YIQTOL considered above.
With QATAL, the syntagm has a slightly wider range of functions,
however. It is relatively more frequent within a narrative sequence.
Moreover, it is found a few times with a sequential meaning which
seems to be unattested with t~ + YIQTOL:
Jud 13:21

;,kliJ7

il~il; 1~7~ ,il.' =,Q;-~"l

iMiV~-"~' n;,jD-"~

the reference time from the context, t~ seems redundant here. 90 If

this view is correct, it may explain the infrequency with which j~
and the participle co-occur.

",
The noun "l.' is most often used as an adverb expressing continuance
or repetition. Its use is not limited to anyone time frame. The
combination with YIQTOL and the participle once again shows the
functional difference between these categories: YIQTOL typically
refers to the future, while the participle represents the process as
actually ongoing at reference time.
YIQTOL

Deut 17: 13

Jud 20:28

At that time the army of the king of Babylon was

besieging Jerusalem.

Both these instances are structured as circumstantial clauses to

which the adverb has been added. Since circumstantial clauses take

Deut 18: 16

See also: 1 Kgs 22:50; in Ex 4:26 this usage is found within a narrative
passage.
.
89 Also Jud 8:3; 2 Sam 21:17.

"O"~ ;'~il; "iP-M~ ,pb~~ =,Ok ~"

M~~il- ;'''''~il rzj~;'-M~'

,il1 nN'N-~"
. . I.

: -

.. T

... :

I will not hear the voice of the LORD my God any more
nor see this great fire any more. 92

Even in this case, however, the expression is clearly turned toward

the future. The syntagm ~" + YIQTOL + "l.' never means "he is
not -ing anymore."
In one passage, the syntagm occurs in a past-tense context,
apparently with a prospective meaning: 93
The use of the adverb signals an intrusion of the narrator into his story: the
fact that the events happen "not now" is underlined.
91 See also: Lev 13:57; Deut 3:26; 2 Sam 19:30, 36.
92 See also: Gen 17:5; 32:29; Ex 9:29.
93 See also: 1 Sam 27:4 K.
90

88

,il1 'lQiNiJ

The adverb usually implies repetition, as in the preceding

examples. However, with durative verbs it may imply continuance:

rl~~ :J~" t~ "1j~iJl "~~~:PiJl

At that time the Canaanites and the Perizzites lived in the
land.
t~,

il907~~ M~~~

Shall we go out once more to battle ?91

Gen 13:7

""0

,il1 11'''~; ~"l 1~1:1 11.'~~: o.r;O-"~l

All the people will hear and be afraid, and will not act
presumptuously again.

The angel of the LORD did not appear again to Manoah

and his wife. Then Manoah realized that it was the angel
of the LORD.89

~'~~-~'~-~-~-~~~~~-~-~~~~~;~~O"j'~;~ l~ti

"11

In prose, the combination of

and YIQTOL is practically limited
to negative clauses and their syntactic equivalents (conditional and
interrogative clauses). The temporal reference is almost always to
the future:

~1il ;,~;,; 1~7~~"~ r:r";;9-l1i: t~

Participle
The adverb rarely combines with the participle. In the entire Bible,
only two instances occur. In both, the reference time is situated in
the past, and the participle expresses contemporaneousness:

113

Chapter 3

114

Varying Verbal Meanings

2 Sam 2:28

O.vi,J-~f 1i~.l1~j '~itN~ :l~i" 17R~~j

~~,~., "'n~ ii17 1!l~'''-~~'
on~n~ ii17 1~o~-~~i

T:

Joab sounded the trumpet; all the pe~pl~ ~tood still and
no longer pursued Israel. And they did not engage in
battle any further.

If the text is in order, the two clauses closing the verse need to be
given a different temporal interpretation. The first, with YIQTOL,
expresses the cessation of the pursuit from the reference point
linked to the moment when J oab sounded the trumpet. The second,
with QATAL, reports the end of war from the point of view of the
narrator.
QATAL

Almost all the cases of QATAL combined with i'17 are like the one
quoted above in 2 Sam 2:28. Theyexpress that something did not
happen again, or that it did not continue happening:
Jos 2: 11

1j1'

ii17 n~R-~~11J~~~ O~~j 17~~~j

O~"JS~ ~"~::l

As soon as we heard it, our hearts melted, and ~h~re w~~

no courage left in any of us because of you.

In one example, however, with a stative verb, QATAL occurs in

a positive clause and refers to the present:
1 Sam 16: 11

1~~~

noV i n~i)11~Rij ,~~ iil1

There remains yet the youngest, but he is keeping the

sheep.

Although the QATAL form refers to a present state, a notion of

anteriority is connected to it: all the other brothers have made their
HI)-~~----~---=-"-~~~E~m,~,me~~~w-o~4n~ffiine~est~~roililerisleft.

Participle
With the predicative participle, i'17 stresses the continuance of
a process. Reference time may be identical with speech time:
Ex 9: 17

OO~rQ "r:J~~~ "~.l1~ r,7.it1t?~ i1il1

You are still exalting yourself against my people, and will

not let them gO.94

94 See also: Job 2:3, 9.

115

Chapter 3

Or reference time may be situated before speech time:

l~~ij-o.v n~f ~r:r:n o~.v '~1~ 1.i1jil1

Gen 29:9

n":l~~ ,~~
While he was still speaking with them, Rachel came with
her father's sheep.95
T

T:

.: -:

Or reference time may be situated in the future:

1 Kgs 1:13-14

... ,.,~~ r;11~~1 ij1 1~~ij-~~ "~:l1 .,~~

~i:l~ "~~j 1~~ij-O.v O~ l"1j~1~ 11il1 n~i)

Go in at once to King David, and ~ay to him... Then

while you are still there speaking with the king, I will
come in. 96

The notion of continuance is extended in those examples, all

representing the same deuteronomistic formula, where repeated
action is meant:
1 Kgs 22:44 (43)

1'9-~~ ni~fij 1~
ni~f~ o"ltpR~1 o"J:'T~r~

cVO iil1

Yet the high places were not taken away; and the people
were still sacrificing and offering on the high places.

Conclusions
The study of temporal adverbs and particles in combination with
verbal forms confirms the distinct uses of YIQTOL and the
participle. YIQTOL almost always implies a nuance of futurity or
non-actuality: it is modal (expressing irrealis). The modal meaning
of YIQTOL is thrown into relief by the presence of particles like
nn17 or nJn which refer to the here and now. In contrast, the
predicative participle implies contemporaneousness with the reference
time expressed by the particles. Very often, a "progressive"
interpretation attaches to the participle: the event is ongoing at the
moment of reference.
The basic function of QATAL, too, is confrrmed. QATAL expresses
anteriority to the reference time. Even where the implication is one of
contemporaneousness, the basic function remains in evidence. With
"stative" verbs, the contemporaneous state results from a prior event,
while in performative expressions the present (or future) action is
95 See also: Gen 18:22; 1 Kgs 1:22,42; 2 Kgs 6:33; Job 1:16,17.
96 See also: Isa 65:24.

116

Varying Verbal Meanings

depicted as belonging to the immediate past. Only the cases of

"narrative" iTJiT + QATAL do not conform to the basic function.
These instances may illustrate the initial stages of a diachronic
development of QATAL, which is turning from a type of presentperfect into a simple preterite.
The use of iN + YIQTOL in past-tense contexts stands out as an
anomaly. None of the theories put forward to explain it is entirely
convincing.

Pragmatic factors
J. J. Austin, How to Do Things with Words (1962); Wagner, Sprechakte (1997).
Language does not exist in a vacuum but is embedded in human
society. The interaction between language and non-linguistic
factors has traditionally been neglected in linguistics, but during
the last fifty years or so, the issue has received considerable
attention under the general heading of "pragmatics". Questions
discussed are: Who is speaking (or writing)? To whom? On what
topic? To what purpose? Under what circumstances? And how do
all these variables influence linguistic expression?
Arguably, pragmatic factors are the most important of all in
the determination of verbal meaning (and of linguistic meaning in
general). Certainly, where a conflict arises, pragmatic factors are
capable of overriding all other factors. It would seem to be
important, therefore, to review some of the mechanisms involved.
At the same time, pragmatics is, once more, a very large and
complicated domain that cannot be exhaustively charted in this
book. The present section will do no more than to indicate a few
aspects of the question particularly relevant to the use and meaning
of the verbal forms.

Temporal shifts
In the approach followed in this book, the verbal forms of biblical
Hebrew have well-defined temporal implications. Although only
WAYYIQTOL positively expresses tense, the other forms most often
refer to one or other time frame as well. The default reading of
QATAL, for instance, is past: in the absence of indications to the
contrary, QATAL will refer to processes lying in the past time
frame. The default readi~g of the predicative participle is present,
that of YIQTOL/WEQATAL and the volitives is future. The verbal

Chapter 3

117

forms do not always conform to expectations, however. Even

without lexical or contextual indications they may refer to an
unexpected time frame-QATAL to the future, say, or YIQTOL to
the past. Such temporal shifts may be brought about by pragmatic
factors: when speaker and hearer know that the process belongs to
a given time frame, they will interpret the verb accordingly,
whatever form is used. A somewhat problematic example is the
following:
Jud 2: 1

'9N"j l:l"~!:ltr-~~ ~~~~tr-l~ iT4iT;-"1~~~ ~~:j

rl~O-~~ c~I;'l~ N"~~4 l:l~'j;;~~ l:l~I;'l~ iT~~~

l:l~"n!:lN~ "r-ll1:::liOJ ,iON

N ow the angel of the LORD went up fr~~" Gllgal ~~ ilo~hi~:
and said, "I brought you up from Egypt, and brought you
into the land that I had promised to your ancestors."

Normally a YIQTOL form in the opening clause of a speech

expresses a modal meaning. 97 At first blush the words of the angel
might therefore be interpreted: "I will [or I want to] bring you up
from Egypt.,,98 However, knowledge of the "real world" makes it
clear that the event referred to has already taken place.
Hearers/readers are forced, therefore, to adjust their understanding
of the verse, taking the YIQTOL form as a reference, however
untypical, to the past. 99
The case of the YIQTOL form in Jud 2: 1 is extreme inasmuch
as the meaning required by the speech situation more or less
completely "bleaches" the meaning expressed by the verbal form.

97 There are almost 700 cases in the books Genesis to 2 Kings where a direct
discourse begins with a clause containing a prefixed verbal form; in every
case the reference is to the future (or at least can be taken to refer to the
future). When the verbal form occurs in first position it often takes the form
of a volitive Gussive or cohortative) and usually expresses a volitive
meaning. See further Chapters VIII and IX. If the meaning intended was "I
brought you up" one would have expected QATAL; see Jud 6:8; 1 Sam 10:18.
98 See Ex 3: 17 o:j~~ '~v,~ o:?,~~ iT~~~ ,r;Nj "I said, 'I will bring you up out of
the misery of Egypt' ."
99 Perhaps the verse is meant to recall Ex 3: 17. The easiest solution would be to
suppose that a few words have fallen out, but no really elegant solution has
been proposed. On the grammatical level, all that can be said is, with David
Qimhi: 'iI1~:l O':::l" ,:::l11 O'p~:::l ,'nl1, "the writer used YIQTOL instead of QATAL,
and there are many other cases like this." For the many cases to which Qimhi
refers, see Chapter XII.

jC
118

Varying Verbal Meanings

It is far more common for the pragmatic context to affect the

meaning of the verbal form without transforming it entirely:

.,~~ N1i?: ,.,~~ "11'~ oi)~ '9Nll j
i"'~ '~~ir-~l1 ~n~ "J~' ir~~ir o"'~'ir-~~ n~
Baruch answ~;ed \h~m:- "He u;~d t~" dicta~; :~ll ;hes~

Jer 36: 18

Chapter 3

imminent future is so frequent that one is led to recognise it as

a subsidiary function of the subject-participle sequence.
Somewhat less conventionally but still rather frequently,
QATAL may be used to refer to processes not yet begun. The usage
is rather rare in conversation:

words to me while I wrote them with ink on the scroll."

As in the preceding example, the use of YIQTOL in the opening

clause of a discourse would normally be interpreted as referring to
the future. And as in the preceding example, knowledge of the
"real world" unambiguously indicates that the process belongs in
fact to the past. Unlike ir~P,~ in Jud 2: 1, however, YIQTOL hefe
does preserve its core function of expressing modality or nonactuality: ~li?: does not mean that Jeremiah did dictate, but that he
would dictate, i.e., that he dictated from time to time. YIQTOL is
used here, as it is frequently, to express the habitual past. More
precisely, we can say that the notion of pastness arises from the
pragmatic context, while YIQTOL expresses its normal function of
non-actuality. 100
In other words, although pragmatic factors are strong, they
rarely operate in an anarchic way. Usually, temporal shifts due to

Illii\
,\i::I;,'ii
:i:;II:I:,I,',:

:1;~: I: !i '
:;I:I'::I:i::I'

Num 17:27(12)

Gen 6: 13

:ii!,!l::I:P

.,~~~ ~~ '~~-~f YR

~W~~,~~~~,~~~~.~~~~~~---~-----------~O~~~~~)-Ci~OY'~O ir~~~-"~

y,~o-n~ 0t1.,r:t~~ "~~;:tl

I have determined to make an end of all flesh, for the

earth is filled with violence because of them; now I am
going to destroy them along with the earth.

There are no linguistic indications showing that the last. clause

refers to the future. The future reference is simply implied by the
speech situation. Nevertheless, the use in reference to the

1:1';~ 1J~f 1:1';~ 1:1~j~ FJ

While the QATAL forms express anteriority, the speech situation

makes it clear that the expiring and perishing of the speakers is not
yet over. This mode of speech is chosen here for emotional
reasons: although the Israelites have not yet all died, they feel so
menaced that it is to them as though they have perished. 101
A similar mode is employed, rather more often, by the
prophets when they represent future events as having already
happened:
2 Chr 20:37 CO~~iir;-~.l' ir~'~~ 1ir11i-l~ ,pr~~ ~~~~~j
1ir:~lj~roS; 11~lj~i)f 'b~~
1"~ p'~-n~

See also: Num 11:5; Jud 9:38; 1 Sam 21:12; 29:5.

ir1ir;

yj~

rzj"rC'M-~~ n:J~~ 1'~11 N~' nillJ~ 1'~~1I'

Then Eliezer son of 'D:~da~ah~ ':oTf M~;esha:h p~~:phe~i~d
against Jehoshaphat, saying: "Because you have joined
with Ahaziah, the LORD will destroy [lit. has destroyed]
what you have made." And the ships were wrecked and
were not able to go to Tarshish.

The narrative context shows that the event announced by the

prophet has not yet been realised. Nevertheless, it is expressed by
QATAL as if it were already past. The use of QATAL in prophecies
probably connotes certainty as to the happening of the event:
although it still lies in the future, it is as certain as if it were
already a fact. Similar examples are met with in the prophetic
books, although the lack of context often makes it difficult to
distinguish the "prophetic perfect" from the mere description of
past events. 102

For other examples, see Chapter VI.

102 See further on the "prophetic perfect" in Chapter VI.

101
100

'b~~ ir~b-~~ ~~lt?': .,~~ 1'~Nllj

The Israelites said to Moses: "We are finished; we are

lost; all of us are lost."

~;:r~~~::~;~i;:e~~;:;;:f:lE~!~:~~~~:~:0-~

subject-participle in principle expresses a process going on at the

reference time. In direct speech, however, many examples exist
where the process referred to obviously has not yet begun. The
clause is then regularly interpreted as referring to the future:

119

II
Varying Verbal Meanings

120

Performative QAT AL
Rogland, Non-Past Uses (2003), 115-126.

A very specific pragmatic function occurs where an act is executed

through words. What is expressed by the verb is effected by
pronouncing it:
Gen 23: 11

1~ "1:IO~ iil~iJ "~~i?rJ! .,~,~-~t,

rr"1:IO~ 1~ ;~-,~~ ii1~rpiJ1

1~ V"I:lO~ "iP~-"~~ .,~.,~~

No, my LORD, hear me; I give you the field, and I give
you the cave that is in it; in the presence of my people I
give it to you.

The giving of the field is effected by the words "I give the field"; the
speech and the act coincide exactly. Similar expressions have been
termed "performative" in general linguistics. As has been remarked,
the performative quality of a clause heavily depends on external
conditions (quaintly termed "felicity conditions"). Thus, in the
present instance, the giving of a field can only come about if the one
who pronounces the words is the lawful owner, if giving it away is
legal, if the receiver is qualified to become the new owner, etc. At
the same time, the performative has a grammatical side: most
languages select one specific verbal form for expressing it. In CBH,
the performative is systematically expressed by the QATAL form.
Performative QATAL may seem to pose a problem to the
approach of this book, where QATAL is viewed as an expression of
anteriority. Indeed, expressions like "I give (hereby)" are not
anterior but, if anything, contemporaneous with the reference time.
The problem is more apparent than real. Indeed, the dominance of
pragmatic factors in the performative use of QATAL should be
,~~<,~~u<~~_laken intQ. ,~coun!~ the feature ~SlfJ~g1!~!!!l?2!.(;lne211sness does not
flow from the use of QATAL but from the speech situation. In
contexts where the felicity conditions for performative expressions
are not met, a form like "r;10~ will express anteriority as expected. 103
Admittedly, the reason why biblical Hebrew uses QATAL in
performative expressions, and not, say, the participle, is not
obvious. Perhaps the use of QATAL in Hebrew was meant to lend
performative expressions a nuance of certainty. The easy answer,

103 See, e.g., Gen 16:5; 27:37; 30:18; 35:12.

Chapter 3

121

however, is to say that the use of QATAL here is conventional:

whatever the origin of the usage, on the synchronic level it is
simply the way biblical Hebrew expresses the function in
question. 104
Volitives and politeness
Longacre, Joseph (1989), 119-136; Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996);
Warren, Modality (1998).

Express.ions of the ~.ill, whether in dialogue, prayer, or soliloquy,

are partIcularly senSItIve to pragmatic factors. The status and power
of the speaker, the relative status of the addressee, the nature of the
process. as w~ll as the general circumstances influence the linguistic
~xpre~sIon gIven to wishes. The cohortative will express the
IntentIon to act when the speaker is able (Ex 3:3), but a request for
help or ~ermission when he is not (Num 20:7). The imperative may
be used In a co~and (Gen 12: 19), request (Gen 23:4), invitation
(Gen 18:4), permission (Gen 23:6), concession (Gen 47:19), blessing
(Gen 24:60) or prediction (Gen 42:16), all depending on the speech
situation. The jussive may express a command (Gen 1:3),
recommendation (Gen 41:33), or mere wish (Gen 31:49), according
to the authority of the speaker. 105
The use of volitives in hortatory discourse submits to subtle
rules of politeness that have been insufficiently researched and are
~herefor~ o~ly partially understood. An inferior speaker may use an
ImperatIve In order to make a request of his superior,106 but unless
it is mitigated it will usually connote some measure of callousness
. .
'
anImOSIty, anger, or despair on the part of the speaker:
Ex 10:7

,.,t,N ii17,5j "i:1l1 1'~~!!'

o"rQ~~V-n~ n~rg rvP.;~~1J~ iii~: -"O~'-i~

nt

Pharaoh's officials said to him, "How long shall this

fellow be a snare to us? Let the people go."

G~nerallinguist.i~ studies have made it clear that, while languages usually set
aSIde one speCIfIC form for performative use, cross-linguistically different
~or~s .may be selected: present or perfect, perfective or imperfective,
105 mdicatIve or modal. See Rogland, Non-Past Uses.
See Chapter IX.
106 Acco~ding to Shulma!l' gramm~tical ~ndications show that God and the king
ar~ VIewed as supenor to theIr subjects, and fathers are superior to their
chIldren; husbands are not superior to their wives, however.
104

=
Varying Verbal Meanings

122

The use of the bare imperative in a speech by the courtiers to

107
Pharaoh shows the exasperation of the speakers.
Mitigation of the request can be effected by several means,
alone or in combination: phrases like "my LORD" or "your servant,"
formulas like "if I have found favour in your eyes," use of the third
person jussive instead of the imperative. It is also possible to tone
down the imperative with the help of the particle N~:
Gen 37:32

N:J-j:l:)M 1jN~~ nNi 1j~Nlll

T

NS:O~

N'; '9~~ n~~fjJ

And they said, ~~This we have found; see now whether it

is your son's robe or not."

Whether this means N~ is equivalent to English "please" is still

debated. Since Nj is used also, although rarely, in monologues/os it
is probably bette; to give it a different function. The particle appears
to contribute to the speaker-centred nature of what is requested,
indicating that what he or she desires is in the way of a personal
favour. As an expression of speaker-centredness, N~ attenuates the
directive force of imperatives and other volitive forms.
When the speaker is superior, the use of the unmitigated
imperative does not necessarily connote harshness or emotionality.
It lies in the nature of superiors to issue peremptory commands:
2 Sam 11:6

::lNi,,-Z,N

i"

123

Chapter 3

NB. The lengthened imperative, with the ending i1 has much more tenuous
links with mitigation and politeness. The form primarily modifies the semantics
of the verb by adding a notion of movement toward the speaker. 109
T -,

1 Sam 23 :27
rl~jTt,.!l o'r:J~~~ 1~~~-'~ iI~~1 il1Q~ 'b~~ t,1~~-t,~ ~f 1~7~1
Then a messenger came to Saul, saying, "Hurry and come; for the
Philistines have made a raid on the land." 110
The nuance added by the long form of the imperative has nothing to do with
politeness. The form is used simply to indicate that the requested hurrying and
going should happen in the direction of the speaker and the group he represents.

Conclusions
Lexical, contextual and pragmatic factors can be distinguished on
the theoretical level. On the practical level, they are most often
enmeshed to an extent that makes it difficult to be sure which
factor exerts the decisive influence in the creation of verbal
meaning. The present chapter is an attempt to spell out some
general guidelines as to what kind of forces affect verbal meanings
and what type of results may be expected.

ll
MZ,rd ,

Mll~1N-nN ,,'~N n~~

So David sent word to J oab, "Send ~-e U~iah th~ I-ii~tit;.'~
"MMM

However, a superior may soften his commands in different ways,

including the use of the particle N~:
~~

_ _ _ _ _ __

Gen 27:21

w_~w~~

"~~ '9~~~1 N~-M~~ ::l~P,:-z,~ PO~: j~Nlll

---qJhen-lsftae-~~0-Jae0hr::Come.near,

___
. .

.that I may feel

you, my son. "

In none of these examples is the basic function of the volitive forms

altered. They express processes willed by the speaker. From this
basic meaning, however, they acquire a remarkable range of nuances
depending on the situation in which they are made to function.
Other examples (Shulman, Modal Verb Forms, 49-51): Gen 34:4; Jud 14:2,3
(youthful disregard f~r etiquette); Gen 27:34; 1 Kgs 19:4 (despair); 1 Sam
6:2 (urgency); Ex 17:2 (animosity).
lOS See Gen 18:21; Ex 3:3; 2 Sam 14:15.

107

109
110

This function has been independently discovered by Fassberg (Studies) and

Shulman. For a different interpretation, see Kaufman, "Emphatic Plea."
See also: Gen 39:12; Num 11:13; Jud 9:29; 2 Kgs 1:9,11.

CHAPTER IV
INTER-CLAUSAL RELATIONS
A particular type of contextual determination is that which is exerted
by one clause on another. In a way, of course, all clauses in a given
text influence one another. A number of specific constructions exist,
however, where clauses interact in a specific way. Some of these
merit review since they imply some unexpected modifications of
verbal meanings.

Circumstantial 'clauses and simultaneous action

In biblical Hebrew narrative, different means may be used to
indicate an interruption of the flow of events, where the narrator
looks back' or forward along the time line, or adds another
dimension to the description of a given scene. The most interesting
are those where no particle or adverb is used. Word order and the
use of specific verbal forms suffice to indicate a deviation from the
time line.
The circumstantial clause
Driver, Treatise (1892\ 195-211; Kuhr, Ausdrucksmittel (1929), 13-40; Andersen,
Sentence (1974), 77-91.

For the description of circumstances attending the main events

recounted within a discourse, biblical Hebrew may employ
a peculiar type of subordinate clause not marked by any specific
conjunction. The existence of circumstantial clauses as a special


Inter-Clausal Relations

126

!he~

the king said, "This one says, ~This is my son that

ahve, a~d your son is dead,' and that one says, ~Not so!
Your son IS dead and my son is the living one'."5

category is recognized by most grammarians. But the syntactic

definition of such clauses is not always precise. Partly this is due
to the nature of the phenomenon. In the absence of a particle or
conjunction, the subordinate character of the circumstantial clause
is not always self-evident. An element of definition is that
circumstantial clauses exhibit the order subject-verb without
exception, the subject being realized as a noun phrase or as
a pronoun. The order subject-verb, although a necessary condition,
is not a sufficient one, however: the same order may be found in
clauses that are not circumstantial. The circumstantial clause is
often, though not always, introduced by the conjunction waw.
In the present section, the term circumstantial clause will be
restricted to clauses having a verbal predicate, whether the
participle or QATAL; a few uncertain cases with YIQTOL will also
be discussed. 2
Circumstantial clauses occur in past-, present- and future-tense
discourse. Circumstantial clauses in predictive discourse are rare,
however.3 As to present-tense contexts, it is sometimes difficult to
be certain that a circumstantial clause, rather than a main clause, is
meant:
2 Sam 7:2

~~ il~i ~"~~ij 10~-t,~ l~~ij '9 Nll j

1:l.,t'~ n"::l::ll ::lrz.;;" .,~~~
ilS;"j;ij l;n~' ~~~ 1:l'~;jt,~O li~~Tj

IS

Here, the two participle clauses refer to contemporaneous processes

that are equally important. The second clause does not describe
a circumstance with regard to the first.
There are no obvious markers telling us that a circumstantial
clause is meant in the first example and an independent clause in the
sec?nd. In fact, it is only the content of the clauses that helps us to
decide between these alternatives. In what follows, the discussion
will be limited to narrative texts, where the circumstantial clause is
best repre~ented, and where it can be straightforwardly identified.
Clauses with a participle, with QATAL, and with YIQTOL will be
treated separately.

Participle
In ~arrative, ~ircumstantial clauses w'ith a participial predicate are
easlly recognized. Indeed, leaving aside relative and causal clauses
and the historic present-all clearly marked with a particle-the
p~edicative . participle har~ly occurs ~n narrative except in the
clfcumstantlal clause. 6 TypIcally, the clfcumstantial clause follows
the narrative clause to which it is subordinate:
Deut 4:11

The king said to the prophet N athan, ~~See now, I am living

in a house of cedar, but the ark of God stays in a tent."

~"-"-_'~

_ _"4'__

In this example it makes good sense to take the second participle

clause as circumstantial: "I am living in a house, while the ark is
staying in a tent."4 The second statement is presented as the
,_"_,=,~_w,l:~elffiFep4e_t~,,fj+sLllUhe.following,example, however, it is more
plausible to find two contrastive main clauses:
1 Kgs 2:23

n19 k nNt l~~ij '9 Nll j

nrpij 1~~1 "lJij "~~-ilt
"Oij "~~1 nrpij l~~ .,~ Nt, nj9 k nNtj

156; JM 159.
2 For the non-verbal circumstantial clause, see Andersen, Verbless Clause.
3 See, e.g., 1 Kgs 14:5; 2 Kgs 5:18.
4 It is also possible to regard the noun at the beginning of the second clause as
a marked topic; see Chapter x.
1

GKC

127

Chapter 4

11::liRr;1j
1:l:~~ij ::l~-i~ rz.;~f '.v.z 'O;::q
'00 nlJt1

l1i~~t1j

You approached and stood at the foot of the mountain

while the mountain was blazing up to the very heavens. 7

In temporal-aspectual terms, the use of the participle implies that

the mountain was blazing before the Israelites approached and that

~ See also: .Ju~ 18:9; ~ ~am 23:1; 2 Sam 15:20; 1 Kgs 22:3; 2 Kgs 2:19; 7:9.
The predicatlve partICIple occurs in narrative, in relative and causal clauses, but
these are very close to the circumstantial clause in their function. In a main
clause in narrative, the predicative participle is rare. The only cases in the CBH
co~us are: Gen.3~:3, 23; Deut 4:1.2; 5:5; Jos 2:15; 1 Sam 18:16; 1 Kgs 3:3; 5:1;
10.25. In late bIbhcal Hebrew, this type of syntax is much better represented'

~a~n

'

See also: Gen 14:12,13; 18:1,8; 24:62; 25:26; Deut 4:11; 5:23; 9:15; Jos 8:3233; Jud 3:20; 4:2; 7:12; 10:1; 13:9; 16:12; 17:7; 18:15-16, 17; 1 Sam 1:9;
22:6; 26:3, 5, 5; 29:1; 2 Sam 4:5,7; 11:1,4; 13:8; 18:9; 23:13; 1 Kgs 8:14;
11:29; 13:1,28; 16:15; 2 Kgs 2:18; 8:7; 22:14.

'''10~

'''~~j-t,l}1 ,.,,:-t,l} lQ~;" t,l}:1

,",nN ,.,t,~ NfDj,
noi~~ '''7~ Nfl! j11~~i~ "'-~~ 1t,~~1

Then Jonathan climbed up on his hands and feet, with

his armour-bearer following after him. And the Philistines
fell before Jonathan, while his armour-bearer killed them
off after him.!l

Although the killing off of the wounded enemies is a dynamic

event, in the present context it is relegated to the background. The
Philistines' falling before Jonathan and the armour-bearer's finishing
them off after him are presented as figure and ground respectively.
Although logically it makes no sense to suppose the killing off was
already going on before the falling, the grammar in this verse also
implies inclusion of the reference time in the event time of the
circumstantial clause. In narrative terms this probably means
something like "they had barely hit the ground when the armourbearer was already killing them off."
Less frequently, the circumstantial clause precedes the
preterite clause to which it is attached:

T.

-:

;~:J~

N1i1" nli)~-nN N''''

In Jezreel, standing on the tower the se~ti~el'spi~d th-~
company of Jehu arriving.

1 Sam 6:13

P~~f O"~1)-'''~i? C"i~P ~~tg n";'i

l;'~o-n~ 1Ni~1 Oij",-"~-n~ 1Ntq~1

N ow the people of Beth-shemesh were r~api~g their ~he~t

harvest in the valley. They looked up and saw the ark. l2
Th~ temporal-a~pectual

and the text-linguistic (pragmatic) impliof ~he cIrcumstantial clause remain essentially the same as
In the prevIous examples: the event time of the participle includes
t~e reference time of the following W AYYIQTOL, and the
cIrcumstantial clause sets the scene for the main events.
When the circumstantial clause comes before the main clause
it may itself be preceded by "0;1 "and it happened." The function of
this introd.uctory "0;1. is purely grammatical. It serves to integrate
the follOWIng clause Into the narrative sequence: 13
~at1ons

lQ~~iJ-t,~ o.,~~.; OiJ "0:1

N"~niJ-t,~ i1'i1"-':J1 "i1~'
As they were sitting at the table, thTe w~rd ~f: th~ ~o~~

1 Kgs 13:20

came to the prophet.I 4

'~'1 lit,o O"~~M i1~iJ "0;J

~~ "~10' ~N-:J~' i1ni1'
As they were walking and talking, 10 there: w~'s a "~ha~i~~
2 Kgs 2: 11

of fire and horses of fire.I 5

12

one ofi.nclusion: Gen 14:12;

Occasionally the temporal relation not
cases, there is a slight
1 Kgs 8:62; 10:1; and see 2 Sam 3:31. In
mismatch between grammar and intended meaning.
9 In a few passages what is recounted in the circumstantial clause is an important
link in the narrative sequence, but this, again, reflects a discrepancy between
form and meaning. See, e.g., the remarks on the circumstantial clause in
2 Sam 12:1 in Sternberg, Poetics, 193-196.
10 Verbs of perception and emotion: Gen 18:10; 24:20-21; 25:28; 27:4-5; Jud
13:19, 20; 1 Sam 1:12; 18:15-16; 1 Kgs 10:1; 2 Kgs 2:11-12; verbs of
movement: Gen 18:16; Jos 3:17; 1 Sam 6:12; 2 Sam 3:31; 16:13; 2 Kgs 6:30.
11 See also: Gen 30:36; 32:32; Jud 6:11; 20:33, 42; 1 Sam 18:10; 2 Sam 6:3;
20:15; 1 Kgs 1:15,40; 3':26; 15:27; 19:19; 20:12, 16; 22:20; 2 Kgs 11:3; 15:5;
17:31; 24:11.

t,N.;rn:~ t,1~~iJ-t,l} '~.b i1)~i1'

2 Kgs 9: 17

it continued to do so when they had taken their stand at its foot.

The reference time provided by the W AYYIQTOL forms is included
in the event time of the participle clause. In pragmatic terms, the
circumstantial clause sets out the background to W AYYIQTOL' s
foreground. 9
The verb of the circumstantial clause often expresses state or
position. Verbs of perception and verbs of movement are also well
attested, however.lO And dynamic verbs occur as well:
1 Sam 14: 13

129

Chapter 4

Inter-Clausal Relations

128

13

14

15

Other examples of a circumstantial clause preceding the main clause: Gen

23:10; Jos 4:10; Jud 20:28; 2 Sam 18:24; 20:12; 1 Kgs 1:5; 13:11; 2 Kgs
2:23; 4:38; 6:32.
On. the textual level, this device may signal the transition to a new narrative
umt.
In the MT, the c~rcumstantial clause is followed by a petucha signalling
a pause. The preCIse nuance intended by this combination is hard to grasp.
Other examples of subordinate clauses introduced by ~i):J and followed by
apetucha are found in Jos 4:1; Ezek 3:16. In Ex 6:28; NUnl 25:19; Deut 2:16;
1 Kgs 9:1; Jer 43:1, the combination of ~i);J + subordinate clause is followed
by soph pasuq and petucha or setuma.
See also: Gen 42:35; 1 Sam 7:10; 23:26; 2 Sam 15:32; 1 Kgs 13:20; 20:39,
40; 2 Kgs 2:11; 6:26; 8:5; 13:21; 19:37; Isa 37:38. See also: 1 Sam 25:20;
2 Sam 6:16 where the MT has it~ii1 instead of ~i);J (Driver, Notes, 199,270).

a
130

Inter-Clausal Relations

Chapter 4

In the latter example, the main event is recounted in a presentative

i1Ji1 clause (historic present), expressing what Elijah and Elisha saw.
In outline, these are the main uses of the circumstantial clause
with a participial predicate. Passages may be found that show
a more complex picture: a temporal adverb may be added to the
circumstantial clause; 16 several circumstantial clauses may be
combined;17 or a circumstantial clause may be combined with other
temporal clauses. 18 But the basic structure and function of the
circumstantial participle clause remains the same: it implies
contemporaneousness (event time including reference time) and
backgrounding.

QATAL

Circumstantial clauses with QATAL as predicate are harder to

identify, even in narrative. As was shown above in Chapter II,
QATAL has several other functions in narrative texts. Notably,
QATAL replaces WAYYIQTOL when the verb cannot take the first
position in the clause. QATAL is used also when the author adds
a comment from his own point of view. In both these functions, the
sequence we + subject + QATAL is possible. 20 Only the meaning of
the clause, and the way it is integrated into the context, can tell
whether a circumstantial clause is meant. This does not put the
existence of circumstantial QATAL clauses in doubt, however.
Many clauses of the form we + subject + QATAL have a contextual
meaning that is very much like that of the we + subject + participle
clauses reviewed above. Only the temporal-aspectual interpretation
of the verb changes:

NB. In narrative, mil clauses should be kept distinct from circumstantial clauses.
While both types show the "inclusive aspect" (event time including reference
time), the latter implies backgrounded processes while the former is typically
used to highlight a new event:
Deut 4: 11

'vv MOI.:l 11'~.!lI.:lj p::l"lj?I:n

1 Kgs 1:41

Ex 3:2

iI~t?jJ 1;r-1~ td~-M~~~ '~7~ iljil~ 1~7~ ~Tj

td~~ ,~~ iI~tpjJ iI~;:t1 ~"l:j

There the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire

out of a bush; he looked, and the bush was blazing.

In this example, too, the blazing of the bush started before Moses' approaching
to receive God's revelation, and it continues afterwards. The event time of the
participial clause includes the reference time. Yet here the burning of the bush is
~~-""----'-"'~'"--"'""'""~''';:n"-o-t'':"'b~a~c;"7k'"-g'ro'-"-u'-n-"~e-'~-.lfls"presen:teaUom'1lre"puil1t'of"Viewof Moses as' a highly

The temporal value of QATAL in the second clause is that of

anteriority: when Adonijah and his guests hear the acclamations of
Solomon, they have already finished eating. In other respects, the
function of the clause is very similar to that of circumstantial
clauses with a participle. It sets the background for the main event
described with a WAYYIQTOL form.
In spite of its similar meaning, the distribution of circumstantial
QATAL clauses is different from that of participle clauses. By far the
most common position is before the main clause. A few examples
occur in parallel with other circumstantial or temporal clauses and
are easily recognized:

remarkable fact. Therefore, in spite of the temporal-aspectual similarity

("inclusive aspect"), the two usages should not be confused. In Deut 4:11, we
have a circumstantial clause, in Ex 3:2 a historic present. 19

Gen 24:1

O"~~~ N~

IPt Oy1~~i

~~~ Oy1~~-1"1~ '''J~ n,n"j

16 With T~, see Gen 13:7; with

,,11, Gen 18:22; 29:9; 1 Kgs 1:42; 22:44; 2 Kgs

6:33; 12:4; 14:4; 15:4,35; with a temporal phrase, Jud 9:45; 14:4; 18:1.
17 See Jos 6:9, 13; 1 Sam 19:9; 29:2; 2 Sam 3:1; 6:4-5, 14-15; 15:18, 23, 30;
1 Kgs 6:27; 10:24-25; 13:24; 22:10; 2 Kgs 4:5.
18 See, e.g., 1 Sam 3:1-3 . .
19 A circumstantial clause and an historic present may occur in the same verse:

ir-1~ 'W~ O"~~fPjj-~~i ~1i1~~'~ 17~~~j

~~N~ 1~::J en,

Adonijah and all the guests who were with hi~ he~rd 'i~
as they had finished feasting. 21

o:~ijJ ::l,-'.!l td~~ ,~~ '001

You approached and stood at the foot of the mountain while
the mountain was blazing up to the very heavens.

In this example, already quoted above, the burning of the mountain is

backgrounded. It sets the scene for the Israelites' approaching and standing at
the foot of Horeb to hear the words of God.

131

20

21

1 Sam 25:20; 2 Kgs 8:5.

Examples with a topicalized subject occur in Gen 13:12; 45:14; 1 Sam 14:46;
15:34; examples of authorial comments with S-V word order are found in
Num 21:26; 1 Sam 18:17, 25.
See also: Ex 17:10; Num 17:15 (quoted in Chapter.n, p. 46); 1 Sam 1:5; 4:1,
and perhaps 2 Sam 4:6 (but see Driver, Notes, 255).

Inter-Clausal Relations

132

N ow Abraham was old, well advanced in years; and the

LORD had blessed Abraham in all things.

Here the circumstantial QATAL clause continues an adjectival

clause. 22
But an initial circum&tantial clause may also occur alone,
expressing a preliminary process leading up to the main events:

Gen 4: 1

n~-n~ i~tlj

,ij(1j

;r-l~~ iI~lJ-n~ 17~~

011$01

Now the man knew his, wife Eve, and she conceIved and
bore Cain.

1 Sam 19: 18

ilr;J7?10 t,~1~~-t,~ ~:J~j ~~i?~j n,~ i111

Now David fled and escaped, and came to Samuel at

Ramah. 23

If one wished to stress that the initial clauses are circumstantial,

one might translate: "when the man had 'known' his wife, she
conceived" and "having fled, David escaped and came to Samuel."
Temporally, the clauses imply anteriority with regard to the
reference time established by the main clause: the "knowing" comes
before the conceiving, and the fleeing before the escaping. At the
same time, the initial clauses are backgrounded; they set the scene
for the following main events.
In some examples, circumstantial QATAL clauses refer to
a time prior not only to the nearest narrative clause, but to ,the
whole time-frame implied by the narrative. In these cases, QATAL
must be rendered by a pluperfect in English:

Gen 31 :33-34
:'1::\

,':Ii

133

In this case, Rachel's actions are anterior to both Laban's entering

her tent and his searching. It is false, however, to state that QATAL
in circumstantial clauses always implies anteriority to the time
frame of the narrative. They express anteriority only with regard to
the clause to which they are attached. 24 In the majority of
examples, a verse-initial circumstantial clause is not anterior with
regard to the preceding narrative clause. 25
This type of syntax is used very often at the beginning (more rarely
at the, end) of a narrative section. 26 Some grammarians have even
thought that the delimitation of narrative units is the primary
function of we + subject + QATAL clauses. The latter approach runs
the risk of missing the anterior and backgrounding implications
of the construction. Moreover, similar clauses do occur within
a narrative section. 27 Nevertheless, the observation that circumstantial QATAL clauses tend to mark the beginning of a narrative
section is accurate. In fact, it is natural that a new section should
begin with an amount of background material, however minimal.
YIQTOL
Circumstantial clauses with a YIQTOL form as predicate are
extremely rare in biblical prose. The dearth of circumstantial
YIQTOL clauses seems to be connected to YIQTOL's inability to
express attendant circumstances. 28 The very few possible examples
may express a prospective function:

1 Sam 13:17-18

t,1j1 t,Qk:P r~7 ~:J~j

o"~1~ij-n~ MOi?7 t,011
Oil"t,17 :Jrt1r-l, t,~nij ,~~ O~~r:1j

. , ., Mjn~~
. -: -. n"nrt1~M ~~~,

O"r-lrt1t,!j

o,,~~i -MrzjS~

t,~1rt1 rj~-t,~ M1~~ 1j'-t,~ M~~: ;O~T rz.;~,~

~~Ft '~~1-:t,Q'ko--t,~~n~ 1~~ rt1~6;j

1(,::11
1

Chapter 4

P"-~"-~"-'--'~~"--"~-4,.-w---'.-~..w~~'~o-t;!rlmn-went;7-into*aehePs tent."" And Rachel had

.1

taken the household gods and put them in the camel's

saddle, and sat on them. Laban felt all about the tent,
but did not find them.

22
23

See also: 2 Sam 7:1; 19:33.

Other examples: Gen 4:1; 7:19; 24:1; 25:34; 31:19, 34; 33:3; 34:27; Num
11:4; 12:10; Jud 3:19, 26; 16:31; 18:27; 1 Sam 1:5; 4:1, 18; 13:16; 14:47;
19:10, 18; 24:8; 25:37;.28:3; 29:11; 30:1; 2 Sam 2:24; 7:1; 16:1; 19:9, 16,32,
33,41; 1 Kgs 1:41; 2:32; 19:4; 2 Kgs 3:22; 5:25.

In general this means the clause with which they are combined within the
verse, although occasionally the verse division of the Masoretes is open to
question.
25 Pace Zevit, Anterior Construction.
26 See Eskhult, Studies, 45-57.
27 In Ex 9:23; 10:13 the circumstantial clause occurs in the middle of a verse,
probably due to theological scruple. The use of WA YYIQTOL might have
suggested that Moses' lifting up of his staff led to YHWH's actions against the
Egyptians. The use of the s-v word order creates a small break in the
narrative sequence: "Moses stretched out his staff toward heaven. And when
the LORD had sent thunder and hail, fire came down ... " It is also possible to
attribute the s-v order to topicalization of the subject (see Chapter x).
28 See above in Chapter II, pp. 62-64.
24


Inter-Clausal Relations

134

j4,n n"~

111 M~~: ,r:t~ tDNi;:Tl

S1::l~iJ 111 M~~: ,r:t~ tDNiOl

i11~iiPiJ c"ll:JiJ "r~4l ='lR~~iJ

And raiders came out of the camp of the Philistines in three

companies, one company turned toward Ophrah, to the land
of Shuai, another company turned toward Beth-horon, and
another company turned toward the mountain that looks
down upon the valley of Zeboim toward the wilderness.

When the Philistine troops come out of the camp their splitting up
and marching in three different directions still1ies in the immediate
future. It appears that it is this prospective nuance that is expressed
by the remarkable syntax: "they came out... each company being
about to tum in its own direction."
2 Sam 15:37

,"11i1 " , i111, "iC1n N::lll,

. TC~~~'"
.~:"T -c"tD:u~i
-T:
T:-:

SO Hushai, David's friend, came into the city, just as

Absalom was about to enter Jerusalem.

Here, too, the prospective interpretation makes good sense. For

David's ploy to work it was indeed necessary that Hushai should
be back in Jerusalem before Absalom's return. Moreover,
Absalom's actual entrance is recounted a little further on in the
story, in 2 Sam 16:15.
Isa 6:4

Nj,4PiJ ~4p~ C"~~iJ n4~~ 111~~1

j~~ N~~: n:~li:q

The pivots on the thresholds shook at the voices of those

who called, and the house filled with smoke.

A prospective reading in these examples is contextually feasible.

Moreover, such a reading agrees with the general function of the
'---.~-"--"-N-~'"~~'~IQ:r~fQ~_a)}'LwitlUhe-way.jLisusedjnpast ~tense contexts in
particular. 29

Expressions of simultaneity
Driver, Treatise (18923), 165-169; JM (20062), 166 c-h.

The circumstantial clause is a valuable tool for the biblical narrator

because it allows him to give depth to the story. While the WAYYIQTOL
form, the mainstay of biblical narrative, generally implies succession,

135

Chapter 4

circumstantial clauses dwell on processes or states that are not simply

links in the chain of events. The participle, especially, creates an oasis
of contemporaneousness in the barrenness of sequential action:
Jud 16:12

cv~ 1i1j,t?~I::11 c"~lO c"~:J~ i1~"~1 nRI:11

j4iC~~ 'T["~~ C"I:1~~~ '''~~ '~Nr-11

~1n~ '''Ol1i\ ~4l~ CPI;l~;1 'lr:t~ ::l~" ::ljN;:Tl

So Delilah took new ropes, and bound him with them, and
said to him, "The Philistines are upon you, Samson!"the ambushers were sitting in the inner room-and he
snapped the ropes off his arms like a thread.

The ambush started before and went on after the sequential events
recounted with WAYYIQTOL. The syntax expresses the temporary
overlap between processes.
Now the Hebrew language possesses a whole array of tools
permitting the expression of contemporaneous or overlapping events.
Temporal conjunctions, the infinitive construct with prepositions and
adverbial expressions may all be called upon to define the precise
temporal relationship between distinct actions. Consider one example:
Gen 24: 15

nN~" i1R=?' i1~iJ1 ,~,~ i1~:P 01~ N1i1-"iJ;1

Before he had finished speaking there was Rebekah ( ... )

coming out. [NRSV]

Here the conjunction cj,~ and the verb i1~~ (pieZ) are used to
express very precisely that the servant's ,speaking was not yet
finished when Rebekka's coming happened.
Such conjunctions and temporal expressions are frequent in
narrative. But they are not indispensable. In fact, no conjunctions
(other than '), prepositions or adverbs are needed: a skilful use of the
various verbal forms and exploitation of word order suffice. The latter
type of syntax strikes one as being more elegant. At the same time, it
is more difficult to decode for the modem grammarian. A number of
idiomatic constructions are clearly recognizable, however.

Subject-participle - Subject-QATAL
To stress that process A was still going on when event B came
about, we find the following:
1 Sam 9: 11

,"11i1 i1~11~~ O"~l1 M70M

C"~ ::lkiC~ n4N~" n4'l1J 1N~'" M70M'

29

See Chapter VIII.

-: -

Inter-Clausal Relations

136

As they went up the hill to the town, they met some girls
coming out to draw water. 30

The temporal relation between the two actions recounted is very

nearly the same as in the passage from Gen 24:15 quoted above:
the action of going up the hill was not yet finished when the action
of finding the girls took place. Where Gen 24: 15 uses two particles
and an auxiliary verb (0'0, il=li1; ilZ,~ piel), the present passage gets
by with the mere juxtaposition of clauses.
This type of syntax is used sometimes at dramatic moments in
the story:
'b~Z, il"~n-Z,~ ilnZ,rz.; N"il' nNS1~ N'il
Gen 38:25
As she was being brought T01~t: sh~ se;'t' ~ord ~~ he~' father'in-law.

1 Kgs 14: 17

ilO~lD N~I;l1 1~~1 OS;~l~ n~~ ORI;l1

n~ ,.p~;:rl n;~ij-=,O~ iltt~

N"i)

Then Jeroboam's wife got up and went away, and she

came to Tirzah. As she came to the threshold of the
house, the child died.

The unexpectedness of the second action may be stressed by the

particle ilJil:
Jud 19:22

'''l1il "rz.;~N il~il' o~z'-n~ C"~"tO"~ il~il

"n;~il'::n~ 1~O~ ~11!!z,~-~~~ "rz.;~N
'T

While they were enjoying th~~sel~es, the ~~~ ~f ihe ~ity,

a perverse lot, surrounded the house.

The whole construction may be introduced with "il'" "and it

happened." As with the simple circumstantial clause, this element
enhances the narrative continuity with the wider context but does
not affect the temporal-aspectual relation between the two clauses:

,;17 i7~;j "8;1

... '~N"1 1~~ij-Z,~ p.p~ N1ill
As the king passed by, he cried to the king and said ... 31

See also: 1 Sam 9:27; 2 Kgs 2:23. With the adverb "11 in the participle clause:
Gen 29:9; Job 1:16, 17 (and cf. 1:18),
31 See also: 2 Kgs 6:5, 26; 19:37. A superficial analysis may lead one to take
some of these as cases of periphrastic i'T'i'T + participle. See in further detail,
J. Joosten, "Diachroni9 Aspects of Narrative wayhi in Biblical Hebrew,"

Chapter 4

137

This construction may also be found at narrative peaks:

1 Sam 7:10

ilZ,iliil ilZ,l1~ Z,N1~rz.; "il'"

z,~,fz}"~ ;,~nz'w~ ""I1~~~"C"nrz.;z,'~~

As Samuel was offering ~p: ~he TbU:r~~ off~ring,: ihe

Philistines drew near to attack Israe1. 32

Although the use of the construction reviewed above is clear,

problems persist with regard to its explanation. The implications of
the first clause, with the participle, are regular enough: the process
expressed is contemporaneous with reference time, and it is
backgrounded in relation to another process: o"~.v il~jJ "they were
going up (when B happened)." The second clause, however, is less
transparent. One would expect a clause like ~~~rt il~jJl to express
anteriority with regard to reference time. Anteriority would imply
a reading like "as they went up the hill, having already found some
girls coming out ... "-which is clearly not intended. How is this
problem to be solved? And what is the function of the subjectQATAL clause?
It seems that the function of QATAL, on an abstract level, is
indeed the expression of anteriority. QATAL refers to an action
anterior with regard to the end of the process expressed by the
participle. 1 Sam 9: 11 might be paraphrased: "they were still going
up when they had already found"-i.e., the finding was completed
before the going up was over. A similar meaning could be
expressed simply by a participial circumstantial clause followed by
WAYYIQTOL. The following example was quoted above (p. 129):
2 Kgs 9:17
iN~f ~1il~ n.t1E?rq-n~ Ni~j

In such a construction, however, the temporal relation between the

two clauses is less well defined. While the participle points
forward, so to speak, to the following WAYYIQTOL, which
provides the reference time, WAYYIQTOL does not point back to
the circumstantial clause. 33 In contrast, the two clauses in the
<subject-participle - subject-QATAL> construction do mutually
define their temporal relation. The participle clause creates the

30

Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 35 (2009),43-61.

32
33

See also: 1 Sam 23:26-27; 2 Kgs 13:21.

As a past tense, WAYYIQTOL sets up its own reference time; see below in
Chapter v.

138

Inter-Clausal Relations

expectation of an event that will establish reference time, while the

QATAL clause harks back to the preceding clause, expressing
anteriority to the reference time it implies. In 'fact, neither clause
by itself sets up a reference time: the reference time of the
construction is created by the mutual interlocking of event times.
NB. In a few passages a circumstantial participle clause is followed by
a' circumstantial QATAL clause without simultaneity being meant. Each clause
keeps its own usual function:
1 Sam 3:2
n;i1~ l~ljij '''1'',V,1 i~p~~ ::1~fZj "~'v", N1i1ij oi"~ '0;1

Chapter 4

Subject-QATAL - Subject-QATAL
A similar construction is used to express the synchronization of
two complete events. Depending on the context, the events may be
consecutive:
Gen 44:4

... ,~~ ='lQi",iP"DliJ ~S '''llo-n~ iN~;

Cij

When they had gone only a short distance from the city,
Joseph said . 37

Or the events may be simultaneous:

'I Sam 9: 17

At that time Eli was lying down in his room; his eyesight had
begun to grow dim.

Here the participle clause implies contemporaneousness with reference time

("on that day"), while the QATAL clause implies anteriority: Eli's eyes had
already become weak. 34 These passages do not display the taut diction of the
instances that do imply simultaneity. No doubt the difference between the
constructions was indicated by intonation.

139

i;1:IV

im,",

SiNiZi-nN i"lN' SNiOrDi

TT ~,,~~ "r;11~~ 'r;j~T ~,,~O iT~iJ

Just when Samuel saw Saul, the LORD told him, "Here is
the man of whom I spoke to you. "38

The two clauses may be introduced with "iT", to the same effect as
in the <subject-participle - subject-QATAL> construction:

... i"l;O i"l~7~j i"l~~rD~rrij "iJ;1

Gen 15: 17

And when the sun had gone down, a darkness fell. .. 39

Subject-participle -, Subject-participle
Two durative processes that are going on during the same period
can be represented with a similar construction:

2 Kgs 4:5

I~!i')l'
I

SO she left him and shut the door behind herself and her

:,I;!!I:

:~i:
'
!1

O'W i~~i ~l~~ n~lij '~t?r;11 i~~~ 1~~1

nR~io N"i)1 O"~~ c"r?f ~~ Cij

One rrri::=::e~:e~~:::p::s:~::~:s~:'t:::e:~n:e:~ of

::s::~s;:~!:~u::::t:=~~~~::~:~~~:~:p~':' ~!~:~~ ~:~~~

Actually, what seems to be implied by the construction is neither

consecution nor simultaneity, but a relation that could be termed
"contiguity" or "tiling": the final phase of the first event is not yet
over when the initial phase of the second event sets in.
Grammatically, this effect is obtained by juxtaposing two clauses
presented as anterior to the same reference point. 40

Other constructions
Another construction of the same type, attested twice only, is used
to indicate that an event came about just when another event was
about to happen:

~""M_w"."_"",.~."._ ,,,lhan. bas!<~ou!!.g!ng., 1'~~CO!!~!~~!~~~ ..~P1?~~s., to be very, rare. 35

!ll:!il_I'__c.'"_" _ _

O':lN-SV i"lS!)~ i"lO":'f,n, Ni:lS rDOWli"l "j1",

As the sun was about to set, a deep sleep fell upon Abram. 41

Gen 15:12

Most passages where two participle clauses follow one another in

narrative probably do represent a succession of circumstantial
clauses. 36

See also: Gen24:1; Jud 18:1; 1 Sam 13:16; 2 Sam 15:30.

See 1 Sam 17:3; 23:26; and perhaps Jos 6:9, 13; 1 Kgs 13:24.
36 See 1 Sam 19:9; 29:2;.2 Sam 3:1; 6:4-5, 14-15; 15:18, 23; 1 Kgs 10:24-25;
22:10.

T: T

T: -

.:-

See also: Ex 10:13; and similarly Gen 27:30 and 2 Kgs 20:4.
See Gen 19:23; Jud 3:24; 15:14; 1 Sam 9:5; 20:36,41; 2 Sam 2:24; 17:24.
39 See also: 2 Sam 15:32; 2 Kgs 8:21 (in the parallel, 2 Chr 21:9, the pronoun is
omitted, showing that the Chronicler preferred to read a periphrastic tense);
2 Kgs 20:4. In 2 Sam 6:16 the same construction is found with i1';" instead of
'i1', (see Chapter VI, Appendix).
40 In Gen 19:23-24, there are three successive s-v clauses of this type.
41 See also: Jos 2:5.

38

35

The construct infinitive here expresses imminent action.

37

34

T:

140

Inter-Clausal Relations

Very nearly the same meaning is expressed with I:l'~ + YIQTOL in

the first clause:
Jos 2:8

)?jJ-t,S; I:lt)"~~ Mlj7.v N"ijl11:J~~: I:l'~ i1~ijl

Before they went to sleep, she went up to them on the roof.42

Chapter 4

expresses dependence On the will of the speaker, here it expresses

subordination to another clause. 45
The "subjunctive" value of a subsequent volitive is not always
obvious. In some cases it is decidedly absent:
Prov 23:7

Instead of a verbal clause with the participle or QATAL, the first

clause may be non-verbal:
Jud 18:3

n::>"~

n"::ll-C17

n70n

"j~jJ 'S;~jJ t,;P-M~ 1i~:pij' M~~i

While they were at Micah's house, they recognized the

voice of the young Levite. 43

And instead of a clause one finds a temporal expression:

2 Kgs 4:40

... 1'9~~j 1P.v~ M~ijl ,.,tjJ~ c7:;>~~ "8;j

And when they had only just started eating the stew,
they cried out, and said ...

In all these examples, the peculiar subject-QATAL structure has the

second clause pointing back to the time frame defined or implied
by the preceding clause or phrase.

Volitive sequences
Kuhr, Ausdrucksmittel (1929), 46-59; Fassberg, Studies (1994), 74-142; Muraoka,
"Final Function" (1997).
Purpose and result clauses can be formed in biblical Hebrew with
the construct infinitive or by means of particles like pn~t, or ,,::J17::J.
In certain syntactic situations, however, a simple volitive form will
suffice to express subordination. Although a Hebrew sentence like
=,).~Dl Q1N"~ii1 (Gen 38:24) could in principle be read as two main
clauses: "Bring her out and let her be burned," it is more natural to
.~J#F~"~-~,-"-_,"_,~~".~._take~_~~~Qllg v~LtL~suboldillJlte.tQ.Jbe first: "Bring her out that
she may be burned."44 This analysis implies that a transformation
of the function of the volitive has taken place. While normally it

Eat and drink.

Here the second action is not dependent on the first. 46 Similar cases
are rather exceptional, however, and usually some degree of
subordination must be recognized even if it is unnecessary to bring
it out in translation.
The SUbjunctive force can be enhanced in several ways. It is
more easily discernible in sequences of different formsimperative-cohortative, cohortative-jussive, etc.-than in sequences
of identical forms. In such "mixed" sequences there often exists
a logical connection between the two processes presented; the
second process depends on the first. Indeed, the logical connection
is often inscribed in the grammar: the subject of the second clause
is almost invariably one of the arguments of the first clause. 47
In some instances, the semantics of the first verb bring out the
subordination very clearly. With verbs expressing a command,
request, or permission, the second clause is practically equivalent
to an object clause:
1 Kgs 5:20 (6)

See also: Num 11:33.

See also: 2 Sam 20:8; and with initial ~i1~' 2 Sam 13:30.
44 The form =,,,]~I:l might be parsed as a normal YIQTOL form. However, because
it occupies the first position in the clause, it is to be taken as a volitive (see
further Chapter IX). .
42

l;j~~jJ-l~ I:l.,tl~ "~-1n"':;>:1 nj~ Ml!1S;l

Therefore command that cedars from the Lebanon be cut

for me [NRSV; literally: ... command and let them cut ... ]. 48

The first clause taken by itself is incomplete. Because of this, the

notion of purpose ("Command so that they may cut cedars")
automatically shades into the idea of complementation: "Command
that they should cut. "49 Whatever the precise nuance intended, there

The nuance of volition is not completely superseded. In most cases, the

second process continues to depend on the will of the speaker.
46 See also: Gen 35:2-3; Mic 6: 1; Ps 34:4.
47 See, in detail, Kuhr, Ausdrucksmittel, 45, 49-55.
48 See also: Lev 24:2; Num 5:2; Jos 4:16; and cf. Ex 27:20.
49 The origin of this construction possibly lies in an elliptic sentence:
"Command (them to cut cedars) so that they should cut cedars." Kuhr,
Ausdrucksmittel, 48, compares Gen 42:25, 1~7~;j ... '~;j, "He commanded
(them to fill the sacks) and they filled ... "
45

43

141

142

Inter-Clausal Relations

is no doubt that the second clause is subordinate to the first. The

paratactic interpretation makes little sense. This type of syntax is
found with several other verbs:

Isa 5: 19

1 Sam 9:27

"iP.ti~1 .,~~~ O"ll"l~~tr 'Q;1 ii~ii;-t,~ 1'' 1:l.T?tr

Pray to the LORD to take away the frogs from me and my

people.

1 Kgs 13:6

'TJ.,vt,~ ii~ii; "~~-n~ Nrt,lj

.,t,N ."., ~rz.;n' "'.l1~ "~~nii'
TO.

TJ

.-:-

LXX a<p't <XU'tov K<X't<xpao9<Xt -

t,~R"1

Instead of a preceding volitive, one also finds questions implying

a request or wish. Here, too, the subordinate nature of the subsequent
volitive is particularly clear:

-a":

it,

2 Sam 9: 1

01"~~~1 .,~~~ =-jlv

LXX: E<XOOV J.1 e~oA9puo<Xt <XU'tou<; - Allow me to

exterminate them [NRSV: Let me alone that I may

destroy them]. 53

ii:\!;i

!!\ii:\!i,l\!::iI

'II,',:I}:
!!I,II,\I'!.

See also: Esther 5:14; 1 Sam 20:4; 2 Sam 21:4 (asyndetic); and compare Ex
14:2, 15; 25:2; Num 19:2.
51 See also: Gen 20:7; Num 21:7.
52 Also Ex 32:10.
53 Also 1 Sam 15:16.
54 The subordinate nature of a subsequent volitive is shown also by the fact that
volitives are used to express purpose or consequence after other, non-volitive,
types of clauses. See below.

n"~t,

,ni.:l ,rtiN ,i.l1-rti., "~ii

,on
0:." i~.l1 iifD
_0. 17N'
".-:-.":
-

.,' -:

. , ' . -:

The use of the volitive57 here is understood when one realises that
the question implies an unspoken request: "Tell me." An example
where the request is made explicit shows the origin of the
construction:
1.:l~t,
iic"fD
j, 1'''~ii
ii~ii iiOT ni.:lfVN'ii
Isa 41 :22

T T:
-T
The former things, what are they? Tell us, that we may
consider them.

See also: Deut 2:24; Ps 51:4.

One may conclude that subsequent volitives are subordinate to
varying extents. There is a sliding scale: a few instances are quite
independent, while others are more or less closely dependent on
the preceding clause. Nor is the precise nuance expressed by the
subordinate clause always the same (purpose, result, object
clause). Globally, the hypotactic nature of the construction is
certain, even though it is not indicated by any conjunction or other
"" __~"~_,~_~~_ _ ~ fqrmal rn,e~ns:. it is the. cons~ru~t,iol1. as, ~lYh.21e that connects the
second clause to the first. 54 The construction is at times paralleled
with a sentence showing explicit subordination:

t,1Nrti

Is there still anyone left of the house of Saul, that I may

show him kindness?

1n~tr

Let him curse. 52

Deut 9: 14

lil\:!!!!!!i!

ii.v'~1 t,~1~: rtii'i? n~p' ii~i~~l ~'i?Dl

Here the final cohortati ve in the second stich is parallel to the

explicit purpose clause in the first. 56

Intercede with the LORD your God and pray for me that
my hand may be restored [NIV; NRSV: ... pray for me, so
that my hand may be restored to me].51

2 Sam 16: 11

ii~l~ 1.11~7 1iifP.P,~ ii~"r:'I; 'ij~;

Let him make haste, let him speed his work that we may
see it; let the plan of the Holy One of Israel hasten to
fulfilment that we may know it. 55

Tell the boy to go on before us. 50

Ex 8:4 (8)

143

Chapter 4

TO.

Volitives are also attested, however, with other types of questions

and with affirmative statements. As it seems, the usage was
extended by analogy:
Isa 25:9

1j~"~i"1 it, 1.:l"1~ ii! 1.:l"ijt,~ ii~iJ

Lo, this is our God, we have waited for him, so that he

might save us.

The certain examples of this last type of syntax are rare.

***

50

The forms i1~~l'J: and i1~i:JI;ll are the only certain instances of the cohortative
with a third person form (uncertain examples are found in Ps 20:4; Job
11:17).
56 See also: 2 Sam 13:5-6 and Prov 9:8.
57 The form i1~~~ is indifferent, but its position at the beginning of the clause
identifies it as a cohortative.

55

Inter-Clausal Relations

144

The subsequent volitive will normally take the form of a cohortative in the first person, an imperative in the second, and a jussive
in the third person. As was pointed out in Chapter I, these three \
forms make up a suppletive paradigm. From the point of view of
the modem European languages, the use of the imperative in
subordinate clauses is, nevertheless, somewhat unexpected. It has
at times been ignored or misjudged by grammarians. The
subjunctive imperative will therefore be treated after cohortatives
and jussives.

145

Chapter 4

Cohortative following another volitive

Imperative-cohortative

Gen 19:5

i1~;~jj '9.,~~ 1~f-'~~ t:J"~~~O i1~~

t:JnN ill1ij, 1j"~~ CN"~iil

;0

Where are the men who came

yo~ '~~nigh~? Bring
them out to us so that we may know them.

The two volitive clauses usually follow one another immediately.

In a few cases, some parenthetic material separates them:
i1"~~ ilNi:n~' .,~., 1~~~ .,~ "Mrzj~-n~ i1:li1
Give me my wife Tth~~ I ~ayT go Ti~ to'her: fo~ '~y timeTi~
completed

Gen 29:21
NB. In the great majority of cases, the subsequent volitive is preceded by the
conjunction waw. In a number of instances, most of them in poetry, one finds an
asyndetic connection instead. The absence of the waw does not seem to affect
the essence of the volitive sequence:
.. '17~~~1 'Tn~7Q ,;~~ ~~-'t~
Gird up your loins like a man, that I may ask you ...

Job 38:3

.. '17~~~ 1~~7Q ,;~~ ~r't~

Gird up your loins like a man, that I may ask you ...
The two clauses are identical except for the absence of the waw in the second.
Job 40:7

The meaning seems to be very nearly the same.

Cohortative

The cohortative is used very often after another volitive. A series

of cohortatives usually expresses a sequence of actions willed by
the speaker:
Gen 45:28

"0

"~f ~~i"-iil1 :lj

n1~~T t:J,~~
.:-.. : 1~N'N'
- : : -.-: il~"N
T:
Enough! My son Joseph is still alive. Let me go and see
him before I die. 58

su
clause is not very
strong. Where the cohortative follows an imperative or jussive, or
where it is attached to a question, the subjunctive force is usually
more perceptible.

58

See also: Gen 11:3, 7; 18:21; 19:32; 22:5; 33:12; 43:4, 8; 46:31; Ex 3:3; 4:18;
Num 14:4; Deut 3:25;'13:7, 14; 1 Sam 11:14; 20:29; 28:7; 2 Sam 3:21; 16:9;
17:1; 2 Kgs 7:9, 13.

Examples: 59 Gen 12:1-2; 13:9; 17:1-2; 19:5; 23:4, 13; 24:2-3, 14,
49, 56; 27:4, 7, 9, 21, 25; 29:21; 30:25, 26, 28; 31:3; 32:10; 42:2,
34; 43:8; 44:21; 45:18; 47:16, 19; 48:9; 49:1; Ex 14:12; 17:2;
18:19 (asynd.); 20:19; 24:12; 33:5, 13; Num 9:8; 11:13; 16:21;
17:10; 21:16; 22:19; 23:3; Deut 1:13; 4:10; 5:31(28); 9:14; 31:14,
28; 32:1; Jos 10:4; 18:4; Jud 1:3; 11:37; 14:13; 16:28; 18:5, 9;
20:13; 1 Sam 9:27; 11:1,3,12; 12:7; 14:12; 15:16,25; 17:10,44;
28:7, 22; 30:15; 2 Sam 13:10; 14:7, 32; 20:16, 21; 24:12; 1 Kgs
13:7; 17:10; 18:1; 2 Kgs 4:22; 6:19, 28-29; Isa 36:8; 41:22-23;
43:26 (asynd.); 49:20; 51:23; Jer 3:22 (asynd.); 4:5; 7:3; 8:14;
17:14; 20:10; 31:18; 33:3; Hos 6:1; 14:3; Amos 4:1; Hag 1:8; Mal
3:7; Ps 2:8; 21:14 (asynd.); 39:5 (asynd.), 14; 41:11; 50:7; 80:4, 8,
20; 81:9, 11; 90:12, 14; 118:19 (asynd.); 119:17 (asynd.), 18,27,
33,34,73,88,115,116,117,125,134,144,146; Prov 1:11
(asynd.); 27:11; Job 10:20 Q; 36:2; 38:3; 40:7 (asynd.); Song 1:4
(asynd.); 7:1; Ruth 4:4; Lam 5:2 Q; 1 Chr 21:2, 10, 22; 2 Chr 1:10;
10:4.
Jussive-cohortative

Gen 27:41

"l)~ :l~~~-n~ il~iij~1 .,~~ ~~~ .,~; 1::lii?:

LXX: E''ytaa'troaav ai TtJ.Lepat 'to'\) 1teVe01)~ 'to'\) 1ta'tpo~

J.L01) iva a1Co1C~eivO) Ia1Cro~ 'tOY aOeA<pOV J.L01)-Let the

59

The list does not include the very many examples of cohortatives following
imperatives that have practically turned into particles: ii::lii, ~'::l, ii::lZ,. These
can easily be retrieved by means of the concordance.

Inter-Clausal Relations

146

days of my father's mourning draw nigh, that I may

slay my brother Jacob. 60

Other examples: Gen 30:3; 1 Sam 27:5; 2 Sam 13:6; 2 Kgs 7: 13; Isa
2:3; 5:19; 55:3; Hos 6:2; Mic 4:2; Ps 119:77; Job 10:20 K; 23:5.
Negative command-cohortative

Gen 18:30
Oh, do not let the

i1'~'N' "JiNZ, ,n" NJ-Z,N

be angry if I speak.
T

LORD

--:-

_.

Also (with the same expression): Gen 18:32; Jud 6:39.

NB. Instead of the expected cohortative one sometimes encounters regular first
person YIQTOL forms after a volitive: 61
Cohortative-YIQToL: Jud 16:20; 19:11; 1 Sam 11:14; 2 Sam 15:7; 19:27; 2 Kgs
4:10; Isa 1:25.
Imperative-YIQToL: Jud 16:26; 1 Sam 7:5; 12:3; 2 Sam 10:12; 1 Kgs 11:21;
2 Kgs 6:13; Isa 22:4 (asynd.); Jer 40:4; 51:9; Ezek 2:1; Zech 1:3; Ps 86:1l.
JussiVe-YIQTOL: 2 Sam 19:38.
No semantic difference seems to exist between these examples and the clauses
with morphological cohortatives in the lists above. 62 First person YIQTOL forms
occurring at the head of their clauses following a volitive form should be
considered cohortatives functionally. The phenomenon is too well attested to
attribute it to scribal error. 63 The explanation is probably to be sought in
diachronic factors; see the conclusion below (p. 159).

Following a question or wish

Deut 12:30

Oi1"iiZ,N-nN
o"ini1 1':J17" i1;:'''N
... ..
... :
0: i1~Ni1
0: ..
T

T"

.,~~-O~ pri1~ i~l

How did these nations worship their gods, that I also may
do likewise?

147

Chapter 4

Following questions we find first person YIQTOL forms even more

often, relatively speaking, than after volitives. But again the two
forms are.functionally equivalent:
Isa 41 :26

P"1~ '~N:l1 O"~~~~1 i'1.v1~1 rC~'~ '''~0-''~

Who declared it from the beginning, so that we might

know, and beforehand, so that we might say, "He is right."

Other examples with cohortative or indifferent forms: 1 Sam 20:4;

2 Sam 9:1; 21:4 (asynd.); 1 Kgs22:7; 2 Kgs 3:11; Isa 40:25; 46:5;
50:8 (asynd.); Jer 14:22; Amos 8:5; Song 6:1; Lam 2:13; 2 Chr
18:6. With non-cohortative forms: 1 Sam 12:3; 1 Kgs 12:9; Jer 5:1;
Prov 23:35; Job 41:3; 2 Chr 10:9.
Formally constructed as a question but in reality expressing
a wish is the idiom 1~: "~. It is followed by a subordinate
cohortative several times:
Jud 9:29

1~~"~t$-n~ i11"O~1 "i;~ i1.!ij o.iJo-n~

Ttl:

"Q1

If only these people were under my command, that I

might remove Abimelech!

Several other translations are possible, but in all of them the

cohortative depends on the preceding wish.
Other examples: Isa 27:4 (asynd.); Jer 8:23; 9:1; Ps 55:7
(asynd.); Song 8: 1 (asynd.).
Finally, the cohortative is found in dependence on clauses
introduced by the particle "~1N "perhaps". Although such clauses
are not questions, they share with questions a deliberative quality.
The function of the subsequent cohortative seems to be the same:
'l~j 010 i'1:Jj~1 ,.,~O N;;~~ "~1N

1 Kgs 18:5

Perhaps we may find grass to keep the horses and mules

alive.

Other examples: Num 22:6; Jer 20:10.

Although the form i:lli?: is indifferent, its position at the head of the clause
identifies it as a jussive. Esau hates his brother more than he loves his father.
Most modem translations have correctly apprehended the syntax, but the KJV
reflects a less adequate analysis: "The days of mourning for my father are at
hand; then will I slay my brother Jacob."
61 See Joosten, "Volitive Sequences."
62 With III-he (ii"t,) and I-aleph (N"~) roots, the co hortative and first person
YIQTOL forms are homonymous; see above in Chapter I.
63 Pace Fassberg, Studies, 80.

Jussive

60

The jussive is found following another jussive. When both forms

have the same subject the subjunctive force is not strong:
2 Sam 13:6 ni:J:JZ, ".i-1rC "J"17Z, :l~Z,n1 "nnN '~.i-1 NJ-Ni:lF1
.:

..:

..

-:

148

Inter-Clausal Relations

Chapter 4

Let us send men ahead of us to explore the land for us and

bring back a report to us.

Please let my sister Tamar come and make a couple of

cakes in my sight. 64

As with the cohortative, the subordinate character of the clause \

stands out more clearly when there is a change of subject.

149

Other examples: Gen 19:20; 34:23; Ex 18:19; Jos 18:4; 1 Sam 18:21;
2 Sam 3:21; Isa 2:3; Jer 3:25; 6:10; Ps 77:4; Job 32:20.
Jussives with different subjects

Gen 9:27
May God enlarge
Shem. 67

O~-"~iJ~~ li">V;:l r1~~~ O"D~~ ~E;l~

J apheth, so as to dwell in the tents of

Other examples: Gen 1:9 (with atnarked YIQTOL form functioning

as ajussive); Isa 38:21; Jer42:2-3; Hos 9:17.
Negative command-jussive
':;lj~~l:11 v~~~(1-~~

Prov 4:6

Do not forsake her, that she may ~eep you. 68

Other examples: 1 Sam 7:8; Jer 18:23 Q.

Following questions or wishes
1 Kgs 22:20

'~~ r1b1~ ~S:1 '.p~1 :l~r:t~-r1~ i1~~; "~

Who will entice Ahab, so that he may go up and fall at

Ramoth-gilead?

Other examples: Deut 30:12, 13; Isa 19:12; Jer 9:11; 23:18; Hos
13:10; 14:10; Jona 1:11; Mal 1:10; Ps 107:43; Job 15:8; Esther 5:3,
6; 7:2; 2 Chr 18:19.
A marked YIQTOL form (vocalisation only) is found once:
Ex 2:7

r1i!'~liv 1~ r1R~"~ i1~~ ~~ "l:1N1R1 ~~~ij

'~~ij-r1~ ~~ P~"t11

Shall I go and get you a nurse from the Hebrew women

to nurse [lit. "that she may nurse"] the child for you?

As in the earlier examples, the form is to be considered syntactically

as a jussive.

In some interpretations (see, e.g., Targum Onkelos), the subject of the second
verb is God.
68 NRSV: "Do not forsake her, and she will keep you." The English future tense
in such a construction likewise expresses subordination.
67

Other examples: Ex 5:21; 1 Sam 24:16; 2 Sam 13:5; 2 Kgs 1:10, 12; 5:8.
On this case, see below in the section on the imperative, p. 150
66 See also the parallel in 2 Chr 16:3, and Gen 1:9; 2 Kgs 6:17.
64

65

Inter-Clausal Relations

150

Chapter 4

In a number of passages the connection between the question and

the following volitive clause is less clear. All the cases are
asyndetic:
Deut 20:5

In all other cases, the second person subordinate volitive is

expressed by the imperative. The usage is entirely analogous to that
involving the cohortative and jussive reviewed above.
The imperative may be used after another imperative, but the
SUbjunctive force will not generally be very strong in that case:

i:l:ln Nt" rziin-n"::l iT:I::l 'rzi~ rzi"~iT-"~

T-:
: TT .- Tin"~~: ::l~;' T1;'~

Who is the man who has built a new house but has not
dedicated it? Let him go and return to his house.

The translation reflects a main clause after the question. One may
also make the volitives dependent on the question, however: "Who
is the man who has built a new house but has not dedicated it? (Let
him come forward) that he may go and return to his house."69
Other examples: Deut 20:6, 7; Jud 7:3; Isa 50:8; Ezra 1:3;
2 Chr 36:23.

However, when the second imperative is non-agentive, the notion

of purpose or result may be more palpable:

Seek the LORD that you may live

and live"]. 72

iT9~O~ o~~ "0~1 l1rz.;"jQ~ rz.;jQiJ Ttl:-"~

Other examples (parallel verses): Ps 14:7 (asynd.); 53:7 (asynd.).

And after "~1~ "perhaps":

YR:1

[NRSV:

~1iT 1~; "~1~

"Wash, and be

i"n, iT'iT"-n~ 1rz.;"

\:Se~k: th~ LO~~

[NRSV:

Following another volitive

The subordinate character of the clause is clearer still when the
imperative follows another class of volitive or a question.
Jussive-imperative

Perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.

~1iT ~"::lr"~ rzi"~iT-nrzi~ ::lrziiT iTMl1'

Gen 20:7

Also Jer 26:3; 36:7.

T'

niryJ ~1~~" ~~~~~1

Now then, return the man's wife-for he is a prophet-in

order that he may pray for you, so that you may live. 73

Imperative
In classical Hebrew prose, second person jussives are almost entirely
limited to negative commands (where they are regular).70 After
another volitive, only one case of a second person jussive is attested:
--'-"-~'.
urn 'I7'23iTlT\-',
. \J.V) ,~,-

'Otp1 yO"'!

2 Kgs 5: 13
Wash, that you may be purified
clean"].

Amos 5:6

Oh, that you would keep silent, that it might be

considered wisdom on your part.

1 Kgs 18:27

v~~~1 Yl~v-n~ 1~7~11:l",!1 i''il

Gen 1:28

Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.

The subordinate jussive is found also after It'1:-"~:

Job 13:5

151

'rW'l111'~~~~"iij'j~iT~~-n~
"T
":.
-:,,.,'

Note the following example, where the imperative clause acts as

a complement to the jussive:
iT~"~ n"~ j'j~~ iT01:1~TiN~~i o~~ iqiT;

Ruth 1:9

::lrziiT
"t,11~ on~1t,M r,~n1 "'~-":I::lt, ni~~ nj~~~~
Put back the s~;if ol Aa~on h~for~ \h~: ~oven~nt, . i~ b~

Ttl:

The LORD grant that you may find security, each of you in
the house of your husband.

"T

kept as a warning to the rebels, so that you may make an

end of their complaints against me.71
Possibly, the form is to be read, against the pointing, as a third person jussive
of the qat stem (see the Septuagint and BHS). This would further require the
of On~1'r-l to the singular.
correction
72
Other examples: Ex 14:16; Isa 45:22; Amos 5:4; Prov 3:3-4; 6:6; see also: Jer
35:15.
73 NRSV: " ... and he will pray for you and you shall live."
71

69 See also: Ex 24:14.

70 Examples are found,. however, in poetry (Isa 12:1; 46:5; Ps 5:12; 50:15;
144:5, 6; Job 15:8) and in LBH (2 Chr 20:20).

Inter-Clausal Relations

152

Other examples: Gen 18:4; 1 Sam 12:17; 25:24; 2 Kgs 5:10;

Isa 4:1 (asynd.); Jer 2:19; 29:6; Ezek 36:32; Ps 128:5; Job 11:5-6;
Ruth 4:11.

Volitives following directives and predictives

We find a volitive expressing purpose or result after an infinitive
absolute expressing obligation:
O~tn O"~~trM~ ii"v

Prov 13:20 K

Cohortative-imperative

iTl1'l~-"~ i07Uf~' iT~~ iTI!l.l11

Ex 3: 10

153

Chapter 4

O"'~~~ "N,fz;"-"J:J "~.l1-M~ N~iiT'

So come, I will send you ~~ :Phar~~h: t~ b~ing my' people:
the Israelites, out of Egypt.

Walk with the wise that you may become wise.

Other possible examples: Prov 25:5; see also 2 Kgs 5:10.

Similarly, the subordinate volitive occurs after YIQTOL or WEQATAL
used as directives:

Other examples: Gen 12:2; 18:5; 19:8, 34; 45:17-18; Jud 8:24;
19:24; 1 Sam 28:22; 1 Kgs 1:12; Job 38:3; 40:7; Ecc12:1.

1 Kgs 20:25

Following questions

You must muster an army like the army that you have
lost, horse for horse, and chariot for chariot, that we may
fight against them in the plain.

~\1iN~ "~bij ":r:t~ ":r:t i~-iT~9l) iTI!l~l

'irz.;"~:::l OMiN iTcn~:J' :J::l'~ :J::l" 01t;j~ 010'
.-

2 Sam 21:3

'9::lN iT~:J1 o~" iT~P.~ iT~

.. - -: iT'~~ M~nTJ-MN' '1~';1

What shall I do for you? How shall i: ~ak~ -expiati~~,

that you may bless the heritage of the LORD?

1p1't:1;:t :JOt ,,~~

Ex 32:24
Who has gold, that you may take it off?

Ex 14:4

o"il1 Mi:JI:1~~ 1"~rQ' 1Ni1 0"~71-".l11iT?S;

O::lrC!jJ" Tl1i~'~ 1N~~1 ~:J':'1::l"~ :Ji~ij ~1' iTr"~

2 Kgs 18:32

...... :

T:

: -

TIT'

0:?'~'l~:P rj~-"~ 0:?,l;1~ "r:1~R71 "~:::l-i.li

0"~1=?1 ocr~ r1~ rCi'''I:111~1 rj~

1"~' rC;i'1 'O~: M"r. r1~

Until I come and take you away to a land like your own
land, a land of grain and wine, a land of bread and
vineyards, a land of olive oil and honey, that you may live. 75

Fassberg, Studies (1994), 78-80.

.~_~"""~__~_,__~.~~__A~~llS alr~m!>een ~~ated, . the lIse. of ~.?!~!~,~~~?rms as a .k!nd of

Other examples: Lev 26:43; 1 Sam 17:46-47; Lam 3:50; 2

28:23.

ehr

Finally, the volitive is found a few times after a participle or

infinitive construct:
Ex 14:17

O:j~~ :J~-M~ pr.r:tT? "~~;:t "~~j

iTl1'!j:::l iT'::l:;'N' OiT",nN
U_: - 1N::l'"
: -

The last clause may' also be made to depend on the imperatives in the
beginning of the verse.

.. T

0V"'"J.O~ ='1'11 iTl1'l~-:J~-M~ "1:1i?1",

i""n-"::l:J1 iTl1'!j:::l iTi::l:;'N'
..

Subordination of volitives to non-volitive clauses

74

..

I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them,

so that I will gain glory for myself over Pharaoh and all
his army.

Stand at the'''c~~~~r;ads:,- and 'look, ~nd ~sk for the ancient

paths, where the good way lies, that you may walk in it
and find rest for your souls. 74

"light subordinate" is found not only after another vohtlve or

a question. In a relatively small number of cases, we fin~ .the
volitive with a subjunctive meaning also after other, non-vohtlve,
forms. The latter usage probably developed from the former.

T-:T':

Other possible examples: Gen 42:20; Ex 26:23-24; 28:27-28; Lev

9:6; 23:18 (asynd.) Num 17:3; 2 Sam 5:23-24; 2 Kgs 5:10; Prov
13:20; 25:5; Neh 2:5.
There are other cases, however, where the YIQTOL or WEQATAL
form preceding the volitive is not directive but simply predictive:

With an indirect question:

Jer 6:16

75

TIT

':

The imperative may also depend on the imperative in vs. 31.

T:

Inter-Clausal Relations

154

Chapter 4

Oliil t,liD il~~Wil ".U7n,

-T:
To buy the threshing floor from you in order to build an
altar to the LORD, so that the plague may be averted from
the people.
_0.

. - -

Lam 1:19

cO~~:1 01~-i~1 ~.r.~'" t,~ rzj"~ ~t,

Ps 51: 18

pass, In order to lay waste fortified cities into ruinous

heaps.79

Sometimes the subordinate clause complements the main verb in

the manner of an object clause:
Isa 2~:9

'*'''',fl'~"",*,""""=",,,,?=~~=,-'''=p;-

"=

A possible example with a subordinate imperative:

Jer 6: 17 .

Instead of the imperative we once find a second person form:

1tD ~1:l il1il; il~~-'~~ '~liJ ilJ: ilWb ,~~"'

And Moses said, "This is the thing that the LOR~
commanded you to do."

Lev 9:6

?ther ex~mples are more doubtful. Often the subordinate

Interpretation appears as only one of several possibilities:

In a few passages, the subordinate volitive is found in past-tense

contexts. The usage is only marginally attested in classical prose
texts, and some of the examples are doubtful. Nevertheless, on the
whole there is no reason to deny the existence of the syntagm:
Compare 1 Sam 15:29 where the subordinate idea is expressed by the
infinitive construct.
77 The NRSV has rendere? here, against the accents: "For you have no delight in
sacrifice; if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased."
78 Note that 'n~~~~, is not reflected in the Septuagint and may be a late addition.

76

'~i~ t,ip~ 1~"rqi?ij o"~~ o~,,~~ "r:1bprn

Also I raIsed up sentInels for you, that you might gi~e

heed to t~e sound of the trumpet.
Cf. Peshltta r<ic'\~ ~.a.1 ~~x~=\ r<.o.C,\=\ c'\!)~::s.. ~.1D.r<
"And I raised sentinels over you that you ~ight hear the
sound of the trumpet".80

il~tI~1 n~t rS~I:1-~t, ":p

Vo'litives follOWing past':fehse'<STarefT1entg~

u,v."rqi", it, 1j"9P ilt 1j"Ht,~ il~iJ

Here IS our God, in whom we hoped, that he would s~ve us.

For you do not want sacrifice, that I should give it.77

Perhaps the construction arose by analogy with the use of volitives

after questions, since questions and negated statements are similar
in some respects.
All attested examples are in poetic texts: Isa 41:28; 53:2; Jer
5:28;78 Ps 40:6; 49:8-10; 51:18; 55:13; Job 9:32, 33.

0if~rn~ 1~"rq:, iD~ t,~k 1rzji?~-":P

jTr:1N"~O il~~ O"r:Ji~"j 01R ,,~,,~~

ni'~~ 0"1.!? O"~~ O"~~ nirzjiJ~ "ilr11
I plan~ed from days of old what now I have bro~gh~ ~o

God is not a human being that he should lie, or a mortal,

that he should change his mind. 76

The nuance expressed by the subordinate clauses is one of

consequence or result, rather than purpose. Nevertheless, the usage is
clearly related to that described above. With verbs expressing
a request, the subordinate clause may be interpreted as an object clause:

niD~ "~O~ "0'" i';-n~ N~~; r~OV

2 Kgs 19:25

Volitives following negative statements

Num 23:19

ni~p~ fzi~~j :l~~j

For they sought food that they might revive their strength.

See also: Neh 5:3; 2 Chr 29:10.

A usage that stands out somewhat is that of a subordinate volitive
after a negated clause:

O.!?O

And he made prIests for the high places again from

amo~g all the people; any who wanted, he consecrated to
be priests for the high places.

il1il"~ lJ~\~ nij~~ r~.~iJ-n~ '9rpll~ niji?~

TT

niD~ "~O~

1 Kgs 13:33

Then I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that

they will go in after them; and so I will gain glory for
myself over Pharaoh.

2 Sam 24:21

155

Ps 18:41(40).

ctl"~~~ "~~~~1 1:'J'l1' ,,~ il~I:1~ "~;k1

Thou hast also gIven me the necks of mine enemies' that I

might destroy them that hate me [KJV].
'

79
80

Similarly in the 'p~allel, Isa 37:26. Some exegetes take ~iJm as a second
person form, but It IS better to understand it as third person. .
The .NRSV regar~s the imperative as representing the sentinels' speech: "Also
I raI~ed up sentmels for you: Give heed ... " This is another possible way of
readmg the verse.

Inter-Clausal Relations

156

The translation supposes that the main verb in the first half-verse
governs the second half-verse as well. Literally, the verse is "You
gave my enemies to me 'as a neck', and (you gave me) my.haters
that I might obliterate them." It is also possible, howeve:, wIth the
NRSV and other translations, to read the second stich as an
independent clause with YIQTOL expressing the past (in poetry).
Other possible examples: Jer 6:27; Ezek 26:2; Job 16:20-21.

Other examples: Gen 42:2; 47:19; Lev 22:2; Num 17:25; 1 Sam
29:4, 7; 1 Kgs 18:5, 44; 2 Kgs 18:32; Ezek 18:30; Ps 83:5; Neh
2:17; 6:9.
Subjunctive ~t, + YIQTOL is relatively frequent after negated commands
or wishes (with t,~ + jussive):
Lev 10:9

81

Fassberg, Studies (1994), 104-107.

Can the subordinate volitive be negated? And if so, what form

does it take? One would expect negated purpose clauses to be
constructed with t,N, the normal negation with volitives in the main
clause. In the subordinate function, however, t,N + volitive is
attested very poorly:

There are no examples of the syntagm following questions, but there

are two cases following .,t,,~ "perhaps" (cf. above on the cohortative
after .,t,,~):
O"ift,~il nrN.vn" .,t,1~
Perhaps the god will spare us a thought so that we do not
perish.

Jona 1:6

-:

Pray to the LORD your God for your servants, so that we

may not die. 82

See also: Num 11: 15; Ps 69: 15; 2 Chr 35:21; and perhaps Ex 5:9;
.
Ps 25:20 (asynd).
Instead, the regular negative counterpart of the subordInate
volitive is the syntagm Nt, + YIQTOL. This can easily be observed
in volitive sequences:
Gen 43:8

Other examples: Lev 10:6; 11:43; 16:2; 19:29; Num 14:42; 2 Sam
13:25; Jer 25:6; 37:20; 38:24, 25; Neh 2:17.

'9"i:;Tt,~ i1ji1;-t,~ '9"1~~ri.v~ t,~~~0

M10l-t,N'
T

81

Deut 28:30

82

"":: T

""

:.

;::1 :ltDn-Nt"
il.:l:lM
.. ..
:.
: : . n"::1
.-

You shall build a house, but not live in it. 83

Jer 10:4

.:

In 2 Sam 1:10 the same construction is found if one reads mtlI;1b~j as

a volitive. Some authorities, however, argue that the form may be read as
WAYYIQTOL, even though one would in this case expect a qamets ~nder the waw
(see, e.g., Driver, Trea.tise, 70, note). Contextually, WAYYIQTOL IS p~eferab~e.
The form is not cohortative, but the particle t,~ usually combmes WIth
volitives.

In other syntactic environments the function of ~t, + YIQTOL is often

problematic. Indeed, since the syntagm is very frequent in main
clauses, only the context can tell whether subordination is meant or
not. Compare the following:

P"~~ Nit,1 01P~r:t; n;:lR~~1 n;'~t?~~

They fasten it [the idol] with hammer and nails, so that it

cannot move. 84

Send the boy with me, and let us be on our way, so that
we
live and not die.

Send away the ark of the God of Israel, that it may return
to its own place, that it may not kill us.

i:lNl Nt" 1.:lt,

See also: 1 Kgs 18:5.

il~'~1 il91P~1 "r:1~ '.v~jJ ilO'(rrJ

M10l Nt" il"nl'
T

'1r;;~ '9"~~1 ilr;;~ ~tt1-t,~ ':tr?l11::

1MOM Nt" ,.v;~ t,ilk-t,~ O~~:l::1

Drink no wine or strong dri~k: neither""you ~or y~ur "~~ns:,
when you enter the tent of meeting, that you may not die.

The negated subjunctive: Nt, + YIQTOL

1 Sam 12:19

157

Chapter 4

In the first example two main clauses are juxtaposed, while in the
second the negated clause is clearly subordinate to the preceding
one. Formally, however, the two sentences are very similar, with
a YIQTOL clause followed by the conjunction and ~t, + YIQTOL.
While these two cases are fairly clear, many other examples allow for
Other cases without subordination: Ex 13:7; 23:15; Lev 2:13; Num 4:15; Deut
13:1; 15:10; 16:16; 28:39, 41; 2 Sam 24:24; 2 Kgs 17:37.
84 Other cases implying subordination: Ex 30:20; Num 18:3; Deut 17:17; 2 Sam
21:17; Jer 11:21.
83

Inter-Clausal Relations

158

either reading. For general reference, one may suppose that ~he ~t, +
YIQTOL syntagm, outside volitive sequences, represents a mrun clause
unless the context imposes a subordinate reading:
t,~l~: "~~ 1;n~ "I:1~~~1
t,~,ta" "Wl.'-n~ :lfp.~ Nt"

1 Kgs 6: 13

I will dwell among the children o'f I~~a~l: and I

forsake my people Israel.

~iil

not

Logically, a link could be found between God's indwelling and hi.s

faithfulness to his people; and the grammar would ~errmt
a subordinate interpretation: "I will dwell... so that I wdl .n?t
forsake ... ". Nevertheless, such a reading seems far-fetched, and It IS
surely preferable to read two main clauses.
In a past-tense context, too, ~t, + YIQTOL most often represents
a main clause. 85 But a few cases of subordinate clauses have been
identified:
Ex 39:21

i~~O nli~~-t,~ '''\1li~~~ jwh;:r-n~ i0:Pi~j

. i~~n :lran-t,l} n~iJ~ n~~I:1 t,"I:1~:;l
..

"'~~O t,l}~ jWh;:r 'n'I:-Nt,l

They bound the breastpiece by its ri.ngs to the. rings of

the ephod with a blue cord, so that It should he on the
decorated band of the ephod, and that the breastpiece
should not come loose from the ephod.

Other examples: Ex 39:22-23; Num 8: 19; Isa 44:20; Ezek 4:8; Jona
3:9; Job 14:5; 19:8; Lam 3:7; Esther 9:27; Neh 13: 19; 2 Chr 23: 19.

~_m'm~mm

Concluding remarks
Volitives tend to be used as "light subordinates" in a variety of
syntactic environments. This usage certainly proceeds fr~m the
~_---~-~basw meaning-trt-tfte--elitie&,----whiG~is .. the expresslo~ of
speaker's will. Representing a process as depend~nt on the WIll of
the speaker, a form like "n" "let it be" could eastly be adapted to
express dependence on another process. In many languages of the
world, the same modal verbal form is used in main clauses to
express wishes and requests, and in subordinate clauses to express
purpose or result.

___

Chapter 4

At the same time, one observes that non-volitive forms tend to be

substituted for volitives in subordinate clauses. This latter tendency
manifests itself in different and apparently unrelated ways:
- Instead of the cohortative, the first person YIQTOL form is used
rather often following another volitive or a question.
- The jussive too may be replaced by a regular YIQTOL form,
although this happens much more rarely than with the cohortative. 86
- Instead of the expected t,~ + jussive, one almost systematically
finds ~t, + YIQTOL as the negative counterpart of subjunctive
volitives.
These phenomena are to be viewed in the light of a larger
diachronic development within biblical Hebrew, in the course of
which YIQTOL, the jussive, and the cohortative collapsed into one
single paradigm. 87 In CBH, this development is still at an initial
stage. In Classical prose, where word order helps to distinguish
volitives from YIQTOL forms, the two modal subsystems are
generally kept well apart. The irregularities signalled above are
mere auguries of an evolution to come.

Inter-clausal relations: final remarks

The constructions reviewed in the present chapter have been
treated under the heading of Konjunktionslose Hypotaxeconjunction-less subordination-in a monograph by Ewald Kuhr.
This term may appear to be an apt description of the circumstantial
clause and the subjunctive volitive: both types of syntax express
grammatical subordination but neither makes use of a distinct
conjunction. The question needs to be asked, however, how these
clauses can be recognised as being subordinate if they are not
marked by a particle. The answer lies in the concept of interclausal relations. Both circumstantial clauses and subjunctive
volitives are formally indistinguishable from main clauses, but
they are marked as being subordinate by the syntactic environment
in which they occur. The combination of a narrative W A YYIQTOL
clause and a circumstantial clause tells the hearer/reader that the
latter is subordinate to the former. And the sequence of two
different volitive forms indicates that the second clause depends on
86

85

See Chapter VIII.

159

87

See Baden, "Volitive Sequence"; Joosten, "Volitive Sequences."

See in more detail Chapter XI.

160

Inter-Clausal Relations

the first. From the basic patterns, other, more intricate, constructi~ns
developed, which need to be studied closely in order to detenmne
their precise function.
.
The absence of a conjunction or other grammatical marker
may result in a loss of clarity. The subordinate nature .of the clau~e
is not always manifest at first sight, nor its prec~se seman~lc
nuance. It should not be concluded, however, that cIrcumstantial
clauses or subjunctive volitives are in fact main clause~. T~e
grammatical transformation effected by inter-clausal relations IS
real. Form and content cooperate to create a fine texture of layered
meaning, to retrace which is the grammarian's irrevocable task.

CHAPTER V
WAVVIQTOL
In classical biblical prose, WAYYIQTOL is the most frequent verbal
form.1 Partly, this reflects the literary genre dominant in the corpus,
namely narrative. Discursive and poetic texts show a lower frequency
of the form. 2 Viewed in this light, the abundance of WAYYIQTOL is
not significant for the analysis of the verbal system. All the same, the
high frequency of the form does lead to a great number of contextual
uses. In the present work, WAYYIQTOL is defined as an indicative
preterite. This basic function accounts for the use of the form, which
nearly always implies a past-tense interpretation. At the same time,
the preterite definition avoids attributing to WAYYIQTOL functional
traits that are not necessarily present (such as punctuality, sequentiality, foregrounding, or narrativity).

Introduction
Wright, Lectures (1890), 191-193; Bergstdisser, Grammatik II (1929), 3, 9-14;
Birkeland, "Imperfectum Consecutivum" (1935); Hatav, Semantics (1997),37-88.

Modern scientific enquiry into the meaning of the Hebrew verbal

forms for a long time held on to the idea that WAYYIQTOL was

An Accordance search on Genesis - 2 Kings found 10590 W AYYIQTOL forms,

9964 QATAL forms, 6956 WEQATAL forms and 9143 YIQTOL forms (many of
which may have to be regarded as jussives); the predicative participle is
harder to count, but it is certainly less frequent than the finite forms.
2 In the book of Isaiah, an Accordance search finds the following figures:
WAYYIQTOL 250; QATAL 1456; WEQATAL 998; YIQTOL 2096. These figures
are certainly inexact, but they give an impression of the proportions
characterizing verbal usage in biblical Hebrew.
1

WAYYIQTOL

162

directly related to YIQTOL. 3 This approach led to two fundamental

misjudgements. First, it was concluded that W AYYIQTOL must be
indifferent to tense. Although the form regularly refers to the past,
this temporal feature was not considered an essential part of its
function since it could not be derived from YIQTOL. Second, the
essence of the W AYYIQTOL form was taken to be the expression of
progression, sequence, "nascent action": since YIQTOL regularly
implied futurity, W AYYIQTOL was taken to express what was
subsequent to the preceding clause, a "future-in-the-past" as it
were. 4 Thus, WAYYIQTOL was defined as a consecutive form,
expressing progression or sequence. Its temporal implications were
judged to depend on the preceding clause.
At the end of the nineteenth century, however, new discoveries
called earlier definitions of WAYYIQTOL into question. Notably,
a comparison with Akkadian, and then also with Arabic, made it
clear that the verbal form underlying W AYYIQTOL was not in fact
identical with YIQTOL. While YIQTOL goes back to the WestSemitic present-future yaqtu[u, the verbal element in W AYYIQTOL
is related to the West-Semitic preterite yaqtul. 5 The implications of
this insight are crucial. W AYYIQTOL, it turns out, does not refer to
the past because it links up with a preceding past-tense verbal
form, but because the verbal form it incorporates is and always
was an expression of the past. These historical considerations are
confirmed by an unbiased review of the uses of W AYYIQTOL: the

The basic identity of W AYYIQTOL and YIQTOL was accepted throughout the
nineteenth century and underlies Driver's Treatise in all its editions. For the
history of research, see Garr, "Driver's Treatise," xxv.
4
.
the following statement by Schroder,
Institutiones adjundame';ta linguae
raeae
1875), 261-262: Quando
enim diversae res factae, quae continua quadam serie aliae alias exceperunt,
narrandae sunt, Hebraei primam quidem per Praeteritum, alias autem
subsequentes, quas, ratione praecedentis, tamquam futures considerant, per
Futurum exprimunt-[In the narration of several events following one another
immediately, the Hebrews express the first one by means of QATAL, but the
following ones, considered as future on account of what has preceded, by
means of YIQTOL].
5 See Garr, "Driver's Treatise" XXV-XXVI. The conjunction in WAYYIQTOL is not
a waw conversive converting the future tense into the past, nor a waw
consecutive linking up with the preceding context, but rather a waw
conservative, preserving an archaic verbal form that has otherwise fallen from

use.

Chapter 5

163

reference to the past is indeed remarkably constant with this verbal

form. 6
So WAYYIQTOL, in contrast to what earlier grammars tried to
establish, may be considered a past tense. What then about its
"consecutive" quality? The notion of sequence, it must be admitted
.
.
'
IS not Just a matter of postulate: even a passing acquaintance with
biblical narrative will leave the impression that WAYYIQTOL implies
sequential action. As the backbone of Hebrew narrative,
WAYYIQTOL usually expresses narrative continuity, with each
successive event linking up with the preceding one. Nevertheless,
use and meaning should in principle be kept apart. In a fair number
of passag~s, W AYYIQTOL does not link up with earlier events, or,
although lInking up, does not imply temporal or logical sequence.
What, then, is the relation between this form and the sequential
function? On this point, recent linguistic thinking has produced new
clarity.7 If WAYYIQTOL is a past tense, it has been pointed out, this
means that the form creates its own reference time. There is a deictic
element in WAYYIQTOL, adding to the notion of process a "temporal
location" at some point in the past. Now, with two adjacent
WAYYIQTOL forms, each one creating its own reference time the
.inference will normally be that the two reference times are diffe~ent.
Moreover, in narrative, they will usually be interpreted to be
successive. Indeed, narrative retraces movement through time, so to
speak, from the past toward the future: the reference times of
successive W AYYIQTOL forms are like points making up a line
through time. 8 The sequential interpretation is not a necessary one,
however. When the action narrated is non-sequential, preterite
W AYYIQTOL can very well be used. Moreover, W AYYIQTOL occurs
in direct discourse, too. In a report, it may express past actions
whether they form a sequence or not. In conclusion, W AYYIQTOL
does not express sequence. It does not mean "and thereafter he did
such and such," nor "and so he did such and such." In a sense, what
the form expresses is the opposite of sequentiality: not that an
action happened after another action, but that an action stands on
~ See i? parti~ular Birkeland, "Imperfectum Consecutivum," and Gross, Verbform.
8 Se~ III partIcular Hatav, Se.mantics, 37-88.

ThIS statement does not Imply that W AYYIQTOL expresses punctual action.
Indeed, WAYYIQTOL can express all kinds of processes, including states; see
Chapter III, pp. 83-87.

WAYYIQTOL

164

its own feet, that it happened "then"-at some point in the past.
Although the notion of sequentiality very often applies to actions
expressed by W AYYIQTOL, it does not flow from the verbal form,
but from the literary genre of narrative discourse.
WAVVIQTOL

in narrative

presents an action as happening "then"-at some

moment in the past. This function makes the form apt to be used in
narrative, where events belong to a more or less distant time frame
not immediately connected to the here-and-now of the speaker.9 In
classical prose, about 99 percent of W AYYIQTOL forms occur ~n
narrative. This does not mean that the use of WAYYIQTOL IS
particularly unified. Within the narrative, the form exhibits a great
number of usages.

W AYYIQTOL

The beginning of a narrative

Niccacci, Syntax (1990), 48-62; Van der Merwe, "~it~'" (1998).

The corpus of classical Hebrew prose presents itself as one. long

story stretching from the creation of the world to the exlle of
Judah. Apart from Gen 1:1, there are hardly any absolute
beginnings.1O This makes it hard for the grammarian to determine
how the beginning of a Hebrew narrative was constructed. The few
embedded discourses that can unambiguously be qualified as
narrative (as opposed to report) do not commence with WAYYIQTOL:
2 Sam 12: 1

no~ '''ll~ 1"0 o"i4f~~ "~~

rCN' 1nN' '''rC SJ 1nN

There were two men in a certain city,

the other poor.

~heT ~~e

rich

a~d

~_______~~~~____~~~~~~~-~~O~~Ol~O
The trees once went out to anoint a king over
themselves.ll

10

11

On the specific discursive attitude characterizing narration, see Weinrich,

Tempus.
.
.,
.
Outside the classical corpus, there are some independent stones begmmng WIth
WAYYIQTOL: Jona 1:1 (but perhaps the story intends to link up with 2 Kgs
14:25); Ruth 1:1 (linking up expressly with the book of Judges); Esther 1:1.
See also: 2 Kgs 14:9 ; Isa 5:1; Job 1:1.

165

Chapter 5

The non-use of WAYYIQTOL in the initial clause probably flows

from the necessity to begin a story with at least some background
information. The main events, recounted with WAYYIQTOL (see
2 Sam 12:4; Jud 9:8b), can be related only after the scene has been
set. The same explanation applies to the very beginning of the
biblical narrative: before the main story line can begin (Gen 1:3),
some background information is provided (Gen 1:1-2).
A new section within the narrative can very well begin with
WAYYIQTOL:

Jud 9:1

i~~ "lj~-"~il~~~".l1~~;-l~ l~~"~~ l~~1

Now Ahimelech went to Shechem to his mother's kinsfolk. 12

A peculiar narrative feature is the use of "0;1 "and it happened" to

introduce a new unit. Where ;''';' means, "to be, become, exist" and
possesses a genuine subject, it must be considered a true verb like
any other. But where it is immediately followed by a temporal or
circumstantial expression, it does not itself represent a narrative
event: 13
J ud 1: 1

SJrCiil"

ni~

",nN "il'"

... il'il~~ "~'fzi" "j~-:1~N~~;

And it happened after the death of- Jo~h~~, "that -:th~

T

Israelites inquired of the LORD

What "happened" is nothing other than the Israelites' inquiring

related further on in the verse. "0;1 is a mere grammatical element
integrating the following temporal phrase into the narrative. This
type of syntax is very frequent at the beginning of narrative units,
although it is found also at other junctures. 14
The body of the narrative
Hatav, Semantics (1997), 56-83; Li, Sequence and Non Sequence (1999).

Biblical narrative consists in the main of a chain of WAYYIQTOL

forms making up the backbone of the story. This chain may be
interrupted by other forms presenting "off-line" material, such as
QATAL forms in negative or contrastive clauses; QATAL or participle

See also: Lev 1:1; Num 1:1; 33:3; Jud 2:1; 4:1; 5:1; 6:11.
The two types occur together in Ex 19:16 and Ruth 1:1.
14 At the beginning of a section: Gen 6:1; 14:1; 22:1; 27:1; 38:1; 40:1; 48:1; at
other junctures: Gen 39:5, 7, 10, 11, 13.
12

13

WAYYIQTOL

166

in circumstantial clauses; QATAL or participle in subordinate clauses

introduced by a particle such as "::J or 'tli~; YIQTOL and WEQATAL in
clauses expressing habitual action.

Sequential WAYYIQTOL
Far and away the most frequent use of WAYYIQTOL in the body of
the narrative implies temporal succession. Examples are too
numerous to be listed. Almost any verse in a narrative text will
provide illustrative instances:
2 Sam 12:20

,.,~Z,9~ =,~lj;1 "19~1 rlji~1 rl~O~ i11 0R~1

iMMrz.;!\, n,n"-n":l

Chapter 5

Successive WAVYIQTOL forms expressing one action

Two WAYYIQTOL forms may be used to express different aspects
of a single event. This usage clearly shows that WAYYIQTOL does
not positively express sequentiality. A first example was already
pointed out above, namely introductory .,i:t;1 "and it happened." As
was stated, the "happening" referred to by this type of "i:t;1 is none
other than the one recounted in the following verb form, which is
very often WAYYIQTOL. 15
Another usage that belongs in this category is the combination
of verbs of speech (or verbs implying speech) with the verb ,~~:

~:l!\'

1 Kgs 18:24

z,::J~!\' OMZ, iZ, i~"rz.,!\, ~~~~, in"~-Z,~ ~:l~i

-

":":

T-

-:.-

..

-:

1,,)1
I

Here, a chain of ten WAYYIQTOL forms expresses as many

successive events.
What is true on the level of the verse is even more so on the level
of the chapter: a series of sentences with WAYYIQTOL normally
implies a sequence of events in the story. Sequential action is the
default reading of narrative WAYYIQTOL.
In certain cases, the sequential nuance may be present even
though the processes are not strictly successive in the temporal sense:
Jud 1:30

Gen 34:13-14

from the action

expressed in the preceding clause. But WAYYIQTOL is not subsquent
in temporal terms. Such implication of "logical succession" is more
frequent with WAYYIQTOL in direct discourse than in narrative.

Non-sequential WAYYIQTOL
Washburn, "Syntax and Semantics" (1994); Cook, "Semantics" (2004).

There are, however, more than a few exceptions where

WAYYIQTOL does not represent successive actions. The following
usages, although statistically infrequent, are entirely regular.

o~~-n~ :l~~:-"~~ u~:j

i'~''''
- : - n~'~::l
T : : ''':l~
T 'i~n-n~'
-:": :
onh~

n,j",

n~ ~~~ ,rz.;~

..~z,;;,j ~z,. o~~z,~ i'O~;;

And the sons of Jacob answered She~hem and ii;mo~ hi;

father deceitfully, and spoke, because he had defiled
Dinah their sister, and said to them, "We cannot ... "

i::liP~ "~~~:PiJ :l~:j t;z,Q~ ":;~i"-n~l

M~-=-"'"#_"--~e"-Clctiorr-"'expres5ed--b~YYfttPeb~fl()ws

O.r;O-Z,il 1.11:1

Answering and saying are not two successive events, but one and
the same.17 Other verbs combining with ,~~ in this way include:
,~~ (Gen 22:7); 1':l piel; ':li piel; rz.;'i; 1'J1r; 1'Z, hiphil; 1~~ piel; ij,j
hiphil; 'i,j;' z,~,j hiphil (Gen 37:21); ,EjO piel; ,nJ1 niphal (Jud 13:8);
z,z,Ej hithpael; n'~ piel (Deut 31 :23); pJ1~;. j"P polel; oz,P hithpael;
~'p; :l",; z,~rz.;; J1:lrz.; niphal (1 Kgs 1:29); z,z,n hiphil (1 Kgs 18:27);
also the expressions iZ,~9 ~f?'~ (e.g., Num 23:7) and '~1 :l"~ij (e.g.,
Deut 1:25). In one passage, three successive verbs are combined:

1i,tpP ":;~i"-n~ rz.;"jin ~z, 1~i:l\

Zebulun did not drive out the inhabitants of Kitron, or

the inhabitants of N ahalol, and the Canaanites lived
among them.

'~liJ :li~ i'~N!!1

And all the people answered and said, "It is well spoken."16

T-

Then David rose from the ground, washed, anointed

himself, and changed his clothes. He went into the house of
the LORD, and worshipped; he then went to his own house,
and asked, and they set food before him, and he ate.

167

A third usage involves verbs like 'n~ piel "to do quickly," ='0"
hiphil "to continue doing," and :l,rz.; "to do again" when they are
used to qualify the action expressed by the following verbal form: 18

See, e.g., Gen 4:3; 19:34; 25:11; 27:1; 29:23; 38:28; 41:8.
Similar sequences are found about 120 times in the Hebrew Bible.
17 The usage arises out of the necessity in classical Hebrew to introduce direct
speech with the verb ,~~. See G. Goldenberg, "On Direct Speech and the
Hebrew Bible," in K. Jongeling et a1. (eds.), Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic
Syntax, Fs J. Hoftijzer, SLL 17, (Leiden 1991),79-96.
18 The following verbal form may be an infinitive construct, but the use of
WAYYIQTOL is entirely normal as well.
15

16

WAYYIQTOL

168

;'~1~ irJTtiP-Nt,~ ,e~j t,!U~~ iij~;j

Immediately Saul fell full length on the ground.I 9

Gen 45: 15

1 Sam 28:20

;'1i~i? ;:yTt~i ;'rf~ nP2~j 0Y1~~

Gen 25:34 ~~~j t,~N"j O"~l~ i"qi OQ~ 'f?'.v.~ rt1~ :JP~:l
Then Jacob gave Esau bread and lentil stew, and he ate
and drank. 23

1 Sam 18:11
i"f~i il1~ ;'f~ i~N"j

='It;?"j

And Saul threw the spear, for he thought, "I will pin
David to the wall."

Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah. 20

1 Kgs 19:6

o:Tt

rJ/j~~l o"~~1 rJ~~ '''\lfzj~''J~ ;'~01 ~:;;i~j

:l~rz1"' :lrz1"' Mrz1"' t,::lN"'

He looked, and there at his head wa~ ~ ~ak~ bal~~d-on-ho~
stones, and a jar of water. He ate and drank and lay
down again. 21

An example that is not easily classified but belongs in this section

is the following:
Gen 7:23

In all these examples, the context makes it clear that the actions
indicated by successive W A YYIQTOL forms are roughly contemporaneous. 24 The grammar does not indicate this temporal relation, but
neither does it suggest that the events are successive. Contemporaneousness can be indicated by syntactical means, when the need
arises. Compare the following examples:
Num 12:2

;,Ttl~y .,~~-t,~ i~~ OiP;iJ-t,~-rJ~ n~~j

Gen 18: 10

the earth

was filled with violence.

See also: Gen 18:6; 24:18, 20,46; 44:11; Ex 34:8; Jos 4:10; 8:14, 19; Jud
13:10 ; 1 Sam 17:48; 25:18, 23, 42; 28:24; 2 Sam 19:17; 1 Kgs 20:33,41;
2 Kgs 9:13.
.
20 See also: Gen 25:1; 38:5; Jud 11:4; 1 Sam 19:21; 2 Sam 18:22; Job 36:1;
Esther 8:3; Dan 10:18; 1 Chr 14:13.
21 See also: Gen 26:18; Num 11:4; Deut 1:45; Jud 8:33; 19:7; 1 Kgs 13:33; 19:7;
22 2 Kgs 1:11, 13; 21:3; Jer 34:16; Zech 5:1; 6:1.
See Gen 40:23; Jud 6:27.

;'~/j rJ.v.~ 'TJ.,~~ :Jirzf~

:Jirzf i~N"j

t,ONy nt1~ rJ1J~~ ;'1f?'1 'TJr;J~~ ;'1f?'~ r~-;,p.01

The active and the passive seem to refer precisely to the same
event. Similar examples seem to be rare. 22

oTtO Y1~Y N~~1:lj O"Ht,~y .,~~~ Y1~y rJJjrftr:1j

p"JQ ii9 N"j

Moses? Has he not spoken through us also?" And the

LORD heard it.25

He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the
ground, human beings and animals and creeping things and
birds of the air; they were blotted out from the earth.

Gen 6: 11

i~1 ;,~b~-l~

Y1~y-r~ 1n~~j

""_ _ _'_W_ _ _4~~~"_.-'-~-Nuw-rh'C'~orrupt;rr6rr~S"'sight;and

;'4;';

;";''' J:~rz1"' i::li ij::l-On Nt,;,

And they said, "Has the LO~~ sp~k~n "o~ly th~ough

o:~rfiJ =,iJ:-i~l ~~"ri~ ;,Ttij~-i~ 0l~~

Contemporaneous events
Actions whose event times coincide can also be expressed with
W A YYIQTOL forms:

OtT~~ ~il~j ,.,O~-t,~~ PW~;j

And he kissed all his brothers and wept upon them.

It would be wrong to render this sentence: "Saul hastened and then

fell." The first verbal form describes the speed characterizing the action
expressed by the second form. In English, this function is usually
expressed by an adverb (as in the NRSV translation given here).
Gen 25: 1

169

Chapter 5

He said, "I will surely return to you in due season, and

your wife Sarah shall have a son." And Sarah heard it in
the tent door [KJV] .26

The event structure implied in these sentences is very similar, but

the syntax is not. In the first example, the acts of saying and
listening are simply juxtaposed; it is left to the reader to infer that
they are contemporaneous. In the second example, the listening is
represented as a circumstance attending the saying; the contemporaneousness of the two acts is expressed by the syntax. 27

19

With the same verbs, see also: Gen 24:54; 26:30; Ex 24:11; Jud 9:27; 19:21;
1 Kgs 19:6, 8; Ruth 3:7; 1 Chr 29:22.
24 Other examples: Gen 6:6; 12:4; 33:4; 34:3, 7; 35:16; 45:15; 50:1, 7; Ex 19:18-19;
1 Sam 14:48; 17:11,24; 18:8; 20:41; 2 Sam 13:2; 16:13.
25 Similarly 1 Sam 17:23.
26 NRSV: "And Sarah was listening at the entrance to the tent."
27 On the circumstantial clause, see Chapter IV.
23

WAYYIQTOL

170

Chapter 5

Jacob was left alone; and a man wrestled with him until
daybreak. When the man saw that he did not prevail
against Jacob, he struck him on the hip socket.

-Overlapping time frames

Washburn, "Syntax and Semantics" (1994).

When the event time of one action includes that of another, the two
processes may relate to one another as figure and ground. The first
situation sets the scene, while the second occupies the foreground.
If explicit expression is to be given to such a temporal relation, the
circumstantial clause can be used. Occasionally, however, one
finds successive WAYYIQTOL forms:
2 Sam 11:2

;::lf~i? t,~~ '11 0R~l ::lj~O n.p.~ ";:1;1

l~~ij-n"~ l~-t,~ l~ijt;1~j

lni1 t,11~ n~ni i1~N N'"1

T -

.. ":

The phrase "until daybreak" shows that the wrestling was still
going on when the man saw that he could not prevail. This type of
syntax is entirely normal. 29
In the preceding examples, the overlapping stretches forward
in time: an earlier WAYYIQTOL form includes a later one in its
event time. The overlapping can also be exerted backward,
however. The effect is usually that of a clause summing up events
recounted earlier:

:--

Here the WAYYIQTOL form l~ijI;'l~j expresses an action that is

begun but not completed before the next event, also expressed by
WAYYIQTOL, comes about. The overlapping of time frames is not
expressly indicated but has to be deduced from the context.
Uncontroversial examples of this use are rare:

o"~.p.O 1'H~j i1~''''1~ij i~::l~l o~~ 1~~1

i1l;Pij t,.,=?~ ,1:t~O "0;j
O"~i1-t,N0: t,!jj
t,T'~i1-nN1
0: :
T

":: -

So he went with them. When they came to the Jordan,

they cut down trees. But as one of them was felling a log,
his axe head fell into the water.

The context indicates that the action of felling trees was not over
when the accident happened. The W AYYIQTOL form i'q~l, "and
they cut down," sets the scene for the event recounted in the next

He took his stand in the middle of the plot, defended it

and killed the Philistines; and the LORD brought about a
great victory.3o

- Backtracking
Collins, "Pluperfect" (1995).

The circumstantial clause with a QATAL form provides Hebrew

with an effective and economical way to introduce retrospective
material into the narrative (Chapter IV). In more than a few
passages, however, retrospection is not marked syntactically but
must be inferred from the context. In these passages, simple
WAYYIQTOL refers to an act that occurred prior to the events
recounted earlier. The usage is sometimes referred to as pluperfect
WAYYIQTOL. For clarity's sake, this usage may indeed be rendered
by means of a pluperfect in English. In Hebrew, however, there is
no pluperfect, but merely a series of preterite forms in nonchronological order:

This "framing" usage of WAYYIQTOL is more easily recognised

when the verbal form is defined by an adverbial expression denoting
duration:
Gen 32:25-26

Jos 2:3-4

:--

i:J:p~1:1j o.,~~~O "~~-n~ i1~~O

nR1:1j
... o.,~~~O ,,~~ iN~ i~ '9~Mj

-:-

29

30
28

See also: Gen 25:22; 27:41; 32:8; 43:31.

'bN~ ::ll:tl-t,~ ;n",; 1~9 n~~~j

lt1":;~ iN~-'W~ l;~~ o"~~ij o"~~~O "~"~;i1

iN~ rj~O-t,f-n~ ,e~~ .,~

;~s; iZi"~ P~l$~j ;1~~ ::l~~: 't1~~1

it, t,~., ~t, .,~ N'"' ,nWil n,t,l1 '11
T

O~"~l i1R~r::lij-l;n:p ::l~:I;'l~l

i17;'~ i1.i?iiZiI;1 i11i1; fz; -17:j O"I:1~~~-n~ 1~1

2 Sam 23: 12

It happened, late one afternoon, when David rose from

his couch and was walking about on the roof of the king's
house, that he saw from the roof a woman bathing.

2 Kgs 6:4-5

171

See also: Gen 5:4, 7; 11:13; 29:20; 37:34-35; 1 Sam 7:13-15.

Other examples: Gen 25:34; 48:20; Jos 10:40; Jud 3:30; 8:28; 12:9, 11; 1 Sam
17:50; 31:6; 2 Sam 23:10; 24:8; Ruth 1:22.

172

WAYYIQTOL

Then the king of Jericho sent orders to Rahab, "Bring

out the men who have come to you, who entered your
house, for they have come only to search out the whole
land." But the woman had taken the two men and hidden
them. And she said, "True, the men came to me ... "

",t,

2 Sam 11: 18-19

,~:!,

::lNi" nt,rzj:!,

n~n~~~ -~'::l~-t,~=-r,~

",'b~~ 'l-~~~~~rl~T ,~~')

Then J oab sent and told David all the news about the
fighting; and he instructed the messenger saying ...

In both these examples we meet with a phenomenon that may be

called "backtracking": the story moves back a little from the point
in time to which it had progressed. In Jos 2:3-4, when the king's
men address Rahab it is too late for her to take the spies and hide
them; the reader understands that the latter actions were executed
before the arrival of the messengers. In the second passage, verse
18 recounts the sending of a report on the war to David, but verse
19 then adds some words said by J oab to the envoy before his
departure; this takes us back to a point in time preceding the one
arrived at previously.
Other examples: Gen 29:24; Deut 31:9;31 Jos 2:4, 16; 18:8; Jud
3:16; 20:36-47;32 1 Sam 26:4; 2 Sam 11:15, 19; 1 Kgs 13:12; 21:9;
2 Kgs 20:8;33 Isa 39:1;34 Jona 4:5.
A similar phenomenon occurs in the transition from one
narrative section to the next. An example is provided by 1 Kgs
11: 17. In verse 14 it is reported that the LORD raised up Hadad the
Edomite as an adversary against Solomon. The next verses then
provide a flashback recounting where this Hadad comes from:
1 Kgs 11: 15-17
~~--~.~~~~"~~~-~..-"~~""----_"~""~"~'*__~""_~._"'W".__~-~~~~_""_ _

... 0i'N-rlN "'1 rli"n::l

::r.j~,,.,-/:t..,:~~,,_'':,...0;'"

."_'''w,,.....

In this case the backtracking does not occur within the narrative as

in the earlier examples. The retrospective material is constructed as

a separate paragraph, introduced with "n", and a temporal phrase. 35
As was noted above, narrative sections can set in with
W AYYIQTOL. The present examples show that such sections are
temporally emancipated from the preceding context. Just as
successive W A YYIQTOL forms within a narrative do not necessarily
express successive events, so successive paragraphs beginning
with W AYYIQTOL do not necessarily recount successive anecdotes.
Anticipatory
Isaksson, "Aberrant Usages" (1998), 17.

For the insertion of prospective material, too, biblical narrative has

its techniques, notably the use of the infinitive construct, or of
YIQTOL forms in subordinate clauses (see Chapter VIII). In a handful
of examples, however, anticipatory matter is introduced in an
unmarked way with W AYYIQTOL. In these cases, only close study of
the context will indicate that the process is not recounted in its
proper place:
Deut 5:22

1997), 134-138.
Narrative Techniques," VT 35 .(1985),417-435, in particular 430.
Note, how~v~r, that verse 7, which creates the temporal discontinuity, is probably
a later addItion. In the parallel account in Isaiah 38 it figures in a different place
(vers~ .21). See Y. Zakovitch, "Assimilation in Biblical Narratives," in 1. Tigay,
Emplrtcal Models for Biblical Criticism (Pennsylvania, 1985), 175-196, in
particular 181-185.
34 See, however, BHS.

n,n" ,::l'1 n~Nn O"'::l'1n-rlN

T : .,' 'Q~ "OT~~ijp:'~~-t,~

l:'j9: ~t,1 t,i'~ t,ip t,~l~Q1 nVQ rzj~Q liM~
"t,N C~rl!!' O"j::lN rlht, "jrzj-t,,Ii O::lM~!!'

These words the LOR~ '~p~ke'-withT ~ loU:d ~~ice -to 'yo~;

whole assembly at the mountain, out of the fire, the
cloud, and the thick darkness, and he added no more. He
wrote them on two stone tablets, and gave them to me.

"n",

32 See 1. Revell, "The Battle with Benjamin (Judges xx 29-48) and Hebrew
33

For when David was in Edom [which happened many

years before] ... , he killed every male in Edom ... , but
Hadad fled ...

'~t~~f l~;

31 See J.-P. Sonnet, The Book within the Book: Writing in Deuteronomy (Leiden

173

Chapter 5

From the context, it becomes clear that the giving of the tablets
happened much later in the story, later in any event than what is
told next in verses 23-27.
Other examples: Gen 42:20; Deut 31:22; Jud 1:7; 1 Sam 25:20.

35

Other examples: Num 7:1 (cf. Ex 40:1); 1 Sam 18:6; 1 Kgs 18:4; 2 Kgs 18:1.
See also: Ex 32:1; Jud 2:6; 1 Kgs 7:13.

174

WAYYIQTOL

Slightly different is the narrative technique by which an event is

first stated generally and then told in more detail. In this case, it is
usual to find W AYYIQTOL in both the general statement and the
ensuing narration:

'''O~7 '~~j Oi"O =,~i" O"O~j

irlN ~:J~ ,ili i!jQi!lj
...oi"nil ~:J-ili~tzj Oil""~ iON"'

Gen 37 :5-6

-:-

:.

-:

-:

Once Joseph had a dream, and when he told it to his

brothers, they hated him even more. He said to
them,"Listen to this dream ... "

See also: Gen 18:1-2; 45:21; Jud 1:4-7; 1 Sam 10:9-11.

Iterative processes
Fokkelman, "Iterative Forms" (1991),45.

For the marked expression of repeated action, biblical narrative uses

the YIQTOL and WEQATAL forms (see Chapter vIII). In contrast,
W A YYIQTOL implies single events in the vast majority of cases.
Occasionally, however, one meets with WAYYIQTOL forms that
need to be interpreted as implying repeated actions. In these passages,
W A YYIQTOL may be called an unmarked iterative:
1 Sam 8:3

li~:!lil "in~ im", '''~i':!l ,":J:l i~"il-~'"

-

T -

-: -

.-

:.

T T

o~~~ 1m~j 'ljtzj-inf.?~j

His [Samuel's] sons did not follow in his ways, but turned
aside after gain, they took bribes and perverted justice.

The W A YYIQTOL forms do not refer to single actions that happened

consecutively. The passage describes a way of life, with W AYYIQTOL
implying habitual action.
The repetitive quality may be underlined by an adverbial
. -..
.. -..

":r'~~'-~~~~--"-""~ression:-~"-"-w'-- -.------~-- '---'~,.-.,.~.-."

Ex 16:21

ip!:l~ ip!:l~ irlN 1tQf.?7~j

Chapter 5

175

He himself went on ahead of them, bowing himself to the

ground seven times.

The adverbial clause indicates that the action of bowing, expressed with
WAYYIQTOL, is not executed once but several times. Such cases may be
considered "summative": the seven acts of obeisance are represented as one
single action. 36 Usually the repetition is carried out before the next event
recounted.
WAVVIQTOL in excursive material
Niccacci,Syntax (1990), 146, 177-180.

In narration, W A YYIQTOL is not limited to the recounting of the

main line of events but occurs in "off-line" material, too. It
regularly follows verbal forms that signal an interruption of the
narrative continuity: QATAL, YIQTOL and WEQATAL, and others.
Such continuation often implies that W A YYIQTOL more or less
takes on the meaning of the preceding form, though without
expressly marking it. Thus we find "pluperfect" W AYYIQTOL after
pluperfect QATAL clauses, and "iterative" WAYYIQTOL after iterative
YIQTOL or WEQAT AL clauses. We also encounter backgrounded
W A YYIQTOL in a diversity of backgrounded clauses. As was shown
above, W AYYIQTOL can take on all these nuances in the body of the
narrative as well. The mechanism is approximately the same in all
these cases: while W AYYIQTOL expresses mere pastness, the context
defines the action as anterior, iterative, or backgrounded.
WAYVIQTOL continuing circumstantial clauses
Circumstantial clauses expressing anteriority have a core
consisting of the conjunction we, the subject, and a QATAL form
(see Chapter IV). Where the circumstance is described in more
than one clause, WAYYIQTOL is used in continuation. The clearest
cases occur when the reference is to a period prior to the time
frame of the whole narrative:

"W"~~ij oi"~ l~f.?~ '''~~~j

1 Sam 30: 1-3

Morning by morning they gathered it.

Other examples of iterative WAYYIQTOL: Gen 30:39; 37:2; Jud 4:5;

9:25; 1 Sam 7:15; 13:20; 18:13; 2 Sam 8:6; 1 Kgs 12:30; 2 Kgs
16:4; 17:17.

'11 ~:l~ "i)~j

l~f.?~-"~l :l~r"~ iO~~ "P~9~j

tzj~f l1~N i!:)i~~j l~f.?~-rl~ 1~~j

"i'r'.l'l IbR~ l1f-irP.~ o"W~ij-rl~ 1~rlf~j

O::Ji'" i~r,", 1liT~"' tzj.,~ irl"~il ~"
... tzj~:!l Til~~'tv n~'n' i~~~-"~' ,.,tzj:J~~. " , ~:l!l'

NB. Cases of limited iteration can also be expressed by WAYYIQTOL, but these
belong in a different class:
Gen 33:3'
t:l~~.r;9l .i1;W i1~"'l~ 1n1:1~~j t:lv~~~~ 1;.r; ~1i11

36

":

T T -: -

Other examples: Num 20:11; Jos 6:15; 1 Sam 2:21; 12:9-11; 18:11.

T-

WAYYIQTOL

176

Now when David and his men came to Zildag on the third day,
the Amalekites had made a raid on the Negeb and on Zildag
[circumstantial clause: we-subject - QATAL]. They had attacked
Zildag, burned it down, and taken captive the women and all
who were in it, both small and great; they had killed none of
them, but had carried them off, and gone their way.
David and his men came to the city and found it burned down ...

The indented clauses refer to a time frame prior to the main line of
the story: the whole campaign of the Amalekites was completed
while David and his men were away, well before the point of their
traumatic home-coming at which the narrative sets in. Apart from
the subject matter, the retrospective nature of the indented material
is indicated by the word order of the first clause. The sequence we subject - QATAL identifies this as a circumstantial clause expressing
anteriority. The following WAYYIQTOL forms, however, are not
marked for anteriority. They simply carryon the flashback. With the
WAYYIQTOL form in vs. 3, the main story line picks up again, as
shown by the content of the clause. 37
Often, however, a circumstantial QATAL clause is anterior only
with regard to the following narrative. In this case, too, the
circumstantial clause can be continued with WAYYIQTOL, but the
extent of the continuation is harder to determine: 38
2 Sam 5: 17-19

Pti~:p 1N~ O"I:1~~~1 .

o"~~'l Pti~:p 1rzftp~~j

O"Mrzjt,S-t,N itt,17Nit ,bNt, it,it"::l ,,~ t,Nrz7!1,

... Now th'e:Philis~ine'~"h'~d com~ a~d spre~d o';t:i~

the valley of Rephaim.
David inquired of the LORD, "Shall I go up against the
Philistines ?"
In this case the circumstantial QATAL clause ("the Philistines had

is not anterior tome entire tim~rrme-~ofthe narrative. In

fact, all events told are in their chronological order. The grammatical
function of the circumstantial clause is to describe the background
to what happened next ("David inquired ... "). There are, then, no
grammatical reasons why the WAYYIQTOL clause in verse 18 ("and
they spread out in the valley of Rephaim") should be taken as an
extension of the circumstantial clause and not as the resurfacing of

~'-'--~-~--'-~-~-come")

37
38

Similar examples: Ge-n 31:34; 1 Sam 28:3.

Cf. Niccacci, Syntax, 91.

177

Chapter 5

the main narrative thread. Yet the former appears to be the correct
analysis: WAYYIQTOL here continues off-line, background material.
Other examples: Gen 39:1; Jos 2:6; Jud 1:16; 6:33; 1 Sam 5:1;
17:2; 2 Sam 18:18; 1 Kgs 9:16; 2 Kgs 2:7; 4:31; 5:2; Jona 1:5.
WAYVIQTOL continuing relative clauses
A relative clause with QATAL, too, can be continued with WAYYIQTOL:

O;prpiJ-t,~ N~iJ-t,f "0;1

2 Sam 2:23

nb:j t,~it~ ~ o~ t,~r'~~

And all those who came to the place
where Asahel had fallen, and died,
stood still.

Only the content of the clauses shows that the first WAYYIQTOL
after the relative QATAL clause is continuative while the second
WAYYIQTOL picks up the narrative.
Other examples: Jos 12:1; 1 Sam 30:21; 2 Sam 8:10.
WAYVIQTOL in iterative passages
Fokkelman, "Iterative Forms" (1991).

In narrative, YIQTOL and WEQATAL usually express repeated or

habitual action. Where these marked forms are followed by WAYYIQTOL
the latter most often signals a return to the main storyline. In a few
passages, however, WAYYIQTOL continues the marked forms,
assimilating their iterative meaning. Only the context distinguishes
these two usages:

Jud 6:3-4 o:H~-"~~1 P~~~11;'l~ it~~, t,~1~: I1jrO~ it;;:q

rj~v t,1::l;-n~ 1n""U?:j ov.,~~ 1lQ:j ,.,~~ 1t,~,
t,~1~::P it;~~ 1'''~~~-Nt" itt,!; '9~;::l-',!;
For whenever the Israelites put in seed, the Midianites
and the Amalekites and the people of the east would
come up [WEQATAL] against them. They would encamp
against them and destroy the produce of the land, as far
as the neighbourhood of Gaza, and leave [YIQTOL] no
sustenance in Israel.

Two WAYYIQTOL forms occur here in the middle of an introductory

passage describing what used to happen from year to year (the main
narrative begins in vs. 7). Although it seems that the writer could

WAYYIQTOL

178

have used WEQATAL forms marked for iterativity, he did not do so.
Instead he used two unmarked forms before switching back to the
marked YIQTOL at the end of vs. 4. This use of WAYYIQTOL is
found especially in long descriptive passages where the narrator
may have wished to introduce some variety. In one or two cases one
may claim that the switch to WAYYIQTOL implies a typical event
recounted to illustrate the habitual process. 39 The above example
shows that this explanation is not always feasible.
Other examples: Jud 6:3-5; 12:5; 1 Sam 1:7; 2:15-16; 14:52; 27:910; 2 Sam 15:2; 2 Kgs 3:25(?); 12:12; Jer 18:4; Job 1:5.
Other varieties of backgrounded WAYYIQTOL
The WAYYIQTOL form may occasionally continue other types of
expository material as well. Although the usages could be
categorized, the gain for grammatical description would be small
because each of them is attested infrequently. Note WAYYIQTOL
continuing a temporal clause:

Gen 27:1

Mkl~ '~~~.v.

T1"0;>1:11

PO~: Ipr~:p ~i);j

~"?ij ;J~ '~.v.-M~ ~lP~j

When Isaac was old and his eyes were dim so that he
could not see, he called his elder son Esau.

Theoretically, one could let the main narrative begin with the first
WAYYIQTOL form ("When Isaac was old, his eyes became
dim ... "). The context shows, however, that the form continues the
exposition of the circumstance. 4o
Note also WAYYIQTOL continuing a causal clause:
1 Kgs 8:7

l;'~Y o;p~-~~ o:~~:p o~~le O~~1':Pij ~:p

....... ~..... --.... ,~ O~:::l'::Ji1 1Z,O"'

r~~~~"~~""~""P'''~''~~'''''''~~-~'''''''"''''-"~'''"'"'""'~"''''-W-~"'~~-~---F"o~~r-=tWWPh""=e--c-h-e-ru-b-i-m-s-p-r-ea-d"""''''o-u-t-t~h-e~IT~''-Lw:~i:::rn;':'gT-~s-"'-'o:""er ~h~: place ~f

the ark, and they made a covering above the ark.

Other examples of backgrounded WAYYIQTOL: Gen 37:2; 1 Sam

1:2.

39

40

See, e.g., 2 Sam 15:2:

See also: Gen 43 :21.

Chapter 5

179

Concluding remarks
WAYYIQTOL is omnipresent in biblical narrative. And narrative is

essentially composed of sequential action. In combination, these two

phenomena lead to the impression that WAYYIQTOL expresses
sequential action. A closer look, however, shows that this
impression is false. WAYYIQTOL does not express progression. It is
not just a matter of a handful of exceptions and special formulas.
The non-sequential uses of WAYYIQTOL are regular and diversified.
What is true for sequentiality is true, mutatis mutandis, for
fore grounding. Although WAYYIQTOL is conspicuous in the
recounting of the main line of narrative, the expression of
fore grounded action is not part of its functional load. Indeed, the
form is regularly used in depictions of the narrative background.
The best way of describing W AYYIQTOL in narrative is to
qualify it as a preterite that is otherwise unmarked. In this capacity,
it interacts with a number of other forms and constructions. As is
well-known, the negative member in an opposition regularly takes
on one of two values, a negative one opposed to the value of the
marked member, or a neutral one not opposed to it. 41 This is
exactly what happens with narrative WAYYIQTOL:
- WAYYIQTOL enters into an aspectual opposition with participial
circumstantial clauses of the form we - subject - participle. While
the participle clause (in narrative) always expresses the durative,
imperfective aspect, WAYYIQTOL may give expression to the
punctual, perfective aspect (the negative value); but it may also
take on a nuance of durativity (the neutral value).
-, WAYYIQTOL enters into an opposition of time reference with
QATAL. While QATAL, especially in circumstantial clauses, regularly
expresses anteriority, WAYYIQTOL may indicate sequentiality; but it
may also be used where the context in fact implies anteriority.
- WAYYIQTOL enters into an opposition with the formal pair
YIQTOL and WEQATAL. While the latter regularly express repeated
action in narrative, WAYYIQTOL may signal a transition to single
action; but it may also be used when repeated action is meant.
- Finally, WAYYIQTOL stands opposed to a variety of clauses
presenting off-line material. While temporal, causal, and circumstantial

41

On the theory of markedness, see Korchin, Markedness, 1-64.

clauses express the notion of background, WAYYIQTOL may imply

foregrounded action; but it may also occur in backgrounded passages.
In sum, narrative WAYYIQTOL is a very adaptive form. The
only constant factor is its reference to past situations. This basic
function also underlies the use of WAYYIQTOL in direct discourse,
as will be shown in the next section.
WAVVIQTOL

in discourse

WAYYIQTOL is prominent in narrative, but it is not limited to this

literary genre. Indeed, even on a minimal definition of narration, it

is possible to find WAYYIQTOL clauses in non-narrative texts.
Following Labov and Reinhart, a narrative may be minimally
defined as a sequence of clauses that are temporally ordered. 42
Clauses whose sequence does not correspond to the sequence of
the events they express do not make up a story. A discourse that
does not contain at least two temporally ordered clauses should not
therefore be qualified as narrative. Precisely such non-sequential
discourses do contain WAYYIQTOL forms in biblical Hebrew:
Ex 1: 18

t:l"i~;ij-n~ T":Ij1!1j
T

i1iij

'~1ij IP"t?'~ .l11-:t~

Why have you done this, and allowed the boys to live?

The QATAL and WAYYIQTOL forms refer to the same action. 43

2 Kgs 10: 13

t:l4t,rjt, ,,~, 1:1n:lN 1i1"tnN "nN

:. i11~~~ij: ~~~1 1~~~'-~~~

Weare kin of Ahaziah; we have come down to visit the

royal princes and the sons of the queen-mother. 44

The nominal clause and the following WAYYIQTOL form express

related facts, not temporal sequence.
-"~C~~"--_~'~~_4W~"

Chapter 5

WAYYIQTOL

180

__~-~"-U-eiiw3{f:'2f-

'_~"~MW'C1'~".v.~

'T(~~~~

10 ., 1}N~~

i14i1;

Nrt:l~

"~~~;;j "r;1~r:t~

If you will allow me to say so, I have learned by

divination that the LORD has blessed me because of you.

181

In none of these examples does WAYYIQTOL express sequence.

More to the point, the speeches containing WAYYIQTOL do not
represent a sequence of clauses that are temporally ordered. To
identify these samples of direct speech as "oral narrative" just
because they use WAYYIQTOL would be a methodological error.
See also: Ex 6:2-4; Lev 20:26; Jud 9:16; 19:18; 1 Sam 1:15;
2 Sam 7:28; 14:5-6; 1 Kgs 3:17-18; 8:24.
Direct discourse can, of course, evolve into narrative. Particularly
with long series of WAYYIQTOL, the use of the form in direct
speech is indistinguishable from its regular narrative use. "Oral
narrative" attributed to the characters in the prose sections of
Genesis - 2 Kings has much in common with the written narrative
in which it is embedded.

***
Discursive, non-narrative, WAYYIQTOL is relatively rare. In the
corpus of CBH it probably represents no more than one percent of
WAYYIQTOL forms. It is disproportionally interesting, however.
Particularly the question of the temporal value of WAYYIQTOL
finds a renewed edge here. All the cases where WAYYIQTOL may
be held to express the present or the future occur in non-narrative
texts.
Preterite WAVVIQTOL in discourse

Direct speech practically never commences with WAYYIQTOL.

This means that WAYYIQTOL in discourse will usually follow
another clause. Where the preceding clause refers to the past,
WAYYIQTOL does so as well. 45 However, even where the preceding
clause depicts the present or the future, the WAYYIQTOL form
usually implies reference to the past. The cases where WAYYIQTOL
implies a transition to a past time frame help to show that the form
has a preterite function.

Here, the situation referred to by WAYYIQTOL is temporally

anterior to the situation expressed by the preceding QATAL.

See Reinhart, "Principles."

See similarly Gen 31':26; Jud 9:16; 2 Sam 2:5; 1 Kgs 18:13.
44 For similar examples, see below p. 182.
42
43

45

In Gen 32:6, the form ilr;t7~~1 is past from the point of view of the recipient of
the message. Compare the use of QATAL as an epistolary perfect presented in
Chapter VI.

182

WAYYIQTOL

Following QATAL
QATAL itself usually implies an event time preceding the reference
time. A subsequent W AYYIQTOL maintains the same temporal
perspective:

1;rz.;9W-t,~ n~"~" '~~r-lj

O":lT~ .,t,~
.,~ r-lt,nn n~n

J ud 16: 10

'll'rI'

Then Delilah said to Samson; !,'yo-~' ha~; ~ockeTd' ~.~ a~d

told me lies."

Chapter 5

Although entirely regular, this appears to be a unique example. 46 In

a few other cases, W AYYIQTOL following a predicative participle
seems to refer to the present. They will be discussed below.

Following YIQTOL
Very few examples exist where W AYYIQTOL follows a YIQTOL
clause. The following instance accords with the preterite function
of WAYYIQTOL:
1 Sam 2:29

Other examples: Gen 12:19; 24:35; 26:27; 31:26, 40; Ex 1:18; Jud
9:16; 10:13; 11:7; 16:10; 1 Sam 15:19,24,26; 2 Sam 11:21; 12:7-8,
10, 21-22; 14:15; 16:8; 19:28; 1 Kgs 2:5; 8:24; 10:9; 18:13;
2 Chr 2:2, and often.

Following a non-verbal clause

In discourse, non-verbal clauses usually describe situations
obtaining at the time of speech. A subsequent W AYYIQTOL will
normally imply a shift to the past time frame. Since this temporal
shift is not brought about by contextual factors, it may be
attributed to the verbal form itself:
n~n; .,~~ rz.;;'l~ .,~

Lev 20:26

o"Wii? .,~ 0D":~l

.,~ n;"~~ o"iP~v-l~ 0~I;'1~ t,1~~~

You shall be holy to me; for I the LORD anl holy, and I
have separated you from the other peoples to be mine.

2 Sam 14:5
"rz.;,,~ no!'!, "j~ njot,~-nrtJ~ t,::l~ '~~r-l'
She answered, "Alas, I am a widow; my husband has died."

T T-

T T

T -:

.:

.,~~~ 1"~~-n~ '~;>~j

See also: 2 Sam 7:28. Some poetic examples are less certain:
Ps 42:6;47 Job 6:21; 11:3 (and see Chapter XII).

Following non-clausal elements

W AYYIQTOL forms do not occur at the absolute beginning of direct

discourse. However, what precedes the form does not necessarily

make up a complete clause. The preceding words may form an
adverbial phrase or a nominal phrase representing the object or
48
subject. Even in this case, the WAYYIQTOL form regularly refers
to the past.
The few instances of this type of syntax in discourse are listed
here:
Num 14:16
'b~~ 1~9w-n~ 1l)9~-'rp,~ 0:t\0 1'9~1

n10 Ol)n-n~ ~"::lnt, n,n" nt,~., "r-lt,~~

'~liP~ O~ort;~)" OQ~ ~Z~~T_,rp,~" rl~i:r~~~

Then the nations who have heard about you will say, "It
is because the LORD was not able to bring his people into
the land he swore to give them that he has slaughtered
them in the wilderness. "49

Following a predicative participle

A similar shift from the present to the past occurs in the following
example involving a preceding participle clause:
n"~~
T- i1~l) ,t,N'
T 'n~ n"::l~ n!:lef'i
The one woman said, "Please, my LORD, this woman and
I live in the same house; and I gave birth while she was in
the house."
T-

T-"

.-:

1;l)~ "I:1"1~ 'rp,~ "I:10~~:t1 "T:l:tt~ 1~~:tI:1 nip~

Why then kick at my sacrifices and my offerings that I

commanded in my habitation; you have honoured your
sons more than me.

The same temporal relations are found in the other examples of

WAYYIQTOL following a non-verbal clause: Ex 6:2-3; Deut 26:5;
Jos 14:7; Jud 19:18; 1 Sam 1:15; 15:17; 2 Sam 14:6; 2 Kgs 10:13;

1 Kgs 3: 17 n~'Tij n~~vl .,~~ "~i~ .,~ nrJ~v n~~v '~~r-lj

183

46

Other possible examples are Jer 4:16; 6:1314; Ps 29:5. It is impossible to

47 prove, however, that WAYYIQTOL refers to the past in these passages.

Perhaps here WAYYIQTOL should be repointed as we + YIQTOL; see below in
Chapter XII.
48 The examples are listed by Gross, Pendenskonstruktion, 14,26,46,50,57,69,
119, 131.
49
Another example: Isa 48:4-5.

WAYYIQTOL

184

1 Sam 15:23

185

Chapter 5

And he said, "Who was it then that hunted game and

brought it to me?"

1~~~ it?~~~~ it'it; ,~,-n~ I!1t?~~ I.t1~

Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has

also rejected you from being king.

TJ~\~ O'-itW~~l ~~-n"~ it~~~l it~1P~1

Gen 35:3

"n'~ o;,,~

~1~iC n~-it~it 'b~~ ,,~ '''~~it ,,~

2 Sam 4: 10

--

-- -

--

- -

'''J''l1~ 'fe:l~~ it"it-~1it'

l~~:?~ :1iti1~~1 ;; TniONJ

The one who told me, "See, Saul is dead," thinking he was
bringing good news-I seized him and killed him at Ziklag.
'b~~ 1'~i it-Tit Ol1it-it~ n"~' ~;~it
CONO'" Oit~ it,it" 'n~ ,iC~ n;nsiC~it "Mrc
Have you not ob~eTr~~d h~~ the~e p~opie-:say, r'Th~ t~~

Jer 33:24

:.": -

-:

families that the LORD chose he has rejected ?"

Jer 44:25

'b~~ ~~'fc" "ii~~ n;~:l~-it'it" ,~~-it~

. . . on~~~ o;"'~~~: O~~~~:: ilj,~T,~, C~"rc;1 TOM~

Thus says the ~~R-~- of ho~t~, th~ G~d ~i Is~~~l, ~~y ~u a~d
your wives have declared in words and accomplished in
deeds ... "

This syntax is found once within a relative clause:

;~~ on'~ ;n~~~ ,rc~ n~~

- -: -:- --: -: -:

Num 12:12

"iln ~r~~

;,~; "~n t,~N"-'

Do not let her be like one stillborn whose flesh-: is h~if

consumed when it comes out of its mother's womb.

"nk ilJ.t1it ~~~

"r:1=?~'oTi~~ 'li~ "'~~ .,~;;

Come, let us go up to Bethel, that I may make an altar

there to the God who answered me in the day of my
distress and has been with me wherever I have gone.

Other examples: Num 14:22-23; 22:11; see also Jer 13:10; 23:31-32;
Ps 18:48; 136:17-18; Dan 8:22.
In other instances of this construction, particularly in poetry,
the WAYYIQTOL form may express general truths. As will be
argued below, the expression of general truths is compatible with
a basic preterite meaning .

Present-tense WAVVIQTOL?
Driver, Treatise (1892), 90-92; Gross, Verbform(1976).

With a few doubtful exceptions to be reviewed below, WAYYIQTOL

never expresses situations contemporary with the moment of speaking.
A number of usages come close to a present-tense meaning, however.

Note that in the last example the reference to the past is not due to
the preceding temporal phrase. The consuming of the flesh has
come about before the coming out from the womb.

Following a "relative" participle

.C~~~ ~~Oo~.~ ~
__

_ _

Where a nominal phrase preceding WAYYIQTOL incorporates

a 1?articinl~2 the c()nstructioJLil;~ (o1J!U!lly~ ..sjroilar to the one
discussed in the preceding section. Functionally, however, there is
a difference, since the participle functions as a relative clause.
WAYYIQTOL links up specifically with the verbal element in the
participle. In fact, WAYYIQTOL continues the participle just as it
would a relative QATAL clause. 5o In the prose examples of this
construction, the WAYYIQTOL form always refers to the past:

"Present-perfect" WAYVIQTOL
Properly, the function of WAYYIQTOL is to locate a situation in the
past. The form does not imply any connection to the present. In
direct discourse, however, the context often lends WAYYIQTOL the
meaning of a "present perfect." It presents a past action from the
point of view of the present. The temporal implication is often that
of a situation initiated in the past but continuing until the present:
rl~O I".lrn~ o~;~ o:j~~~ ~~{,iJ o-\'O iI~iJ
A people has come out of Egypt and has spread over the
face of the earth.

Num 22: 11

,,~ ~:l'" '''~-'~iI ~1i1 ~;5j~-"~ '~N!\'

Gen 27:33
50

T-

In the KJV, the WAYYIQTOL form is rendered by a simple present:

"Behold, there is a people come out of Egypt, which covereth the
face of the earth". The NRSV's "has spread" is more faithful to the
grammar of the Hebrew, however.
See also: Gen 32:5; Ex 4:23; 1 Kgs 19:10. 51

......-

See, e.g., 1 Kgs 2:24; 10:7; 21:22.

51

See also Chapter III,

nn17

with WAYYIQTOL.

186

WAYYIQTOL

Chapter 5

With verbs expressing activities of the inner person, in particular,

the "present perfect" usage may lead to a present-tense interpretation: 52
2 Kgs 18:24

The gnomic function is often found where W A YYIQTOL continues

a predicative or a "relative" participle:

irJ~ l'irJ~ "~~ l'i~ :l"~~ 1"~1

t:J"~~mit

1 Sam 2:6

t:J"~l~~1 :l~j~ t:J:j;;~=-S~ ~i~ -;,~~~;

Other examples with a predicative participle: Nah 1:4; Ps 34:8;

Prov 20:26; Job 12:22, 23, 24; 14:20; perhaps Ps 29:5.

This usage is analogous to the use of QATAL with similar verbs. 53

A more precise rendering of n~~r:'l1 would be "you have put your
truSt."54

. Gen 49: 17

'in~i:l=?,r,S~j 010-"~iPS; 1~~ij

.:. -

Other examples with a "relative" participle: Isa 40:22; 57:3; Jer

13:10; 23:31; Amos 5:8; 6:2-4; 9:5; Ps 18:33; 104:32; Job 3:20-21.

MN-"~
:

I, I am he who comforts you; why then are you afraid of

a mere mortal who must die?

Again, the Hebrew implies something like "you have taken

fright.,,55 See also: Isa 50:7 (l1i"); Ps. 16:9 (t,"l); 45:8 (Njtv); Job 4:5
(t,it:lj and itNt,).

Performative WAYYIQTOL?
Although several possible cases of performative W AYYIQTOL have
been identified, the usage remains doubtful:
Num 31 :49-50

Gnomic WAYVIQTOL
W AYYIQTOL is regularly used in proverbial contexts to express
general truths:
P"'1~ itl~ N~:j l1l tzip.i~ t:J:Ij~~ l1W~~
The evil are ensnared by the transgression of their lips,
but the righteous escape from trouble. 56

52 With WAYYIQTOL this function is much less common than with QATAL.
53 Compare 2 Kgs 18:21 i1iiJ ri~lY i1~~ij n~~~7;')-t,.!! "17 t1"~; mi:'! i1t1.!!.
54 Other examples with the same verb: Isa 30:12; 36:9; Ps 52:9.
55 Another example with'this verb: Job 6:21.
56

See also: Prov 11:2,8; 12:13; 20:26; 22:12; 25:4; 30:25; Job 14:10.

iti?r;r~iPij "~~~ tzi~'-l'i~ 1N~~ 'TJ"1~~

rV"~ 1~~~ iR~r~t,l 1jl:~ ,~~
N~i? ,~~ tzi,,~ it4it; l~lR-l'i~ :lji?~j

Your servants have counted the warriors who are under

our command, and not one of us is missing. And we have
brought the LORD's offering, what each of us found.

Prov 12: 13

Perhaps this usage may be explained, on the analogy of the Greek

gnomic aorist, as originating in the expression of truths known
from eX12erience:-, Altema~ivel~, a"d~~ta~i~~g::~function may be
attributed to W A YYIQTOL in proverbs. General statements do not
refer to actions coming about here and now. The deictic element in
W AYYIQTOL could be interpreted as referring to situations that are
non-proximate. However this may be, gnomic W A YYIQTOL should
not be fielded as an argument in favour of a present-tense function.

njk-"~~ Ib"~~ 171-"~~ tzir;r~ rr";:i;

May ~an be a snake by the roadside, a viper along the path,

that bItes the horse's heels, and its rider falls backwards.

Isa 51:12
"Nj"rI'

r,,pftJ t,iNtzi i"ji~ itftn~1 l'i"~~ it,it"

life~ he hring~" d~wn t~"sh~oi

The LORD kills and brings ~o

and raises up.

"j.,N "i:ll1

How then can you repulse a single captain among the

least of my master's servants, when you rely on Egypt for
chariots and for horsemen.

l'i1~"T tziijN~
',,:

187

The W A YYIQTOL form at the beginning of verse 50 might be given

a performative meaning: "We are (hereby) bringing."57 It is also
possible, however, to read the form as a perfect, as is done in the
Septuagint and in the NRSV.
Other possible examples: Ps 119: 106; 1 Chr 17: 10.

Present-tense WAYYIQTOL following a predicative participle?

One passage remains where W A YYIQTOL, in prose, does seem to
refer to the real, ongoing, present:
it~!:l 1~~ij it~;:i :l~i"~ '~~j
dt,rV:lN-t,l1 r,~Nl'ift',
It was told to Joab, "The king is weeping ~~d ~ou~~i~g

2 Sam 19:2 (1)

for Absalom."

57

Gross, Verbform, 125-126; 1M 1180.

188

WAYYIQTOL

The example is unique. 58 It would be unwise to use this one

possible instance of present-tense W AYYIQTOL as an argument
against the preterite interpretation. Preferably, the. passage should
be explained in a different way. Several solutions have been
proposed. Some authorities would ~lter the t~xt to t,~~~~1.59 alt~~
Gross finds the solution in the lexIcal meanIng of the verb. In hIS
view, t,:.J~ "to mourn" expresses a mental or psychological. state.
The case would belong with 2 Kgs 18:24 quoted above In the
section on "present-perfect" W AYYIQTOL. A better solution has
been proposed by John Revell. 60 As Rev~ll points .out, the
W AYYIQTOL form could begin the followIng. nru:atIve . .Th:
translation would be: "It was told to J oab, 'The king IS weepIng.
And he (the king) mourned for Absalom."

:v.

WAYYIQTOL expressing the future?

Certain examples of W AYYIQTOL referring to future situati~ns are
rare even in poetry. What may reasonably be conceded IS that
W A~YIQTOL can be used when a speaker or writer wishes to
represent future actions as already accomplished. A prose example
may be found in the following:

Jer 38:9 ~fzilJ 'W~-t,f n~ i1~~y o"~~~y ~17'ij 1~~ij .,~.,~

'i:::li1-t,~ ~~"~~0-'~~ n~ ~"~~ij ~i1;T?1:~

'''ll~ ii17- OO~ij 1"~.,~ :l~iY .,~~~ '''I!1~I:l MTt;j

My LORD king, these men have acted wi~kedl~ in.all they

did to the prophet Jeremiah by throwIng. hIm Into t~e
cistern. And he will die of hunger where he IS, for there IS
no bread left in the city.

In all other occurrences of WAYYIQTOL following a predicati~e participle,. i~

may be taken as referring to the past: 1 Kgs 1:25 (m narratIve); Gen 37.7,
41:2-3, 18-19; Jud 7:13 (in reports of a dream); Jer 4:16; 6:13-14 (but see
above, note 46).
.
59 Bergstrasser, Grammatik II, 38. Two Masoretic manuscripts mde~d read the
participle, but this is probably a mere facilitating reading showmg up the
difficulty of the text.
.
60 Revell, "System," 9. The same solution was proposed y~ars later by DavId
L. Washburn, "The King is Weeping: A Textual/GranlI~:latlcal Note on 2 Sam
19:2," Textual Criticism 1 (1996), available on the mternet: http://rosetta.
reltech.orgITC/vo101IWashburn1996.html. Washburn makes no reference to
Revell.

189

Chapter 5

As in Num 17:27(12), where the QATAL form 1j.vj~ "we have

expired" is used to express the hopelessness of the situation, so here
n~~j "and he died" implies the certainty of the event, even though it
in fact still lies in the future. 61
Somewhat similarly, the prophets may at times use WAYYIQTOL
forms to speak of events that are yet to happen. 62
WAYYIQTOL also comes to refer to actions still lying in the future
in conditional clauses:

Num 35:16
n~ii1 n~~" ni~ ~~i1 n~i

But anyone who strikes another ~~h an -iron object, ~d

death ensues, is a murderer; the murderer shall be put to death.
T

Other examples: Num 5:27; 35:17, 20; Ps 44:21; see also Ezek 33:4,6.
Modal WAYYIQTOL?

In the present work, WAYYIQTOL is classified as an indicative

form. Indeed, W AYYIQTOL practically always implies that the
process concerned really has come about. Nevertheless, it may be
inquired whether there are modal, i.e., irrealis, uses of WAYYIQTOL.
Under the influence of contextual or pragmatic factors, an indicative
form can at times take on modal nuances (see Chapter VI, on
modal QATAL).
In point of fact, however, WAYYIQTOL most likely does not
express modality. The few examples that have been alleged for this
use must be explained differently.
WAYVIQTOL following questions
Gross, Verbform (1976), 55-56.

A modal interpretation is sometimes applied to WAYYIQTOL when

it follows a question:

58

Isa 51:12

n1~"T iOij~~
... : ..

"N,"n,
.:. -

MN-"~
:

Who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that

shall die? [KJV]

Ps 144:3

The verse is difficult, however, and the Septuagint version differs much from
the MT.
62 See perhaps Mic 2:13; Isa 5:15-16,25; 9:5, 10-11; 22:5-9; Joel 2:23.
61

WAYYIQTOL

190

Qu'est-ce que l'homme pour que tu Ie connaisses?

[Colombe]

63
In these examples, the modal nuance is contextually defendable.
Two facts plead against it, however. First, the modal interpretation
risks effacing the distinction between two constructions: question +
we.jussive (see Chapter IV pp. 149-150) and question + WAYYIQTOL~
The former indeed implies modality, but the latter probably does not.
Secondly, a few examples of WAYYIQTOL following questions
certainly express the indicative:
Gen 12:19

i1tf~~ ,,~ i10k n~~l ~'0 "Dh~ I;11~~ i1~~

Why did you say, 'She is my sister,' so that I took her for
my wife?64

See also: 1 Sam 2:29.

On the whole, it is better to maintain an indicative interpretation
for WAYYIQTOL following questions. In Isa 51:12 it should be
rendered: "that you are afraid,"65 and in Ps 144:3 "that you took
note of him. ,,66

continuing a negative or interrogative clause

A modal interpretation has been applied to the following passages:

WAYVIQTOL

Gen 31 :27

"nk ~~lM' ni~t, n~::lnj i1~t,

O"iW=il1 i10~~:P ~'ci~~~l',,~ I;1'1:~~_~t,T1

'i~~=il1 ='jt1:p
Why did you flee secretly and deceive me and not tell
me? I would have sent you away with mirth and songs,
with tambourine and lyre [NRSV].

Jer 20: 17

"i=ili? "~~ "~-"0~j OQl~ "~1J~i~-~t, 'W~

Because he did not kill me in the womb, so my mother

Gen 19:9

~i~~ ~!)~'" '1lt,-~::l in~i1

T

--

T -:

This fellow came here as an alien, and he would play the

judge! [NRSV]

Chapter 5

191

At first blush the English translations of the NRSV appear to be

defensible. Indeed, in all three verses, WAYYIQTOL seems to be
used in statements that are contrary to fact (irrealis). In truth,
however, the NRSV renditions do not accurately reflect the
meaning of the Hebrew. A different analysis must be applied.
In the first two examples, the negation ~t, governs the
WAYYIQTOL form as well as the preceding QATAL. Such doubleduty negations are entirely regular in Hebrew. 67 The following is
a parallel to Jer 20: 17:
"j".v.~ t,~11 ,rlC", "j~~ "nt,i 'lC ~t, ,,~
Because it did not shut th~ do~~~ -~f ~y ~~~her,~Twomb',
nor hide trouble from my eyes [RSV].

Job 3: 10

Note the RSV's addition of the negation "nor" in the second clause.
Similarly, Jer 20: 17 implies "he did not kill me ... nor did my
mother become my grave." The same analysis applies to Gen
31 :27, which implies: "you did not tell me and I did not send you
away."68
In Gen 19:9 the initial i1 in 'O~Q should probably be taken as
the interrogative particle. 69 If this is correct, the analysis will be the
same as in the earlier examples. Indeed, the interrogative too can
govern two successive c1auses. 70 The verse may be rendered: "Did
anyone ever come to dwell as a stranger and judge?m1

Conclusions on discursive WAVVIQTOL

The different uses of WAYYIQTOL in discourse show clearly that
the form is not inherently narrative. Although there is a natural
affinity between the preterite meaning and the narrative genre, this
does not entail incompatibility with other genres of discourse.
From its basic preterite meaning, WAYYIQTOL develops a range of
contextual usages-in narrative and in direct discourse-that
remain reasonably transparent. Only the gnomic function is not
67 Other examples of double-duty negation with WAYYIQTOL in the second
clause: Num 16:14; Jer 15:17; Ezek 13:5; Ps 44:19. For other cases, see GKC

63 See also: 2 Sam 3:8; Isa 40:14; 57:11; Ps 42:6.

64 The KJV renders: " ... so I might have taken her to me to wife." This appears
to be an apologetic translation, however, designed to avoid any suggestion
that Pharaoh might have consummated his relationship with Sarai.
65 For the present-tense reference, see above.
66 The "that" function flows from the context and is not explicit in the Hebrew.

152.3.

68 The double-duty negation is compatible with a change in subject: Ps 44:19.

69 The vocalization of the interrogative particle with qamets is unexpected, but it
70 finds parallels in Num 16:22 ~t9!T iO~ t,h~v and Deut 20:19.
See Deut 4:33.
71 The infinitive absolute indicates here that the action is contrary to expectation.

192

WAYYIQTOL

obviously related to the notion of pastness, although even on this

point the parallel of the Greek aorist shows that the connection is
feasible.
Whether the interpretation of W AYYIQTOL as a preterite can be
maintained with regard to poetry must remain an open question for
the time being. Some reflections on this question will be proposed
in Chapter XII.

CHAPTER VI
QATAL
The basic meaning of QATAL is the expression of anteriority in
respect to the reference time. The default reference time being the
moment of speaking, it may be said that the natural environment of
QATAL is direct discourse. In discourse, QATAL usually represents
an action as having come about before the moment of speaking.
This seemingly simple definition can be pulled in two directions.
Anteriority implies temporal distance. If this implication is
underscored, QATAL will refer to past action (preterite). But
anteriority also implies relation. The underlining of this quality
leads to QATAL expressing a state relevant to the moment of
speaking. Most of the uses of QATAL are situated between these
two poles.
To affirm that QATAL naturally belongs to discourse is not to
say that it is rare in narrative. In fact, the form is about as frequent
in narrative texts as it is in discursive ones. 1 Its abundant use in
narrative is due, in part, to the fact that QATAL has taken over
a number of uses from the Hebrew preterite W AYYIQTOL, which is
syntactically immobile (it can occur only in the first position in the
clause). In other cases, notably in subordinate clauses adopting the
reference time of their main clause, QATAL expresses anteriority
with regard to the time of the narrative.

This is true within the limits of the CBH corpus and in absolute terms. Given
that the corpus consists mostly of narrative, QATAL is proportionally better
attested in discursive texts.

QATAL

Chapter 6

QATAL

194

in discourse
2

Direct discourse implies a speech attitude different from narration.

First and second person pronouns are frequent. The discourse is
anchored in the here and now of the speakers. There is usually
a clear conception of what has already happened as opposed to
what is still happening and what is yet to come.
In this framework, QATAL is mainly used to represent actions
as having occurred before the moment of speaking. The
implication of anteriority is usually that the action in some way
influences the here-and-now. Often it may be said that the action
expressed with QATAL leads to a state relevant to the moment of
speaking. The precise import of the action depends on the meaning
of the verb. With adjectival verbs and verbs designating activities
of the inner person, QATAL may express the inauguration of
a situation still obtaining at the moment of speaking. In English
translation, the present tense must often be used to render this use
ofQATAL.
Other uses of QATAL with reference to the present or the future
represent secondary functions. Reference to the present or future
does not flow from the basic meaning of QATAL, but is to be
attributed to other factors-contextual, stylistic, or pragmatic.
QATAL expressing anterior actions

In direct discourse, the most frequent use of QAT AL is in

the representation of events as having come about before the
moment of speaking. This function is too common to attempt an
enumeration of all the examples. A few indications will be given to
show what is normal and what is exceptional.

In other cases, however, QATAL is used for actions that belong to

a more distant past not directly connected to the time of speaking.
Note the following passages where QATAL first represents a more
distant, then a more proximate event:

For with only my staff I crossed thi-~ -J~~d~n: a~d ';o~

I have become two companies.

Deut 10:22

T T

2 Sam 19: 10(9)

~~~ O"S;~~~

1j"~;k l:"j~~ 1j~"~i) l~t9ij

The king delivered us from the hand of our enemies, and

saved us from the hand of the Philistines; and now he has
fled from the land because of Absalom.

As these examples show, temporal distance favours the use of the

simple past in English, while the immediate past is expressed by
the present perfect. In Hebrew, QATAL is used in both functions.
Hence, QATAL must not be defined narrowly as a stative verbal
form: the event portrayed may lead to a state obtaining at the
moment of speaking, but it does not do so invariably.
Types of actions
In representing anterior actions, QATAL is compatible with every
semantic type of verb: states, activities, accomplishments and
achievements (see Chapter III). A few examples will illustrate this:

Gen 30:29

i"l:11;~ ,~~ n~ tlS;j; i1~~

., r:J~ ; ~I?~ ;':V-,~~ n~j

You yourself know3 how I have served [activity] you, and

how your cattle have been [state] with me.

:-

Gen 29:25

This "present perfect" function of QATAL can be underlined by

means of the particles i1~.!) or i1~0 (see Chapter III).

See Benveniste, "Relations"; Weinrich, Tempus.

1'''1:

O"r:J~~~ l:"j~~ 1j~7~ ~1i11

Oit,~~~ t,.!)~ rl~O-l~ n,~ i1~'!)i

They said to him, "We have found water."

i1rt;'l~~ i"D!:l~

:Ji~ O:~'ij"~=?i:Jf i"ijt,~ i14i1; i~~ i1~.!)1

Your ancestors went down to Egypt seventy persons; and

now the LORD your God has made you as numerous as the
stars in heaven.

O"~ 1~~~O it, 1'~~!l'

T

i1'!ij l'l~ij-n~ "l:11;.r; .,~p~~ ":p

ntln~ "jilft, "n"";, i1M.v,

Gen 32: 11(10)

Typically, QATAL in discourse refers to actions situated in a more

or less proximate past, whose effects are relevant to the present:
Gen 26:32

195

.,~t1"~' i1~~11~S; "l:11;.r; t,r.t'l~ ~t,O

For the use of QATAL implying reference to the present, see below.

QATAL

196

Did I not serve you for Rachel [accomplishment?] Why

then have you deceived [achievement] me?

Gen 31 :30 '9":;1~ n"~~ M~EtQ=?~ r'jb=?~-":p ~=?~V

Ml!1~l

lZ,o

And now, you have gone [achievement] because you

longed [state] greatly for your father's house.

Most often, QATAL in discourse refers to single events. But it may

also be used in other ways. With repeated actions:
Jud 16: 15

":!l

Chapter 6

on the time before the moment of speaking and on the resulting

state - the multitudinousness of their people.

The Epistolary perfect

Rogland, "Epistolary Perfect" (2000).

In classical Hebrew, QATAL may be used in letters to present

actions as anterior from the point of view of the reader:

MZ,nM O"~l1S rOz,rO i1t

T: -

2 Kgs 5:6

T""

You have mocked me three times.

Gen 22:20

He brought the letter to the king of Israel, which read,

"When this letter reaches you, know that I have sent you
my servant Naaman".4

Milcah also has borne children, to your brother N ahor.

With durative actions:

Gen 30:8

"MZ,:;,"-O~ "nh~-ol1 "MZ,M~:J o"iiZ,~ "Z,1r.JEj~

.:

-:

.: -

"::

And even with habitual actions:

... ,"jEjz, "n~~ 1~~MnM ,rz.;~ o"iiZ,~i1

Gen 48: 15

T T:

-:

:.

": -:

.. : T

The God before whom my ancestors walked ...

The objective characteristics of the action (Aktionsart) do not

much affect the use of QATAL. What counts is that the action is
temporally located before the moment of speaking.

Anteriority and completion

Anteriority can imply completion. In practically all the examples
provided above, QATAL refers to an action that began and ended
before speech time. As the next section on stative verbs will show,
however, completion is not a necessary feature with QATAL. Stative
verbs in the
TAL form
often'
states still obtaining at
may also be found with dynamic
the moment of
verbs where the action has not come to an end:
J os 17: 14

'n~

z,:ln,
'n~ z,,;~ i1Z,nj
,,~ i1r.Jnj 111'~
0:"::
T-:-
i1,i1" "j~':;"l M!;:)-'l1-'rz.;~ '11 :l'-011 "j~'
TO:

TO"

:..

T-T

- " : -:

-: -

Why have you given me but one lot and one portion as
an inheritance, since we are a numerous people, whom
the LORD has blessed hitherto.

The tribe of Joseph do not wish to imply that the process of God's
blessing has been completed. The focus of the clause, however, is

'b~~ Z,~lf?': 1?~-Z,~ '~~ij ~~~j

';I"?~ i1tij '~~ij ~;:l:p Ml!1~l

":r~~ l~~rn~ 'T["?~ "1:lr;r~~ i1~iJ

'9"1J~ ';n~~ O"~f ~'iJ-O~ i1f~~ M17; i1~iJ

With mighty wrestlings I have wrestled with my sister,

and have prevailed.

197

The sending of Naaman is contemporaneous with the moment of

writing the letter, but anterior to the moment the letter is read by
the addressee. Through the use of QATAL, the writer projects
himself into the period when the letter will be read, when the
sending already belongs to the past. This epistolary perfect should
not be confused with the "performative perfect" where QATAL
does indeed refer to a contemporaneous process (see below pp.
202-204). The epistolary perfect represents a stylistic nicety which
is uncommon in English but well known from Greek, Latin and
other languages. 5
See also: 1 Kgs 15:19; 2 Chr 2:12. 6

Present of stative verbs

Rundgren, Abriss (1961),62-66; Dobbs-Allsopp, "Statives" (2000).

Stative verbs were defined in Chapter III as verbs expressing nondynamic processes. Lack of dynamicity is not an absolute
condition: some verbs, like M:l~ "to be high," indeed designate
The New International Version gives a more idiomatic rendering: "The letter
that he took to the king of Israel read: 'With this letter I am sending you my
servant Naaman'."
5 For the epistolary perfect in Semitic languages, see D. Pardee and R. M.
Whiting, ~~Aspects of Epistolary Verbal Usage in Ugaritic and Akkadian,"
BSOAS 50 (1987), 1-31.
6 Compare Gen 32:6 with WAYYIQTOL (see above Chapter v, p. 181, n. 45). For
the epistolary perfect in epigraphic Hebrew see D. Pardee, "The 'Epistolary
Perfect' in Hebrew Letters," BN22 (1983), 34-40.
4

QATAL

198

~ ,[

ii,

situations without any activity or change; 7 other verbs, however,

like .v," "to know" or :lnN "to love," do logically imply at least
a certain level of activity, even though it may not be observable.
The question is complicated further when one looks at verbs in
context: ':l~ "to be heavy" is a stative verb; but what about a
clause like n1;f n9rJ~~iJl "the battle raged" (Jud 20:34)?8
From the point of view of the biblical Hebrew language system,
a prominent feature of stative verbs is their basic ambiguity vis-a.-vis
the phases of the situation implied. n:ll is either "to be high" or "to
become high," ':l~ "to be heavy" or "to become heavy," .v," "to
know" or "to get to know," :lnN "to love" or "to fall in love".
A verbal meaning can be conceived as a succession of phases (or
terms): an initial phase, one or more medial phases, and a final
phase. The verbs enumerated, and many like them, can refer either
to the initial or to a medial phase of the process.
This analysis sheds light on the so-called "present-tense" use
of QATAL with stative verbs. The anterior function of QATAL may
imply the passing of a given phase of the verbal process. Since the
relevant phase of stative verbs may be the initial one, QATAL can
be used to express that the process implied has set in: 1n~~ means
"they have started to be (and still are) high." The focus, in this
case, will not be on the initial phase ("they have become high"),
but on the ensuing state ("they are high"). In other cases, however,
QATAL will imply that the state is ended: the relevant phase in this
case is not the initial but the median one (j'!'T~~ "has been high [but
is so no more]," Ezek 28: 17).
Where QATAL refers to present states, it comes close in
meaning to nominal clauses with an adjectival predicate. Indeed,
the two syntagms occur in parallelism:

Ps 139:14

'9"~~~c"~~~~"l)"~~~-n'~li.:l ":P ~~ '91 iN

I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;

wonderful are your works.

Ps 3:2

"~l? C"~R C"~' "1~ 1:::1,-n9 n~n;

o LORD, how many are my foes! Many are rising against me.

And they seem to alternate freely in similar expressions:

7
8

See, e.g., Isa 55:9.

For a general linguistic discussion on stative verbs in relation to other types see
Lloyd, Anatomy, 23-33.

Chapter 6

199

'9i~f j"~~C":P nin; "~i~ 1!17'~ j:P.-~~

2 Sam 7:22

Therefore you are great, 0 Lord

like you.

Ps 86:10

GOD,

for there is no one

'9'~~ C"i:f~~ n1!1~ niN~~~ n~lil n~~ 'i'~-":P

For you are great and do wondrous things; you alone

are God.

Functional similarity does not mean identity, however. In principle,

QATAL connotes the idea of a phase that has passed, while the
nominal clause does not. In most cases, the anterior function of
QATAL is clearly present.
QATAL expressing the passing of a phase
Many passages where QATAL is to be translated with a present
tense in English nevertheless connote a prior event:
.,~~~ nR1~ '9~~j

Gen 38:26

n11n; ':p':j

Judah acknowledged [the pledges] and said, "She is more

in the right than I."

By her fidelity to Judah's family, Tamar has shown herself to be

righteous.
1 Sam 14:29

.,~"~

i,k-":p Nr1N"l

n'Tn
rzj:l,
... -:

~.v~
"r:1~.v~
,,~
-:
:-T

See how my eyes are shining because I tasted a little of

this honey.
i1~"T":P n1b~j

Gen 18:20

Cit?

nl~~r

'k~: i1':l~
,,~ cnN~n'
TIT
T
T-:

How great is the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah

and how very grave their sin.

The prior occurrence in this case is the overstepping of a given

limit. The sinfulness of Sodom and Gomorrah has become so great
that God decides to do something about it. Similarly:

nr.t ni.:l~ "~~~ ":lj~ "l:I~R

I am weary of my life because of the Hittite women.

Gen 27 :46

1 Kgs 22: 8

ink~ n,n"-nN rzji'~ ,nN-rzj"N ,i.v

.v'-CN ,,~ :li~ ,,~; ~:!l;r,"-~~ ',,~ '''nN~~ ".:IN'
T

-T

- : .

.-:-

There is still one other by whom we may inquire of the

LORD; but I hate him, for he never prophesies anything
favourable about me, but only disaster.

200

QATAL

Because of his constant adverse prophecies, Micaiah son of Imlah

attracted the king's hatred. One might translate: "I have taken to
hating him."
Other examples: Jos 23:2 Opt "to be old"); 1 Sam 30: 13 (i1~n
"to be ill"); 2 Sam 6:20 (':1~ niphal "to be honoured"); Num 22: 13
O~~ piel "to refuse"); Gen 29:21 (~~~ "to be full"); Jud 15:3 (i1I'J
niphal "to be innocent");9 Jud 4:19 (~~~ "to be thirsty"); Num 17:2
(~'p "to be holy"); Deut 15:9 (:1,P "to be near"); 1 Sam 5:7 (i1~p
"to be hard"); 1 Sam 25:10 (:1:1, "to be numerous"); 1 Sam 2:1 (0"
"to be elevated"); Jos 13: 1 (,~~ niphal "to remain"). The nuance
implying the passing of a phase is frequent also in poetry: Isa
33:14; Jer 4:31; 23:11; 44:18; Ezek 35:12; Hos 12:9; Joel 2:10; Ps
34:11; 38:7; Lam 4:8.
Anteriority of a subjective phase
Rattray, Tense-Mood-Aspect System (1992), 78.

In a number of instances, the initial phase represented as anterior

corresponds to the moment the state was perceived:
1 Sam 26:21

,i.v '9~ .v'~-N~ ":p "1-"~~ :11~

n:VJ Oi"tT i"~".v.:P "~~~ nji?: ,~~ nOt1

Chapter 6

How great are your works, 0 LORD, how deep your

thoughts!

In these statements, what is in view is not the coming about of the

situations expressed by the stative verbs, but their observation by
the speaker. A clause like '9"~~~ 1~'~-i1~ could be paraphrased,
somewhat prosaically: "I have noticed how great your works are."
See also: Isa 52:7; Jer 22:23 ("how gracious you are!"); Ps 3:2;
139:17; Job 6:25; Prov 30:3; Song 4:10; 7:2, 7.
Many other examples may be explained on this principle of
anteriority of a subjective phase. Such an explanation, however,
will often be somewhat subjective itself. 10
Difficult cases
A sizeable number of cases remain where the notion of anteriority
is not obvious. Two groups of examples stand out.
In prose, the QATAL of adjectival verbs such as l~P "to be small"
almost always implies a prior event. Some verbs expressing
processes of the inner person, however, such as :1i1~ "to love" and
.v," "to know" occur without expressing any notion of anteriority:
Jud 14: 16

Come hack, my son David, for I will never harm you

again, because my life was precious in your sight today.

~~'_'~_.W<~~

___

__

M"~'__ _-Num 24' i -,#,~~~+4:!~l.f~~-:lr~,1~F~vk 1:lm-i1~

How fair are your tents, 0 J acoh, your encampments,
o Israel!

Ps 92:6(5)

i1~i1; '9"~~~ 1~n-n~

'9"p!:l~r;-r~

ip91J

'k~

The suggestion of futurity in Jud 15:3 flows from the fact that Samson has not yet
perpetrated his act of violence. The situation designated by the stative verb is
present, however. Because of what the Philistines have done to him, Samson
has-prospectively, so to speak-become innocent of the evil he will do to them.

"~~~ij~ N~l "~tl~~~rp,

You hate me; you do not really love me.

Gen 29:5

Saul's life may have been precious before the time-span referred
to, but what is expressed here is that it was perceived as being
precious by David on that day.
See also: 1 Sam 26:24; Jud 14:3; Jer 6:20; Mal 3: 13.
This subjective use of QATAL with stative verbs may also underlie
the following examples with exclamatory i1~:

201

';nrl~ 1~7-n~ otlS?1;ij

007 '9~"j
,J.v," 1'~~'"

He said to them, "Do you know Laban son of Nah~r?'~

They said, "We do."

Such examples are hard to explain on the assumption that QATAL

expresses anteriority. Perhaps they should be qualified as formulaic:
with the verbs :1i1~, .v," and ~Jfzi, the use of QATAL in present-tense
statements is conventional.
In poetry, absence of the notion of anteriority may perhaps be
attributed to archaism. In proto-Hebrew, the suffix conjugation of
adjectival verbs may have expressed simple stativity.ll Hebrew
poets may in places have imitated earlier poetic writings, or quoted
from them; or they may simply perpetuate ancient poetic diction:

10

See, e.g., Gen 49: 15.

See Chapter II, pp. 73-74.

202

QATAL

'''Mi:1~'~ n!:)i~:J' n~l7" C"jjl7~ n~n

Jer 4: 13

:: -

-:

'''9'iO-C''-i~-~~ 1~R

Look! He comes up like clouds, his chariots like the

whirlwind; his horses are swifter than eagles.

1 Sam 1:28

1~"~; il~79 Pj~

Your name, 0 God, like your praise, reaches to the ends

of the earth. Your right hand is filled with victory.

'1~: 1P'~ M~~ n4n;-"~Efr?!~

The ordinances of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.

Ps 19: 10
Jer 12: 1

statement. The performative usage is well-profiled in biblical

Hebrew. It nevertheless shows some variety. The verb involved may
designate a legal, ritual, or divine act effected (or rendered effective)
through speech:

r1~-"j~R-~.l7 1l;1~i)r;11~ C"D~~ 1~iQf

Ps 48: 11

,~~ "'~!:l-~f 1"~ il"~~ C"S;if1111 .l7i'~

Why does the way of the guilty prosper? Why do all who
are treacherous thrive?

203

Chapter 6

n4n"~ in1:l7~~0 "~~~ C~l

Therefore I have lent [or rather: I am lending] him to the WRD.

Other examples: ~':1 hiphil "to bring (as sacrifice)" (Deut 26:10);
1':1 piel "to bless" (Gen 17:20); niV~ "to anoint" (2 Kgs 9:3); 1Mj
"to give" (Gen 1:29 and very frequently); n~o "forgive" (Num
14:20); nM!:) piel "set free" (Jer 40:10); iV'p hiphil "to consecrate"
(Jud 17:3); ~!:), piel "to heal" (2 Kgs 2:21).
Or the verb itself may be a verb of speech:

1"ij~~ n4n"~ ci!liJ "1:l'~0

See also: Isa 31:1; 55:9; Ps 139:14 (quoted above); 141:6; Job
15:15; 35:5; and perhaps Zech 9:2.

Deut 26:3

Neither the archaic usage attested in poetry nor the occasional

formulaic. usage in prose should obscure the fact that the normal,
and statistically dominant, use of QATAL with stative verbs implies
anteriority. It is legitimate-and often profitable exegetically-to
enquire in every given case whether some form of anteriority
applies. 12

Today I declare to the LORD your God that I have come into
the land that the LORD swore to our ancestors to give us.

NB. With the verb

il~il, QATAL

in a few cases refers to the present:

1:J~~~'~ ~l":y ~6 1Jr:r~~ 1:J~~~

Gen 42:31
Weare honest men, we are not spies.

Perhaps this phenomenon may be explained as reflecting a development:

"we have not been" > "we have never been" > "we are not."
See also: Gen 42:11; Ex 2:22; Jud 11:35 (and see Chapter VII, il~il + participle).

Hillers, "Performative Utterances" (1995); Wagner, Sprechakte (1997), 98-121;

Rogland, Non-Past Uses (2003), 115-126.

In Chapter III, it was indicated that the normal verbal form for
performative expressions in biblical Hebrew is QATAL. In these
expressions, the speech situation lends QATAL a. specific nuance:
the process expressed by the verb comes about by pronouncing the
12

In Jos 4:24 the QATAL form 1:J~~q; is probably due to a scribal error and should
be corrected to 1:JI;1~r1: (see BHS).

r1~ij-~~ "lj~~-":P

ij~ MP~ ij"t1~~~ n1n; l7~~~ 'W~

Other examples: ,~~ "to say, to command" (e.g., 2 Sam 19:30;

2 Kgs 9:3); 1':1 piel "to bless, to greet" (Ps 118:26); ="n piel "to
defy" (1 Sam 17: 10); n," hiphil "to praise" (Ps 75:2); r l7 " "to
counsel" (2 Sam 17:11); "l7 hiphil "to bear witness" (Deut 8:19);
~~iV "to request" (Ps 27:4); l7:1iV niphal "to swear" (Jer 22:5), hiphil
"to adjure" (Song 2:7); l7~iV hiphil "to declare" (Isa 48:6).
Or it may be a verb designating a legal or ritual gesture
accompanying speech:
Gen 14:22 r1~4 c:~~ n~~ 1i"7~ ~~ n4n;-~~ "'; "ljb"",O
I swear [lit. I lift up my hand] to the
High, maker of heaven and earth.

LORD,

God Most

Also n,nMiVn "to bow down" (1 Sam 16:4); flJ,!:) piel "to spread out
[the hands]" (Ps 143:6).
13

Normally, the verbal form is in the first person singular or plural.

The third person may occur, however, when it refers to the speaker:
2 Sam 24:22-23

13

... ",-~~ nj"~ '~~!l'

17~~ 1~~iJ ~~ljT~ -io~ S~~

The singular is much more common than the plural. For first person plural
performatives see Ps 75:2; 118:26; 129:8.

204

QATAL

Then Araunah said to David... "All this, 0

Araunah gives to the king".

king,

Or when the speaker officially represents a third person:

i11' '~1 l~~iJ O"HS~y rzj"~

2 Kgs 1:9

o man of God, the king says, "Come down."

Ruth 4:3

l~~"~~~ ~J"r:-r~~ ,~~ i11~iJ nR~O

:JN4~ i1'W~

i1:JISi1

"~17J M'~~

Naomi, who has come back f;om th~: ~ou~t~y of Moab: i~

selling the parcel of land that belonged to our kinsman
Elimelech. 14
NB. The prophetic expression i11i1~ ,~~ i1:D, "thus says the LORD," may be
performative or not, depending on whether the following oracle is expressed
there and then for the first time or has been communicated to the prophet on an
earlier occasion. The latter must be the case when the formula is specified by
a phrase like "unto me" (Isa 18:4; 31:4; Jer 17:19), showing that the prophet is
relating a personal experience that occurred earlier. 1s However, when the
formula is followed by the adverbial phrase "unto you" (2 Chr 20:15), or when
the oracle explicitly addresses the hearer in the second person (see, e.g., 2 Kgs
9:3), it is better to view it as a performative. Indeed, even if the oracle was
communicated to the prophet earlier, it is pronounced with full force only in the
presence of the intended addressee (see, e.g., 2 Sam 24:12).

205

Chapter 6

Those with good sense are slow to anger, and it is their

glory to overlook an offence [nominal clause].

The usage finds an analogy in the Greek gnomic aorist. It represents

a derivative function of QATAL in which the notion of anteriority is
obscured. The gnomic function probably originated in the observation
of past occurrences (truths known from experience). Temporal
remoteness was reinterpreted as non-actuality: proverbs state situations
not, or not necessarily, obtaining here and now.
Other examples: Isa 1:3; Jer 8:7; Amos 5:8; Prov 19:7.
QATAL

expressing anteriority in the future

In future-tense contexts, QATAL is used to present an action anterior

to reference time (future perfect). Practically all cases appear to be in
subordinate clauses. 16

Relative clauses
1 Kgs 8:50

l~-n~tp" ,~~ 'TJip.il~ l!1T;i~91

You will forgive your people who have sinned [i.e., will
have sinned] against you.

Seealso: Gen 48:6; Ex 10:2; Lev 25:45; Num 5:7; 14:15; Deut 6:11;
8:10, 18; 1 Kgs 8:47,48,50; 13:9, 17; Jer 8:3.17

Temporal clauses

Gnomic QATAL
Rogland, Non-Past Uses (2003), 15-48.

With

2 Kgs 7:3

In proverbial expressions, QATAL is used in reference to general

truths:
Prov 14:6
A scoffer seeks wisdom in vain.

"occurs"Tii"parallelism with other

verbal forms, or with nominal clauses:

~""~O~~~-""""'''''''''~''W4'~'-~O''~"''IilffilsTunal0il,--QATAL-Offeii''

Prov 14: 18

n17' ~'M:,)" O"~~'17' nS~N O"Nn~ 1t,n~

Prov 19:11

17~~-S.il '!:l~ 4Ml~~~1 4s~ l"'~v 01~ S~tw

'17 "until"
1~I;'l~-'.il

i19

o"~~~ ~JT;i~~

i1Tt

Why should we sit here until we are dead?

Also Mic 5:2; with ON '17: Gen 24:19; Isa 30:17; Ruth 2:21; with
,iZlN '17: Ezek 34:21; with ON ,rzjN '17: Gen 28:15; Num 32:17; Isa 6:11.
With .,:') "when"

1 ehr 17:11

'TJ"p!:l~-oll n~~~ 'TJ"~; 1N7~-"~ i1;Yl

... 'TJ~lr-n~ "~4~"POj

The simple inherit f~liy, h~~ the ~iev~~: .are' ~r~wn;d

[YIQTOL] with knowledge.

14

15

The verse is difficult; see the commentaries.

See Kr'Ispenz, "Botenformel."
.

In a main clause the only certain case is Gen 24:14 I;1~~H iiI;1~ "(let her be the
one) whom you have appointed" (in the parallel verse 44 this usage is put in
a relative clause). For other possible examples, see Gen 43:14 and its parallel
in Esther 4:16; Num 15:25; and perhaps 2 Sam 17:12 (but see Driver,
Treatise, 54, who takes the form ,iJi:1 as ajussive rather than QATAL).
17 In 1 Sam 1:28 the text is almost certainly corrupt; see Driver, Notes, 22.

16

206

QATAL

And the king saidto Joab, ~~Behold now, 1 have done this
thing."

When your days are fulfilled to go to be with your ancestors,

I will raise up your offspring ... 18

Causal clauses
1 Sam 14: 10

1:J"~l7' 1:J"~l7 1~l7 1'~N" iT~-O~'

.. T

-::

1:J'''~
HT :

iT,iT"

T:

207

Chapter 6

See also: Gen 17:16; Lev 26:44; 1 Sam 15:2; 1 Kgs 3:13; Isa
42:16; Jer 31:33; 2 Chr 12:5; perhaps Deut 15:6.

C.ln.l-"~
T T:

But if they say, "Come up to us," then we will go up; for the
LORD has given [i.e., will have given] them into our hand.

Perfect of confidence
In a few cases QATAL seems to be used to announce an expected
event with assurance:

Also: 1 Sam 20:22; 2 Sam 5:24; Isa 11:9; 19 35:6; 1 Chr 14:15.

Gen 30: 13

Stylistic usages in reference to future actions

And Leah said, "Happy am I! For the women will call me

happy."

Grammatical temporality does not always conform to actual time.

Notably, actions that still belong to the future may be presented by
a speaker as having taken place already. In order to make sense of
this type of discourse, the hearer needs to invoke knowledge of the
real world. In other words, pragmatic factors determine the
temporal interpretation of the verbal forms (see Chapter III, p. 119).
The intended effect of this non-literal, figurative, use of QATAL is
generally to lend the statement a measure of certainty, urgency, or
dramatic effect.

Emotional use
In a situation of despair, a QATAL form of a verb meaning something
like "to perish" may be used to express anguish in the face of what
seems an inevitable end:

Gen 21:7

See also: Ps 6:9; 20:7; 36: 13; 37:38.

Prophetic perfect
Rogland, Non-Past Uses (2003), 53-114; Klein, "Prophetic Perfect" (1990).

In prophetic discourse, QATAL may be used in the announcement

of future events. The effect is that of stressing the certainty of the
occurrence decided by God. The usage is disconcerting, and one is
at times left in doubt about the chronology of events:
Num 24: 17

:U$i"-~~ 1~rpij '~N!lj

2 Sam 14:21

iTTiT
... -

':l~iT-n~
T T 0:

"n"rz.,l7

~ri1~i1
T

In the parallel, 2 Sam 7: 12, YIQTOL is used instead. The semantic difference in
this specific context is negligible.
19 Here, the stative i1~77? refers to a future state.

~~lf?'~~ co~~ oR1 :l~~~~ :l~i~ 1"

n~-"~~-~f 'R"1R1 :l~i~ "Ij~~ Y1JTt1

A star shall come out of Jacob, and a sceptre shall rise

out of Israel; it shall crush the borderlands of Moab, and
the territory of all the Shethites.

",n,rl.l
"M'~~
"rz.;N'-~l7-O"~-1~;$

tT:
.: - T
. T
Water flowed over my head; I said "I am cut off."

Promises
In promises made by someone in authority, QATAL may be used to
represent the speaker's absolute commitment.

iTlf?' O"~~ i1R"~"ij OOl~~~ ~~~ .,~

Who would have said to Abraham, "Sarah will nurse children."

Lam 3:54

See also: Num 17:27; 1 Sam 26: 19b; Isa 6:5; Jer 4: 13; Ezek 37: 11;
Ps 31:23.

ni:J~ "~1'~~ .,~ "i~~~ iT~~ '~NMj

The usage is rare in classical prose. 20 But in the prophetic books,

a sufficient number of examples may be found:
Jer 28:2 ~~~ 1~~ ~lrn~ "I:Il;~ 'b~~ ... iT1iT ; '~~-iT~
Thus says the LORD : "I have broken the yoke of the
king of Babylon."

Although the breaking of the yoke is here presented as an anterior

fact, the near context specifies that in reality it will happen in two
years. Thus verse 11 reads: "this is how I will break (YIQTOL) the
yoke of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon from the neck of all the

18

20

See Jud 4: 14; Lev 9:4 (but perhaps i1~i~ should be read instead of i1~i~; see BHS).

QATAL

208

nations within two years" (see also vs. 3). The fact that Hananiah's
prophecy was false is irrelevant to the grammatical analysis.
See also: Isa 25:8; 30:19; 32:10; Jer 13:26; Ezek 3:25; Hos
10:15.

Questions
Modal QATAL is found several times in questions, whether or not
they are introduced by a pronoun or particle:

Gen 21:7

In other prophetic passages, the use of QATAL appears to reflect

a shift of the reference time: the seer switches to the point of view
of the future and presents an event as already having come about:
Isa 34: 14

it~4~ij "l)~~jI;1-n~l "p~~-n~ "l:I710P

1:l"~l1it-"l1 l1~j" "M~"it'
Shall I stop producing my sweetnes's" ~nd - ~y deli~i~~~

Jud 9: 11

fruit, and go to sway over the trees ?22

Wildcats shall meet with hyenas, goat-demons shall call

to each other; there too Lilith has reposed, and she shall
find a place to rest.

Modal QATAL
Gai, "Connection" (2000).

Gen 18: 12

~ QATAL

"he kills" (gnomic)

~ QATAL "he might/should/could kill."
The gnomic function suppresses the notion of actuality that usually
accompanies QATAL. The presentation of non-actual actions could
then easily evolve into that of non-real actions.

See in general S. Fleischman, ''Temporal Distance: A Basic Temporal Metaphor,"

Studies in Language 13 (1989), 1-50.

: -:

TIT

.. -: -

In none of these examples does the highlighted QATAL form refer to

a real event. The three passages express a variety of epistemic

modality implying doubt as to the possibility of the process coming
about. The shade of modality is determined by the context, however.
In other passages, QATAL may express other shades of meaning:
Ps 11:3

"~~-it~ P"'~ pO"J.ij~ n4nrfij .,~

If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?

Prov 24:28

1"P~~~ tJ"l:I~Oj 1~"J.f 1:l~r:t-i.v. "0I;1-"~

Do not be a witness against your neighbour without

cause: would you deceive with your lips?

See also: Jud 9:9, 13; Num 23:19; 1 Kgs 21:19; 2 Kgs 20:9; Jer
30:21; Hab 2:18; Zech 4:10; Ps 60:11; 73:11; 108:11; Job 22:13.
Modal usage may also be found in the following:
Ex 16:28

"I;1i4nl "lji;;~ 'b~~ ct1~~~ it~l$-i~

How long will you refuse to keep my commandments and

instructions ?23

Some authorities take the verbal form to refer to the present by

virtue of the stative meaning of 1~~ piel "to refuse". The modal
interpretation is preferable, however, since the temporal
perspective of the clause is clearly directed toward the future. 24

See also: Jud 9:9, 13. For the analysis of the verbal form, see J. Joosten, ZA W
102 (1990), 96-97.
23 See also: Ex 10:3; Hab 1:2; Ps 80:5.
24 Note also that in Hab 1 :2, 't:111ttQ ii1li; ii~~-iS;, "0 LORD, how long shall I cry?"
the verb is not a stative one.

22

21

itjil1 "~-i1n"i1 "ri":l "'n~

After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure?

In principle, QATAL belongs to the indicative paradigm in biblical

Hebrew. It presents actions as real. In a small number of cases,

however, one finds QATAL in modal statements expressing different

varieties of irrealis. These instances reflect a process of
"neutralization": the impact of contextual or pragmatic factors
suppresses QATAL' s indicative meaning and lends the form a modal
function. Similar usage of perfects or preterites is found in many
languages. 21 It may be attributed to a semantic development. The
main trajectory, it may be submitted, leads from the expression of
real events to the expression of general truths, and further on to the
expression of modality:

itlff 1:l"~~ itR"~"iJ 1:lijl:t~~ ,,~~ .,~

Who would have said to Abraham, "Sarah will nurse children?"

~li?: ~it.v."r"~ '''~ffl1:l''~~-n~ 1:l"~~ ~rzj~~~

1j4j~ it~ itl$;;~~ n"~"~ it~"~1o O~-l~

Other examples: Isa 8:8; 11:8; 13:10; 19:6, 7, 8; 24:14; 30:32;

35:2; 43:17; 51:11; Hos 5:5; Amos 8:3; Zech 9:15.

209

Chapter 6

QATAL

210

Asseveration after O~ .,~

The particle O~ "if' combines easily with modal QATAL. A group of
cases must be signalled, however, where no conditionality is
intended, in spite of the presence of O~. The compound particle O~ .,~
is employed for asseveration, and QATAL refers to the future: 25

nv:r

2 Kgs 5:20

"~j~O 1i?~rn~ .,~.,~

1tpO

n~iJ

~"~iJ-'W~ n~ i';~ ntrR~

n,n"-"n
n~~~~ iM~~ "~r;;R~i

''''n~ ".tl~'-O~-":!)
T-: -

Precative
Lambert, "Optatif' (1925); Provan, "Precative" (1991).

Should one recognize a precative or optative use for QATAL? In

view of the other modal uses presented above, the precative usage
appears to be theoretically feasible. 28 Moreover, with particles,
precative QATAL certainly exists. Above, Gen 40:14 was quoted
where QATAL following O~ .,~ clearly expresses a wish. Similarly,
optative QATAL is found with the particle ,t, "would that" (Num
14:2; 20:3; Jos 7:7; Isa 63:19), and once with the formula 1n" .,~:

My master has let that Aramean Naaman off too lightly

by not accepting from him what he offered. As the LORD
lives, I will run after him and get something out of him.

Jud 15:7

t,1t:1~ 'tr~l o~~ "l:1~R~-O~ ":p n~tf pf!'~t1-0~

If this is what you do, I will take revenge on you, and

then I will stop.26

J er 51: 14

irV~J::l ni~:l~ n,n" 17::lrV J

p~~~ -Ol~ 1~~~~~~O~- ~~

Job 23:3

Gen 40: 13-14

'TJw~'-n~ n171;;l ~~: o"~; n~t,~ ,i17:P

~ .. 'TJ~.~-t,.li 'TJ~"~Oj

Whether QATAL can be used in this way without introductory

particle is debated. 29 Several indications favour this view. Once
QATAL and the imperative occur in parallel passages:
1 ehr 17 :27
2 Sam 7 :29

,on

25

In another instance, QATAL and imperative correspond as ketiv and

qere:

Mic 1: 10

1~, ~::J.

26

27

Here, the construction occurs in a conditional sentence. But the construction

of the apodosis is that of a main clause.
Driver finds this verse difficult and proposes the emendation of ~::J to 1~; see
Driver, Treatise, 142, note 2.

1:!):lM-t,~ i~::l 1'''~M-t,~

n)::l
"~~snn '~17 ni~17t, -n"~~
-T-:-

TT

T:-:

Tell it not in Gath, weep not at all; in Beth-Ieaphrah roll

yourselves in the dust.

"'~17 ~~-n"f!'17'

The compound I:I~ ~::J usually means "but, unless." In the latter meaning, it is
regularly followed by QATAL referring to actions that are yet to come about:
see, e.g., Gen 32:27; Lev 22:6; 2 Kgs 4:24; Isa 55:10, 11. In Hebrew, the
borderline between adversative and asseverative particles is generally rather
porous. Several particles are used in the expression of both functions: z,::l~,

'TJ;t~.li n"~-n~ 1'~~ ~,?~ii1 nl!1.lil

'TJ;t~.li n"~-n~ 1'~1 "~ii1 nl!1.lil

N ow therefore may it please you to bless the house of

your servant. 30

1~ :l~": ,~~~ 'TJI;1~ "~t1i~rO~ ":p

Within three days Pharaoh will lift ~pT yo~r' he~d ~~d
restore you to your office ... But remember me when it is
well with you, and please deal kindly with me. 27

in~1~I;1-'.li ~i:l~ 1n~~~~1 "l:1lf1~ 1t1:-"~

Oh that I knew where I might find him, that I might

come even to his dwelling!

The LORD of hosts has sworn by himself: surely I will fill

you with troops like a swarm of locusts.

With a second person verbal form, the asseveration is contextually

interpreted as a pressing request:

211

Chapter 6

For the qere "rQ~~~iJ the ketiv is "nrz;t,~nn, which should probably
be interpreted as a 2 fem.sg. QATAL form. 31 In view of the context,
the meaning of the two forms would be similar.

The usage finds parallels in Arabic and Ethiopic; see Gai, "Connection."
Note that almost all the cases without particle are in poetry while the attestations
in prose usually have a particle. Asyndetic subordination in poetry versus
syndetic subordination in prose similarly characterizes Hebrew relative clauses
and comparative clauses.
30 The fact that the passages are parallel does not guarantee that they express the
same meaning. In the Chronicles passage, QATAL possibly refers to the past:
"You have begun ... " (see the Septuagint Kat vuv i1p~ro), or "Your were pleased
to ... " (see the NJPS: "It has pleased you ... ").

28

29

QATAL

212

Elsewhere, QATAL and volitive forms occur in parallelism:

"~tl"~.tl o"~"'J. "~i~~1 j"!~i~ "~~ "~.v."~ij"!
Save me from the mouth of the lion, from the horns of
the wild oxen answer me.

Ps 22:22

Finally, a few passages simply make good sense on a precative

reading:
,,~ o/j~~ r~ "~~ j"!O~~~ ":P 111~rf
n"tzil1 j"!r-1~ ,,~ 1tzifli "nl1' 111~rO "::l"k-S~
T

-T

T-

eTT

:T

-:

See also: Lam 3:55-59;32 Job 18:17.

It is perhaps possible to explain these examples otherwise. But the

wisest course will be to recognize the validity of the precative

usage.

in narrative

As has been already stated, QATAL is about equally as frequent in

narrative as in reported discourse. Three distinct uses of QATAL
are encountered in narrative texts. First, QATAL is employed as
a preterite more or less synonymous with W AYYIQTOL wherever
syntactic constraints prevent the use of the latter. Second, QATAL
is used in subordinate clauses to present actions that are anterior to
the time of the main storyline. Third, QATAL is found occasionally
~""~""~~'~~"""'~-Ml:e$"fltt:ffftter-tlSes a eemm:em-fr~m-"his"()wnupoint of view,
entailing a shift in reference time from the past to the present. The
first two varieties of QATAL are about equally frequent, with each
See GKC 44h. The 2 fem.sg. QATAL ending in ~n- finds a parallel in Mic 4: 13
(where the MT has pointed the form as 1 sg., but the parallelism indicates that
the second person was intended). As Wellhausen recognized, the form
produces word-play with the name of the Philistines (to whom the beginning
of the verse also alludes; cf. 2 Sam 1:20). Some commentators have thought
that the ketiv in Mic 1:10 represents the 1 sg., but there is little warrant for
this in the context (though see verse 8).
32 On this text, see in detail Provan, "Precative."

31

of them attested well over a thousand times in the CBH corpus. The
third is much rarer.
In illustration of the uses of QATAL in narrative, we will take
a look at one short tale.

O"10~ o"i~11 no~ j"!~f?' r'l~O-S~ "iJ;j

WAYYIQTOL
WAYYIQTOL
WAYYIQTOL
WAYYIQTOL
WAYYIQTOL

0l~~ 0.vt?~~

"iJ;j

'.v~~ r'l~~ j"!.vi?~ 1~~~~j

"~i~~ 1";:t:1 tl~li=roi" t;lN;1ij

They heard how I was groaning, with no one to comfort
me. All my enemies heard of my trouble; they are glad
that you have done it. Bring on the day you have
announced, and let them be as I am.

QATAL

213

Gen 11:1-9

See also: Isa43:9; Ps 4:2; 31:6; 116:16; Song 1:4a.

Lam 1:21

Chapter 6

WAYYIQTOL
QATAL [preterite]
WAYYIQTOL

orO 1::lrO!'I,
1j"!11'-S~ rO"~ T1'~~~;
j"!!j'tzi" j"!!j,tzij, O"j::lS ~~':::lS; j"!::ln : T. :. T::': 1~~~ n~~~ij OO~ "iJI;1j
'~hS oj"!S n"n '~nj"!'
...

:T

TT

O"~rN::l

irON" S~)~1 ,"11 1j~-j"!j::lj j"!::lj"!

r'l~o:~~ ,,~~-~~ Tr~!jrl~ O~ 1j~~n~i~1
W AYYIQTOL
QATAL [anterior]
W AYYIQTOL

. - :

1'~N!'Ij

Sl~~ij-n~1 '''llo-n~ nki~ j"!~j"!; j'l~j

TTT "j:::l
":

Oj~j"!

1~1l
'rO~
T
.,'-:

j"!~j"!;

'9N!'Ij

nitzip.~ O~nij j"!!1 O~~~ n/j~ j"!~f?'1 jO~ o~ 10

nitzil1" 1~i" 'rO~ S~ OJ''!~ '~:::l"-NS j"!r-111,

-: - :T 'OM!jtzi O~ 'nS~'j; 'j"!j,j n~n
1j"!11' TM~tzi ~,,~ ;;'~:rO" ~S ,~~
r'l~O-S~ :,,~~-~~ c~~ Otlk n~:j"!; r~~j
,"11j"! n~::lS 1S~n!'l'

WAYYIQTOL
WAYYIQTOL
QATAL [in comment]

S~~ ~~~

N1R 1~~~~

r'l~O-Sf n~ff j"!~j"!; S~~ Orf-":P

r'l~O-Sf "~~-S~ j"!~j"!; O~"~O O~~1

- What first leaps to the eye is that Hebrew narrative is composed

of a chain of W AYYIQTOL forms (eleven of them in this passage)
making up the backbone of the story.
- The narrative chain is repeatedly interrupted with embedded
direct speech, indented in the above preseritation, where the rules
of narrative grammar do not operate (unless the embedded
discourse is itself a narrative).
- Within the narrative, there are five occurrences of QATAL,
highlighted in the sample. These five occurrences represent three
basic usages of QATAL in narrative:

QATAL

214

1. Preterite
vs. 3

'~h~ ov~ M~V '~tijj11~~~ M~~~jj ov~ "iJr;J1

And they had brick for stone, and they had bitumen for
mortar.

The temporal-aspectual function of the QATAL form M;V is

practically identical to that of the preceding WAYYIQTOL. The
reason why W AYYIQTOL was not used in the second clause is
syntactical: the pre-positioning of the subject, itself caused by the
enumeration of brick and bitumen, precluded the use of W AYYIQTOL.
QATAL is found here in a main clause. In main clauses, QATAL does
not express anteriority but the narrative past.
2. Anterior
vs. 5
Oi~M
"j~
1j:il
,rzj~
TTT
:
T
-:-:

came down to see the city and the tower, which

the mortals had built.

The LORD

Here QATAL does express anteriority with regard to the time implied
by the narrative: before the LORD came down, the tower had been
built. Anteriority with regard to the time line is the rule in subordinate
clauses, relative (as in the example), causal, or circumstantial.
3. Comment
vs. 9

~~~ j:j~~ ~jR 1~-~~

rl~V-~f n~~ i1~i1; t,~; o~-"~
rl~V-~f .,~~-~~ i14i1; o~.,~O O'~1

Therefore it was called Babel, because there the LORD

confused the language of all the earth; and from there the
LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.

Superficially the first QATAL form, in a main clause, might be taken

clauses, as
anterior. A closer look reveals, however, that the verse is not really
narrative at all. It is an etiological comment connecting the story to
present phenomena: the name of the city, lack of understanding
between language communities, and the dispersion of humankind.
QATAL here expresses anteriority not to the time of the story, but to
that of the narrator. 33

33

In some modem transl~tions, the difference between vs. 9 and the preceding
verses is marked by the use of the verbal forms. Thus in the French translation

Chapter 6

215

All occurrences of QATAL in narrative fall into one of these

categories. The main-clause / subordinate-clause distinction facilitates
the correct attribution of preterite and anterior cases. The third,
explanatory use also has some distinctive features. The three types
will be considered in turn.
Preterite QAT AL
Above it has been pointed out that QATAL may be employed in
direct speech for actions that are temporally remote. The preterite
use of QATAL in narrative is but an extension of this: in narrative,
the speech time disappears from view and the reference time is
a moment in the past.
From a diachronic standpoint, the use of preterite QATAL in BH
reflects a transitory stage: in most cases the preterite is expressed
by WAYYIQTOL, but in a few this function is taken on by QATAL
because W AYYIQTOL could not be used. The basic reason for the
non-use of W A YYIQTOL is when any element, other than the
conjunction we, precedes the verbal form in the clause. The main
syntactic constellations where this happens have already been
reviewed in Chapter II. They will be listed again, with a few
further remarks.
Negated clauses
Narrative WAYYIQTOL is mechanically replaced by QATAL in clauses
negated with ~~. The claim has been made that negative clauses
are inherently less dynamic than positive ones, and that this could
help explain the use of QATAL. There may be some truth in this.
But in any event, the only way to negate W AYYIQTOL is by using
the syntagm we + 10' + QATAL.
The temporal-aspectual equivalence of W AYYIQTOL and negated
QATAL can be observed where a positive and negative phrase have
the same meaning:
2 Sam 2:21-23

'j:l~ ;~ '~~!l'

... '9~~~~-~~ ;~ '9~.,~~~~~ '9~ n~~

called Franftais Courant, verses 1-8 use the narrative tenses passe simple and
impaifait, but verse 9 uses the discursive tenses present and passe compose:
"Voila pourquoi celle-ci porte Ie nom de Babel. C'est 10, en effet que Ie
Seigneur a mis Ie desordre dans Ie langage des hommes et c' est a partir de 10,
qu'il a disperse les humains sur la terre entiere."

QATAL

216

''''n~~ '~Ot, t,~irflil1 ir:JN-Nt"

t,~ir~~-~~ 'b~~" ,~~~ ,;~ ='9li1

'~O~ 1~9;~ ... "1Q~~ ~7 ,~o
Abner said to him, "Turn to your right or to your left ... "
But Asahel would not turn away. Abner said again to
Asahel, "Turn away from following me ... " But he refused
to turn away.

Gen 40:23

~irJj~rq:~ =,oi"-n~ 0"P~7Pij-'fQ '~t-Nt,l

The chief cupbearer did.not remember Joseph, but forgot

him.

Negated QATAL is frequent in biblical narrative. Lexical and

contextual factors lend the syntagm certain nuances, comparable to
those taken on by W AYYIQTOL. It involves no special problems of
interpretation, however.
following temporal phrases
Adverbial phrases of time are compatible with the use of
QATAL

ot1"~;j l~-"jQ~ .l1~iir; o~:j

o":;tV, ir~~Q S.l1 O~~~j

Afterward Joshua struck them down and put them to

death, and he hung them on five trees. 34

For some reason, however, this word order is infrequent except

with initial "ir",. Where the latter is not used, the temporal phrase
usually stands at the head of the clause, precluding the use of
WAYYIQTOL. 35 Instead we find the QATAL form:

Ex 34:32

t,~1~: ,,~~-t,f 1rz1~~ 1~-"'1Q~1

,::l,

ir-1~ ir,ir"
,rzj~-t,~ n~ o~~'"
Afterward all the Israelites ~am~ ~e~, .and -he gav~ th~~
~-~~~.~~~~.---~~-~---0"---tIT4~mmmnrtmrenr-:rtr~aL~heJLOltfi""na.d spoken with
him. 36

In this construction, QATAL has the same, or very nearly the same,
temporal-aspectual value as WAYYIQTOL.
QATAL following an element contrastively topicalized
Where two entities in successive narrative clauses are opposed,
this may lead to a change in word order in the second clause: the
contrasted element takes the first position, and the verb is pushed
into second position. In such a construction, WAYYIQTOL cannot
normally be used and QATAL is found instead. 37 The preposed
element may be a direct object:

... ~irp~~-t,.l1 0"P~7Pij 'fQ-n~ ::l~~j

Gen 40:21-22

ilt,Fl O"jkir ,~ n~'

He restored the chief cupbearer to his cupbearing ... but
the chief baker he hanged.
T T

It may be an indirect object:

Gen 1:5

ir~;~ NjR 1~h~1 oi" 'i~~ O"i:it,~ ~1f?~j

And, of course, the contrasted element may be the subject:

1 Sam 14:41

'N~~ 0.!1Y1 t,~~~1 ll;l~;" '~~~j

Jonathan and Saul were indicated by the lot, but the

people were cleared.

The latter type of clause is apt to create confusion because it

superficially resembles circumstantial QATAL clauses. Only attention
to the context can tell whether a clause with the sequence we + subject
+ QATAL in narrative is circumstantial (with QATAL expressing
anteriority) or contrastive (with QATAL a simple preterite).
Non-contrastive topicalization
Contrast is not the only factor leading to the positioning of
a nominal or adverbial phrase before the verb in narrative:

Gen 19:6
See also: 1 Sam 24:9; Jer 34: 11.
35 In a small number of exceptions the temporal phrase does precede WAYYIQTOL,
e.g., Gen 22:4 '~~~.v.-li~ cvlil~ ~~~j ~rq~~~ij ci"~, "On the third day, Abraham
looked up." See also: Gen 27:34; 1 Sam 4:20; 2 Kgs 25:3; Isa 6:1; Jer 7:25;
52:6; Ps 138:3; Dan 1:18; 10:4-5; 2 Chr 13:1; 25:27; 28:22 (Gross,
Pendenskonstruktion, 49-50).
36 With the same temporal expression see Gen 23:19; 25:26; 45:15; Num 8:22;
Jos 8:34; Job 3:1; 2 Chr 20:35; 33:14. With other temporal phrases: Gen
15:1; Deut 10:1; Jos 4:14; 5:2; Jud 5:6; 1 Kgs 8:64, 66; 13:33; 14:1; 16:34;

34

217

God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

WAYYIQTOL:

Jos 10:26

Chapter 6

'''1Q~ '~9 n~'ij1 irQ~~ij coit, OO~~ ~~~j

Lot went outside to meet them, and shut the door behind
hinl.

2 Kgs 10:32; 15:29,37; 16:6; 18:16; 20:1, 12; 23:29; 24:1, 10; Isa 20:2; Ezek
20:6; Zech 1:7; Esther 2:1; 3:1; 9:11; Ezra 7:1; Neh 13:1, 15; 1 Chr 21:8;
32:24; 2 Chr 28:16; 32:1, 9, 20.
37 Exceptionally, such an element does precede WAYYIQTOL; see Ex 9:21; 1 Sam
10:11; 14:19; Jer 44:25; 2 Chr 25:13 (Gross, Pendenskonstruktion, 106-107).

QATAL

218

The construction probably implies some form of insistence on the

direct object in the last clause. But the precise import of the inversion
of the word order is not always easy to apprehend. In any case, the
inversion pushes the verbal form into second position, thus rende~ng
the use ofWAYYIQTOL impossible. 38 The temporal-aspectual function
of QATAL in such clauses is simply that of a preterite.
Other examples: Gen 18:7; 19:3, 6, 10; 20:16; 27:16; 34:26,
29; 39:4; 43:15; 47:2, 21; Ex 12:37-38; 13:18; 14:6; Num 11:32;
Jud 6:35; 1 Sam 4:11; 6:12,14; 7:1.
Other
In Chapter III, a few passages with narrative i1ji1 + QATAL were
pointed out. 39 These are somewhat irregular and seem to represent
a peculiar development influenced by direct speech.
.
.
Completely irregular, although attested a number of times, IS
the asyndetic use of clause-initial QATAL in narrative:

Gen 21: 14

c:~ n~1::11 c~~-nR~j 'R!:l~ cOl:t~ C~~~j

i1~~rQ;j '~~iJ-n~l ~~=?~-~lJ c~ '~O-~~ i~~j

So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread

and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on
her shoulder, along with the child, and sent her away.40

Num 11:8

i1::i'iP~ 1~1 iN C:ljl~ 1jO~11~f?~1 C~O 1~~

The people we~t ~round and gathered it, ground it in

mills or beat it in mortars. 41

Most of the attestations of this usage are text-critically or

otherwise doubtful: Num 7:19; Jos 3:16; Jud 18:17; 20:31,42-43;42
1 Sam 17:13;43 1 Kgs 7:51; 21:12; 2 Kgs 15:19; and perhaps 1 Sam
30:20;44 1 Kgs 11 :27.
~""""~,_~O""~"_~~~~.~~1e-that as~mdetjc. QAIAI

js_uselLregu1arl)'..in. QlaJl&e~. that . (ld,d a

Chapter 6

219

QAT AL expressing anteriority

In biblical narrative, QATAL is used very often to retrieve

background information pertaining to the time preceding the
events recounted in the story. The retrospective function is
connected to QATAL'S basic function of expressing anteriority. The
backgrounding is expressed syntactically by the fact that this usage
is limited to subordinate clauses. The subordination may be
indicated by a particle, but it may also be expressed simply by the
clause structure.
As a rule, then, QATAL in subordinate clauses in narrative is
retrospective. An apparent exception occurs with stative verbs,
where QATAL may present states contemporaneous with the events
narrated. This usage is analogous to that in direct speech discussed
above: what is anterior is the decisive phase of the action
designated.
Other exceptions are found where the subordinate clause refers
not to the time of the story but to the time of the narrator. The
latter use will be discussed below.
Explicit subordination
Gross, "Partizip" (1975), 28, 31.

Retrospective QATAL in narrative is very frequent in relative clauses

introduced by 'rzlN:
Gen 26: 18

c:~iJ ni~~-n~ 'S~~j PO~: :l~~j

Ci1':lN "(Y'~ 1'~n 'rzlN
TT;-

,.

:T

.:-:

With a stative verb the temporal implication is contemporaneousness:

2 Sam 11: 16

comment from the narrator's point of view; see below pp. 221-223.

CiPipiJ-~~ i1~"'11N-n~ i~~j

Crzl ~"n-"rzljN .,~ 11'" 'rzlN
T

Exceptionally, the verb comes in third position; see, e.g., Gen 14:1~.
See 1 Kgs 13:1; 20:13; Ruth 2:4, and in the report of oral narrative: 2 Sam
1:6; 14:7; 1 Kgs 20:39.
40 The problematic verbal form may be a participle, but the clause structure
remains anomalous.
41 The Septuagint seems to attest WEQATAL instead of QATAL.
42 See G. F. Moore, Judges, 440-441.
43 Driver, Notes, 141.
.
44 Driver, Notes, 224.

..

Isaac dug again the wells of water that had been dug in
the days of Abraham. 45

: -

-T

... -:

He assigned Uriah to the place where he knew there were

valiant warriors. 46

38

39

Retrospective QATAL is frequent, too, in causal clauses introduced

by .,~:

This usage is extremely frequent. The only ostensible exceptions are those
where the relative clause introduces a comment by the narrator (see below).
46 See also: Gen 27:14; 1 Kgs 9:1.

45

QATAL

220

Gen 38: 15

O"~~ itI;1tp:;> ":p i1~ii~ O~~~:1 i111i1; O~"'1~1

Chapter 6

With a stative verb:

When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a prostitute,

for she had covered her face.

1 Kgs 1:50

itl$j: ":p "I:1i?li~ ~~ 'bN~ i1lf?' rVlJ:;lr;'l1

But Sarah denied, saying 'I did not laugh'; for she was afraid.

Retrospective QATAL is found also in temporal clauses introduced

by a variety of particles:
Gen 18:33

oOl~~-~~ ,~,~ it~:P ,~~:;p i11i1; '1~~1

And the LORD went his way, when he had finished

speaking to Abraham.

Gen 39:5

in":;f ink '''j.?~;:1 i~~ ";:1;1

i~-rV" 'rVN-~~ ~17'
=,~i" ~~~~ "j~~ij n"~-n~ i11i1; '1j~;1
":

":-:

-:

From the moment that he h~d' m~de him overseer in his

house and over all that he had, the LORD blessed the
Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake.

1 Sam 5:9

'''S;f

i11i1;-i~

";:Ir;'l1 ink 1~QiJ "'10~ ";:1;1

But after they had brought it to Gath, the hand of the

LORD was against the city.

2 Sam 24:10

o~o-n~ '~9 r;r"'10~ ink i'1-:1~ '1:1

David's heart struck him after he had numbered the people.

NB. In narrative, QATAL also expresses anteriority to reference time in object

'1~~1 0R~1 i1fj~~ "~~f;' Nj: 1i1~~"~1

li~~~ij niJ"'1Rf pr.O:1

Adonijah, fearing [i.e., having taken fear of] Solomon,

got up and went to grasp the horns of the altar.47

With a stative verb the process is contemporaneous:

Gen 18:15

221

The circumstantial clause has been discussed, with examples,

in Chapter IV.
QATAL

in authorial comments

In classical Hebrew story-telling, the narrator rarely intrudes upon

his tale. He practically never uses the first person. 48 In the
opposition between showing and telling, the option is clearly in
favour of the former: we learn what the characters did, and we hear
what they said, but usually neither their actions nor their words are
judged overtly.
Nevertheless, the narrator does on occasion speak in his
own name, expressing value judgments or providing background
information to the story.49 Such a switch from narration to comment
implies a shift in temporal orientation. Whereas in the story the
reference time is located in the past, a comment takes the period of
the speaker as its reference time. Thus one occasionally encounters
temporal markers like "today," "unto this day," or "formerly" and
"in those days". Verbal usage, too, is sensitive to this shift: the story
is told by means of WAYYIQTOL, but comments more typically use
retrospective-from the point of view of the narrator-QATAL.

clauses:
'~7ij r,10-~~ il111~ ~l:j
Pharaoh saw that the rain had ceased.

Ex 9:34

However, in such passages it may be claimed that the temporal point of view is
hears or knows.

1h'~'~"'~~""""~""-"-~-'-""'~'Mt~th~()t1Fne'narr:iiiVeTtif11rnrr-oTtm~lllliflacfi~,~lf{f sees,

Subordinate clauses
The theory of authorial QATAL explains a number of cases where
QATAL in relative or causal clauses does not express anteriority to
the time implied by the story line:

Object clauses are akin, in a way, to direct speech.

2 Sam 16:23

Circumstantial clauses
Circumstantial clauses have the form we + subject + verbal form.
The subject is not contrasted and no stress attaches to it:
2 Kgs 10:24

OijO o"f;'~~

1'.11: ,~~ ~~M"rJ~ n~~n

O"ii~Ni1 ':1i~ rV"N-~Nrzj" 'rVN~

":: T

ni~l1' o"n:1i nifzi17~ 1~:1!l'

rV"~ O"~b~ Y1"n i~-C~ N1it~i

T
;

They proceeded to offer sacrifices and burnt offerings.

Now Jehu had stationed eighty men outside.

-:

-:.

.: -: -

N ow in those days the counsel that Ahithophel gave was

as if one consulted the oracle of God.

47

See also: 1 Sam 18:25.

48 The only exceptions are Jos 5:6; 1 Kgs 8:65.

49 See Sternberg, Poetics, 120-121.

QATAL

222

Chapter 6

'b~~ n1n; ';l'l~ .,~~ '~1 ltt~~1

If this were a narrative clause, one should render "the counsel that
Ahithophel had given;" obviously, however, this is not a narrative
clause, but a comment by the narrator (note the expression "in
those days").
Ex 38:8

This case is much more laconic. Two facts show that the relative
clause represents an authorial comment. First, the process
expressed by QATAL is not anterior; nothing indicates that the
women's serving is anterior to the making of the cultic utensils.
Second, the women serving at the entrance of the tent play no part
in the narrative. The clause is a piece of archaeological knowledge
incidentally transmitted by the narrator.
Other examples with relative clauses: Gen 31 :49; Jos 5:4;
10:11; 1 Kgs 9:15; 11:27; 14:19; 2 Kgs 23:25. 50
Ex 2:22

o:~ t;1~~i ory~ t,~~"i '9p.,~-t,~ '9t;1~ 1n~eqo

it,

orz.;l~ i~~-n~ ~ll?~j 1~ i~t1j

n~i~~ rJ~~ "D":;; ,~ ,~tt ":p

She bore a son, and he named him Gershom; for he said,

"I have been an alien residing in a foreign land."

The expression "for he said" does not refer to an event within the
story but to an explanation transmitted by the narrator. Based on his
privileged knowledge of the characters' thoughts and motivations,
the omniscient narrator informs the reader of an underlying reason.
Other cases of ,~~ "::l: Gen 16:13; 21:16; 29:32; 32:20; 38:11;
Ex 12:33; Num. 16:34; Jud 9:3; 20:39; 1 Sam 4:7; 2 Sam 18:18;
Main clauses
In a few striking cases, clause-initial QATAL expresses a comment
in a main clause:

As signalled by the asyndesis and the verbal form, the last words
are a digression from the narrative. "He lied to him" is not an event
linked into the narrative sequence but an aside from the writer to
the reader.
Other examples: Gen 18:11; 48:14; Jud 2:17; 1 Sam 5:11;
1 Kgs 14:24; 2 Kgs 21:6; see perhaps also: Gen 21:14; Jos 3:16;
Jud 20:31; 1 Sam 17:13; 30:20. 52
In other cases, illustrated by Gen 11:9 above, explanatory
QATAL occurs in non-initial position. In this case, no syntactic
marker indicates the function of the clause. Only the context can tell
whether a comment is meant or whether the clause recounts an
event belonging to the story.
See: Gen 16:14; Jos 14:14; 1 Sam 10:12; 27:6; 2 Sam 2:10;
3:5; 1 Kgs 10:12.

Appendix: ~ + QATAL (perfect conjunctive)

Driver, Treatise (1892), 160-164; Huesman, "Waw + Perfect Problem" (1956);
Rubinstein, "Anomalous Perfect" (1963); Spieckermann, Juda unter Assur
(1982), 125-128; Longacre, "WEQATAL" (1994); Andersen, "Salience" (1994).

In a relatively small number of passages one finds QATAL referring to

single (i.e., not habitual or iterative) events in the past, immediately

preceded by the conjunction we. The combination can easily be
confused with the WEQATAL form: we + QATAL and WEQATAL are
grammatical homonyms (see Chapter 1).53 Use and meaning of the
two are nevertheless entirely distinct. Notably, we + QATAL expresses
single events as having really happened, a function alien to WEQATAL:
Jud 3:23

1 Kgs 13:18

nji"o~n i1n~ ~:::!l'

t,17:1, ii17~ ~!lt,~:n' n;nt,~' 'no~i

T T :

50
51

See also Gen 10:14 in a genealogy.

Where it does not introduce a comment of the author,
anterior; see Num 26:65; 1 Sam 1:22.

may of course be

-: -

.-

Note also the switch from WAYYIQTOL to QATAL in 1 Sam 19:5, in oral
narrative.
53 Except for tone shift in 1 sg. and 2 sg.; but see Chapter I.

52

,~~ ~~

rzf lj:P

And he said to him, "I also am a prophet as you are, and

an angel spoke to me by the word of the LORD: Bring him
back with you into your house so that he may eat food
and drink water." But he was deceiving him.

nrzfhj i~~ n~' nrzfhj 'i!l~iJ n~ fli~~j

i17i~ t,nk nns- 1N;~ i'~~ nk~~iJ nki~~

He made the basi'n of bron~~' with its'" s~and' of bro:O:ze',

from the mirrors of the women who served at the
entrance to the tent of meeting.

223

224

QATAL

Then Ehud went out into the vestibule, and closed the
doors of the roof chamber, and locked them.

There seems to be no reason why the author should not have used
W A YYIQTOL in the last clause. If t,.v~l expresses a distinct nuance,
one wonders what it was. 54
Confronted with this "anomalous" use of we + QATAL, scholars
have sought for a solution in several directions. Some have
attempted to establish a link with WEQATAL, replacing homonymy
with polysemy, so to speak. This leads one to attribute overly
subtle nuances to the syntagm. 55 Others have attempted to do away
with the difficult cases by text-critical operations. 56 There are,
however, far too many examples of the usage to make the textual
solution feasible in every case.
Instead, a diachronic view is in order. Historically, classical
WAYYIQTOL will be replaced in later Hebrew by we + QATAL. 57
This replacement is complete in mishnaic Hebrew. The transition
from the older system to the later one can be observed in the Bible.
Indeed, the older books show few cases of we + QATAL, while in
later books, starting with 2 Kings and Jeremiah, the usage
increases. In Ecclesiastes, we + QATAL is used about 25 times,
while W AYYIQTOL occurs only thrice (see Chapter XI).58 It is in the

54 Note, however, that in 2 Sam 13:18 the same verb is used in the same form to
the same effect.
55 The form has been taken to express ''the persisting result of a chain of processes"
see Koch, "Aschera als Himmelskonigin in Jerusalem," UF 20 (1988), 97-120, in
particular 103-105; it has been described as "pivotal" or "climactic", see
Longacre, "Weqatal"; and as imperfective by Gentry, "System," 16-17.
56 See Huesman, "waw + Perfect Problem"; Rubinstein, "Anomalous Perfect."
This
is confirmed
a few cases of textual variation: note that we +
parallel, Isa
37:19; note
Jos 6:13 where one finds first we + QATAL and then we +
infinitive absolute in the same slot. Correspondence of we + QATAL and
WAYYIQTOL is found in 2 Kgs 18:36 and the parallel Isa 36:21. See also
Kutscher, Language, 354.
57 It is sometimes suggested that this evolution could have been influenced
by Aramaic, but it may just as easily have come about due to internal
development.
58 In the other late books the syntagm is not particularly frequent; see Esther
8:15; 9:23-25, 27; Dan 8:4,7, 11, 12,27; 9:5; 10:7, 14, 15; 12:5; Ezra 3:10;
6:22; 8:30, 36; 9:2, 6, 13; Neh 9:7-8; 10:33; 12:39; 13:1, 30; 1 Chr 8:7; 9:26;
11:22; 17:10; 22:18; 23;.1; 2 Chr 3:7; 12:10; 19:3; 25:19; 29:6, 19; 33:4, 6,
14, 19; 34:4.

Chapter 6

225

nature of linguistic innovations to appear infrequently at first and

to become more regular with time.
It remains possible that we + QATAL originally did express
a nuance distinguishing it from W A YYIQTOL. Until a convincing
proposal is made, however, the two must be regarded as free
variants representing different, though overlapping, periods of the
Hebrew language.
Discourse

As was stated above, the natural environment of QATAL is direct

discourse. One may suspect, therefore, that indicative we + QATAL
appeared first in direct speech and was carried over into narrative
59
only later. The biblical data do not really bear this out, however.
In fact, we + QATAL is rather rare in discourse, at least in the books
of Genesis - 2 Kings. A number of cases can be found where two
simultaneous actions are presented by means of QATAL + we + QATAL:
1 Sam 12:2
. .

o~"~=?~ l~iJ~~ l~~iJ i'r~0 i'rl!1,vl

"1:1;~j "t:1~Rt "~~j

See, It IS the king who leads you now; I am old and grey.

1 Kgs 8:47

'b~~

ov":;rv rl~f 1"~~ 1j~lj~01

1jlirl.h
T l.j"'liM' 1j~~n
And they will plead with you in the land of th~i~ "~~pto;sT,
saying, "We have sinned, and have done wrong; we have
acted wickedly."

See also: Gen 31:7; Deut 2:30; 33:2; Jos 9:12; 1 Sam 10:2; 1 Kgs
20:27; and outside of the CBH prose corpus: Isa 1:2; 5:14; 37:23,
25, 26; 38:12; 43:12; 44:8; 63:10; Jer 7:28; 22:15, 28; Ps 20:9;
22:6, 15; 27:2; 28:7; 34:5, 6, 11; 35:15; 37:14; 38:9, 20; 50:21;
53:2; 66:14, 17; 76:9; 86:17; 97:6; 131:2; 148:5; Job 1:5 (1~j:;1);
Dan 8:27; 9:5; 10:15; Ezra 9:2,6; 2 Chr 29:6, 19.
.
It should be noted, however, that simultaneous processes may also

be expressed by the sequence QATAL W AYYIQTOL:

1 Sam 26:21
ik~ M~'M iT~rzjN' "nt,z,oiT i'r~M
I have been a fool, and have ~ad~' a' gre~"; ~ist~k~. do . ...

59 Cf. Blau, "Hirhurim," 110.

60 See also: Ps 119:106.

QATAL

226

Indeed, the two constructions occur in parallel passages, apparently

without semantic difference:
,rz.;!:lj irllj i;-"l~i? li)"~rq';1

Isa 37:27

2 Kgs 19:26
,rz.;!:l~j irllj i;-"l~i? li)"~rq';1
Their inhabitants, shorn of strength, are dismayed and
confounded.
Other cases of we + QATAL in direct speech are scarce and
uncertain:
1 Sam 24: 11(10)
i1l.vip~

"';f

'TJ"~".v. i~l i1"!i::t O;lliJ i1~0

o;!liJ i1~i1;. 'TJ~~~-'W~ n~
'TJ.,~.v 0QI;1j 'TJ~lO~ ,~~,

This very day your eyes have seen how the LORD gave
you into my hand in the cave; and some urged me to kill
you, but I spared yoU. 61

See also: 2 Sam 7:11; 1 Kgs 3:11; 2 Kgs 8:10; 14:10; 21:13.
Outside the corpus of CBH prose: Isa 6:7; 9:7; 19:14; 29:20; 37:4;
43:14; 66:7; Jer 7:31; 19:4,62 5; 23:14; 32:29b; 38:22; Ezek 13:6;
16:19; 17:18; 31:10; 37:11; Joel 1:7; Mic 3:3; Nah 3:17; Hab 1:11;
Mal 2:11; Ps 26:3; 86:13; Eccl 1:13, 16, etc.; Ezra 9:13; Neh 9:7,
8; 10:33; 1 Chr 17:10; 2 Chr 19:3; 25:19.
Narrative
Indicative we + QATAL is slightly more prominent in narrative. Not
only is it better attested, it is also more striking. In most instances,
there seems to be no reason against using WAYYIQTOL instead:

Gen 15:5-6

i1~i1"~ l~~iJ' 'TJ~lt i1~~: i1~ ;~ '~~llj

i1Rl~ ;~ O~rqt:1~j

said to him, "So shall your

the LORD;
and he reckoned it to him as righteousness. 63

61 The Septuagint appears to have read here

Notes, 194.

1~~~'

"and I refused"; see Driver,

62 In the Septuagint, the waw is not reflected. Since the sentence reads more
fluently with simple QATAL, the text should probably be corrected; see BHS.
63 In 4Q225 frag. 2i:7-8, the text of Gen 15:6 is quoted with a WAYYIQTOL form
instead of the anomalou~ we + QATAL: i1Pi~ ,r, :lt17rini o[ ~i1W'~[:J Oi1':J~] [rr~]~~'
This is most probably a secondary reading, however.

Chapter 6

227

The remarkable verbal form in Gen 15:6 has been explained in

various ways:64 as a pluperfect,65 as an expression of persistence,66
iterativity,67 or stativity,68 or as a late form indicating a gloss.69
None of these approaches, however, affords a consistent
explanation for the other instances of we + QATAL in narrative.
There is simply a sprinkling of single cases occurring in the midst
of good, classical narrative. Only in 2 Kings does one begin to find
sequences of narrative we + QATAL (see in particular 2 Kgs 18:4;
21:6; 23:4-14; 25:29). The latter phenomenon may be a sign of
relative lateness.
See: Gen 21:25; 28:6; 34:5; 38:5;70 49:23 (poetry); Ex 36:1, 29, 30;
Jud 3:23; 5:26 (poetry); 16:18; 19:8; 1 Sam 1:12; 4:19; 5:7; 10:9;
17:20, 38, 48; 20: 16; 25:20; 2 Sam 6: 16;71 12: 16; 13: 18, 19; 15:30;
16:5, 13; 19:18, 19; 23:20; 1 Kgs 9:25; 11:10; 12:32; 13:3; 14:27;
18:4; 20:21, 27; 21:12; 2 Kgs 3:15; 11:1 K; 14:7, 14; 17:21; 18:4,
36; 19:18; 21:4, 6; 22:17; 23:4, 5,8,10,12,14, 15; 24:14; 25:29;
Isa 9:19; 24:6; Jer 3:9; 37:11, 15; 38:28; 40:3; Ezek 9:7; 19:12;
20:22;72 37:2,7, 8, 10; 40:24, 35; 41:3; Amos 7:2; 9:5; Hab 1:11;
Ps 135:10, 12 ; 136:14, 15, 21; Eccl 9:14,15; Esther 8:15; 9:23-25,

64 1. Willi-Plein, ZAW 112 (2000), 396-397, has argued that the temporal
reference is to the future and that the form continues the direct speech of
verse 5: "So shall be your seed, and it will believe in YHWH."
65 See Luzzatto, in P. Schlesinger, S. D. Luzzatto's Commentary to the
Pentateuch (Padua, 1871 [Jerusalem, 1965]), 68. What Luzzatto means is not
that the verbal form should be translated as a pluperfect, but that it implies that
Abram believed in YHWH even before the promise was made.
66 See G. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, WBC lA (Waco TX, 1987),324.
67 See M. Oeming, "Der Glaube Abrahams" ZAW 110 (1998), 16-33, in
particular 18, where this analysis is attributed to Gunkel.
68 Oeming, "Glaube," 19.
69 H. W. Hoffmann, "Die Afformativkonjugation mit prafigierten waw in der
Genesis," in M. Beck, and U. Schorn, Auf dem Weg zum Endgestalt von
Genesis his II Regum, FS H.-C. Schmitt, BZAW 370 (Berlin & New York,
2006), 75-88, in particular 85-86.
70 There are several special studies on the cases of we + QATAL involving the verb
i1~i1; see, e.g., Isaksson, "Aberrant Usages," and Stipp, "Modernisierungen." In
principle, however, the cases involving this verb are not to be separated from
other verbs.
71 4QSama and the parallel 1 Chr 15:29 here read WAYYIQTOL, which may
reflect the original text.
72 The words ~1;-n~ ~l:1!:l~m have no equivalent in the Septuagint and may be
a late addition to the text.

228

QATAL

27; Dan 8:4, 7, 11, 12; 10:7, 14; 12:5; Ezra 3:10; 6:22; 8:30, 36;
Neh 12:39; 13:1, 30; 1 Chr 8:7; 9:26; 11:22; 23:1 2 Chr 12:10;
33:4, 6, 14, 19; 34:4.73

CHAPTER VII
THE PREDICATIVE PARTICIPLE
In several respects, the participle is the odd man out in the verbal
system of biblical Hebrew. Morphologically the active participle is
an adjective. Only in combination with an explicit subject does it
function as a verb.! To put it more precisely, it is not the participle
as such that plays a role in the verbal system, but a unit composed
of the participle and its subject. While the other verbal fonns
incorporate subject and predicate into one fonn, the participle
provides only the predicate: "r:J-~~O "I-went" ~~-~ "I-will-go" ~~h .,~~
"I (am) going"; QATAL and YIQTOL are synthetic, but the predicative
participle is analytic. 2 In historical perspective, moreover, the
predicative participle is a newcomer to the verbal paradigm (see
Chapter n). As a result, it is still relatively rare in CBR. While the
other fonns are counted in thousands, the predicative participle is
counted in hundreds.
For these reasons, the predicative participle has often been
treated step-motherly, or even not at all, in discussions of the
Hebrew verbal system. 3 Such neglect cannot be justified, however.

This statement reflects the normal situation in CBH. In LBH the mere participle
may imply a third person subject, and some examples of this syntax are found
already in CBH. See Chapter XI.
2 Some grammarians prefer the term periphrastic.
31t is significant that Driver in the first edition of his Treatise did not discuss the
participle in a systematic way. Only from the second edition onward did he
introduce a special chapter dealing with the participle. The addition of this
chapter did not affect the presentation of the other verbal forms, however. For
the early period, reference may also be made to the history of research by
McFall, Enigma, where the participle hardly plays a role. More recently,
however, a number of scholars have made a point of incorporating the
participle in their view of the BH verbal system. See, e.g., the works of
Bartelmus, Ratav, DeCaen, Warren, and Rogland.
1

73

Perhaps Ex 36:38; 38:28; 39:3 should be added to this list. The execution of
the building of the Tabernacle is a relatively late addition in E~odus; see
A. Aejmelaeus, "Septuagintal Translation Techniques: A SolutIOn to the
Problem of the Tabernacle Account," in eadem, On the Trail of the
Septuagint Translators: Collected Essays (Leuven, 2007), 107-122. The
usage in these verses may be regarded as iterative, however, in the light of
similar cases in 1 Kgs 6:3'2,35.

230

The Predicative Participle

From a linguistic point of view, the fact that Hebrew should

incorporate synthetic and analytic forms into one verbal system is
unremarkable.-Many languages, Semitic or not, do likewise. 4
Formally, the participle differs in kind from the finite forms, but
functionally it does indeed interact with them. As to the relative
rareness of the predicative participle, this should not obscure its
structural importance.
Indeed, the participle has a unique and well-defined functional
spectrum. Historically, it may have started out as a vivid
expression underlining a function that could equally well, though
less vividly, be expressed by other forms. In biblical prose,
however, it no longer functions in this way.5 In most clauses, one
could not substitute QATAL or YIQTOL for the participle phrase
without seriously altering the temporal-aspectual meaning. 6 In fact,
the role of the participle is pivotal in the Hebrew verbal system. As
an expression of contemporaneousness it stands opposed to, on the
one hand, QATAL and WAYYIQTOL which express anterior or past
situations, and thus temporal distance, and, on the other hand, the
modal forms which present situations as non-real. The predicative
participle fulfils an essential role in the verbal paradigm.

Two sequences of participle and subject

Andersen, Verbless Clause (1974); Joosten, "Participle" (1989); Buth, "Word
Order" (1987).

Inasmuch as it is not the participle alone but the unit composed of

the participle and its subject that expresses verbal functions, note
must be taken of two basic variants of this unit. The participle may
follow or precede the subject. The former sequence is much more
frequent than the latter, although both are well attested: Ptcp-Su

Notably Aramaic and modern dialects of Arabic; see D. Cohen, Phrase

nominale, 269-334.
5 In English, the present progressive "I am writing" is fully grammaticalized,
while the French equivalent, ''je suis en train d'ecrire," is not. The former
must be used in certain situations, while the latter can always be replaced by
the simple ''j' ecris" (although with loss of expressivity). In Hebrew, the
predicative participle stands closer to the English than to the French usage.
6 There is, however, a measure of overlap between the functions of the participle
and those of the finite tenses; see Chapter II.

Chapter 7'

231

has around 140 occurrences in the whole biblical COrpUS, 7 whereas

Su-Ptcp is about eight times more frequent. 8
Above in Chapters I and IT it has already been argued that the
sequences express a semantic difference. Su-Ptcp presents a situation
as ongoing at reference time:
Num 11 :27

'~N!lj i1Wb~ '~:j '.li~ij r1~j

i1~n~~ C"N:ll~nO ""O~ "~"N
":-:--

-:-,-

T:

e
.-

And a young man ran and told Moses, "Eldad and Medad
are prophesying in the camp."

Ptcp-Su, in contrast, presents a contemporaneous situation as a fact:

1 Sam 19: 14

"1-n~ n/jR~ C"~~~~ "1N~ n~~~j

N~it it~n '~NMj

When Saul sent messengers to take David, she [Michal]

said, "He is sick."

Accordingly, Su-Ptcp is relatively more frequent with dynamic verbs

and in syntactic situations implying concomitance, while Ptcp-Su is
the more usual sequence with stative verbs and in clauses stressing
the factuality of a situation.
Admittedly, the semantic distinction referred to is subtle. Dynamic
verbs in particular may pose problems: to perceive the difference
between the presentation of a dynamic situation as ongoing (with
Su-Ptcp) and the observation of a dynamic situation as a fact (with
Ptcp-Su) is not easy. Nevertheless, in most examples the semantic
difference between the sequences is clear.

An analogy: Nominal clauses with an indefinite predicate

From the typological point of view, the distinction between actual
and factual present is unique. 9 In order to understand why biblical
Hebrew maintains a linguistic contrast found in very few other

See the list of examples in Joosten, "Participle," 158. To the cases listed there,
Lev 27:8; Ezek 1:9; 2 Chr 30:21; Neh 8:9 should be added, as well as the
cases involving *qatil participles and niphal participles.
8 These statistics are extrapolated from the figures for Genesis, where there are
13 cases of Ptcp-Su and tOO cases of Su-Ptcp.
9 See, however, Comrie, Aspect, 69-70.

232

The Predicative Participle

languages, a broader look at the Hebrew nominal clause will be

instructive. 10
As was first realised by Francis Andersen, in a nominal clause
consisting of a definite noun phrase functioning as subject and an
indefinite noun phrase functioning as predicate, the normal word
order is Predicate-Subject 11
1 Kgs 2:38

'~1ij :1i~ 1~~~ ~Sl~~ '~N!!j

And Shimei said to the Icing, "The sentenc~ 'is fai~."

'

The opposite order, Subject-Predicate, is the rule in relative and

circumstantial clauses:
Gen 37:24

P'J ,i::l;:q

i11!:lij ink 1:7)~~~j

'

Relative and circumstantial clauses indicate a situation obtaining at

reference time. A precise English translation of the example would
be: "They threw him into a pit, the pit being empty. "
The order Subject-Predicate is also used, though less frequently,
when the nominal clause insists on the here and now:
Ex 1:9

;~1f9: "d~ c.p i1~ij iw.rr'~ '~N!!j

~~w~ C13.17' :1,

He said to his people, "Look, the Israelite pe~pie are T~or~
numerous and more powerful than we are. "13

What unites the circumstantial clause and the expression of

transitory states (or the here and now) is a nuance of "adherence" .14
Nominal clauses exhibiting the order Subject-Predicate express
situations that "stick to" the reference time in a way other nominal
clauses do not. What is relevant in Gen 37:24 is that the pit was
empty when Joseph was thrown into it, and in Ex 1:9 that the
Israelite people were numerous when Pharaoh remarked on it.

In the light of the usual syntax of nominal clauses with an indefinite

predicate, the opposition between the participial sequences becomes

understandable. The order Subject-Predicate, being normal in
nominal circumstantial clauses, was used in participial circumstantial
clauses as well. One may compare Gen 37 :24, quoted above, with
the following:
Gen 18:1

.:

.:..

In nominal main clauses, the order Subject-Predicate is

exceptional. 15 Yet the special function (i.e., insistence on the hereand-now) of such clauses recommended the use of this sequence
for the presentation of ongoing processes. Compare Ex 1:9 quoted
above with the following:
C"i=?Sl i1~ij o~1:i~~~ 1'~N!!j
O~-1N~r::r~ij 'W~ O~'lhiJ-l~ C"~~';

P~icipial clauses are verbal in regard to their function, but nominal in regard to

therr form. The term "nominal clause" is here restricted to clauses whose
subject and predicate are nouns (substantives or adjectives) or pronouns.
11 In terms of information structure, the
is the known element in the clause
it is worth
<1Istm~~U1~;hirlg between ."grammatical subject" and "logical (or psychological)
. the
deSIgnates the noun or pronoun phrase with which the verb
accords, while the latter refers to the known element in the clause. The two
categories usually coincide, but they may be forced apart in specific cases; see
below pp. 234-236. For extensive discussion of the different ways of defining
the terms "subject" and "predicate," see M. Baasten, The Non- Verbal Clause in
12 Qumran Hebrew, Disse~ation,. Leiden ~006, 28-34.
After Andersen, the baSIC predIcate-subJect structure of the nominal clause was
recognized by Joosten, "Syntax"; Niccacci, "Simple Nominal Clause'" Michel
"Probleme"; idem, Grundlegung, 160. It is contested by Buth for rea~ons tha~
are mostly of a theoretical order; see Buth, "Word Order," 94-106. Priority
should be given to the fac'ts, however.

i1,i1" ''''N N'"'

. : - 'Sn'ki1-nnS :1~'~ N1M;

N'~~ ~ j;N::l

The LORD appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he

sat at the entrance of his tent.

1 Sam 14: 11
10

233

Participial sequences and the syntax of nominal clauses

Examples of this structure are numerous, as a glance at Andersen's

lists will confirm. 12

And they threw him into a pit. The pit was empty.

Chapter 7

The Philistines said, "Look, the Hebrews are coming out

of the holes where they had hidden themselves."

The nuance of adherence detected in nominal clauses of the

structure Subject-Predicate translates into a notion of concomitance

See also: Gen 2:23; 19:31; Ex 1:9; Lev 13:43; Num 9:7; 11:6; 16:3; 32:1;
Deut 28:31; Jos 14:10; Jud 7:4; 2 Kgs; 7:15; 19:35. The Subject-Predicate
word order may also be induced by other factors, notably when two nominal
clauses are contrasted. See Zewi, "Nominal Sentence."
14 See D. Cohen, Aspect, 92-142, in particular 100.
15 The frequent occurrence of the order Subject-Predicate when the predicate is
a participle was one phenomenon that Andersen felt he could not explain (see
Andersen, Verbless Clause, 34, 43, 47-48).
13

The Predicative Participle

234

with participial predicates. With the sequence Su-Ptcp, the process

"envelops" the reference time. Aspectually, such clauses are
imperfective: the situation is portrayed from within, with special
attention to its internal structure.
The reverse order, Predicate-Subject, is the normal one in
nominal main clauses. In participial clauses, this sequence is used
when the ongoing quality of the process is not relevant. The
process is presented as a state or, more accurately, as a fact:
2 Sam 15:19

iil!1~ "'l~r"~ 1~i.9iJ-Oll :ltql :l~rzj

'TJ~;p~~ i1t1~ i1~A-O~l

Go back, and stay with the king; for you are a foreigner,
and you are living in exile away from your home.I 6

Here the participial clause, in the sequence Ptcp-Su, is parallel to

a simple nominal clause. Aspectually, such clauses are perfective:
the situation is portrayed as an undifferentiated whole, without
regard to its internal structure.
Historically, one could say that the sequence Ptcp-Su in its
"factual present" function was an accidental by-product of the
peculiar structure of the Hebrew nominal clause. While the
expression of the "actual present" by means of the sequence SuPtcp corresponded to a real need of the language, namely the
renewal of the progressive present,17 the opposite sequence merely
exploited an existing syntactic possibility. This accidental genesis
clarifies how Hebrew ended up with a peculiar extension of its
verbal syntagm that most languages do without. More practically,
it also explains why the sequence Ptcp-Su is fairly infrequent in
CBH. Finally, it accounts for the fact that later stages of the Hebrew
language do not preserve the classical distinction. 18

In the present work, it is argued that the participial sequences

express distinct TAM (Tense-Aspect-Mood) functions. In this respect,

the sequences are comparable to the finite forms. 19 Formally,

16 See also: Jer 48: 11.

17 See above in Chapter II, pp. 76-78.
18 In LBH, the facts are not clear-cut, but in Qumran Hebrew the two sequences
manifestly function according to different rules from those in CBH.
.

19 See above.

235

Chapter 7

however, the participial sequences are analytic units composed of

two discrete elements. 2o A short word can slip in between the two:
Jud 15: 11

o"rlrz.;t,s ~j~ I:l',t,rz.;b-"~ M17'" ~t,ii

Do you not know that Phili'sii~~s r';le o~~r

US?21

-T

-:

More importantly, textual constraints may alter the participial

sequence in other ways.22 Notably, the sequence may be inverted
because either the subject or the lexical meaning of the verb is
highlighted. 23 In some cases, the pragmatic factor may interfere
with the semantic features expressed by the sequences.24 This
phenomenon needs to be rehearsed briefly.
Su-Ptcp with focus on the subject
In the great majority of cases, the sequence Su-Ptcp does not imply
special emphasis on the subject. However, when the subject is
highlighted, it is this sequence that is used:
1 Sam 17:45

1;'''~~~ r;"~17:;l~ :ljQ=!l .,~~ N~ i1t1~

r;;N~;; ii1ii; otq=!l 'TJ"~~-N~ "~~~1

You come to me with sword and spear and javelin; but

I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts. 25

With finite verbal forms, this type of contrastive topicalization

often leads to the addition of a personal pronoun. 26 One could say,
therefore, that the pronouns in sentences like the one quoted are
doing double duty: they provide the subject of the participial
sequence, but they also carry the weight of the emphasis.

Contrast Syriac where the participle and the pronoun coagulate into a single
prosodic unit.
21 See also: Jud 20:34; 1 Sam 3:13; Jer 4:19.
22 An adverbial phrase can come between the subject and the participle in order
to give it "a lesser level of prominence" (Revell, "Verbless Clauses," 17):
2 Sam 11: 11 t:J~~h i1j~ij ~~=?-t,~ ~~.,~ ~1~.t11 :J~i~ ~~"~1. "My lord Joab and the
servants of my lord are camping in the open fields." Other examples: Gen
13:7; 1 Sam 19:9; 22:14; 23:3; 25:19; 2 Sam 11:11; 2 Kgs 15:5; 2 Chr 26:21;
Eccll:4. See also Buth, "Word Order," 82.
23 Highlighting may imply either topicalization or focalization. For a more
precise definition of these terms, see Chapter x.
24 Buth has argued that the marking of pragmatic functions is the only factor
determining the order of subject and participle; see Buth, "Word Order," 90-91.
25 See also: 2 Sam 7:2; 11:11; 12:23; Jud 11:27; 2 Chr 20:6; 28:23.
26 See, e.g., 1 Sam 24:18; Deut 31:3.

20

236

The Predicative Participle

When the subject is highlighted, the sequence Su-Ptcp occurs

even where one would expect the opposite sequence:
'.!l~~ NjP MjM; ":P .,~v. l~~j
1 Sam 3:8
Then Eli perceived that the LORD was calling the boy.

Complement clauses governed by verbs of cognition practically

always select the sequence Ptcp-SU. 27 In the present example,
however, the subject is focused. 28 The complement clause answers
the question: "Who is calling?" For this reason, the sequence was
reversed and the subject was put into the initial position (after the
conjunction). Again, the noun in initial position does double duty:
it is the subject of the participial sequence, and it is the marked
focus in the sentence. The nuance between "actual" and "factual"
present is voided, being overlaid by pragmatic constraints.

seeing. 30 The salient information in the sentence is contained in the

ki-clause. 31
However, when the verbal notion as such is highlighted, it is
the sequence Ptcp-Su that is used. This happens even where one
would expect the opposite sequence: 32

Gen 31:5

1~"~~ "~~-M~ .,~~tt

Mtt'

oflj~rzj
~bM~
: ..
: . "~N
_.. !J~j"~C"~
..... ..
1 see that your father does not regard me as favourably
as he did before.

It is hard to detect here any reason for highlighting the notion of

See below p. 253.

This is one case where the definition of subject and predicate formulated in note
11 p. 232 breaks down: in terms of information structure, the noun phrase is
here the predicate, the new information, and the verb is the subject, the known
element.
29 Pace Driver, Treatise, 169; Hoftijzer, "Nominal Clause," 501-502; Buth, "Word
Order." Since the participle is the predicate, it is only natural that it should
sometimes express the most salient information of the clause (this may happen
even in the sequence Su-Ptcp: 2 Sam 19:2; 1 Sam 14:33). This is not the same
as saying that the participle is especially marked for focus, however.

i1i!JM" on~-M"::l~ 1.lM.lN c",::ll7

Jud 19: 18

' : '..

""

:--:

o:j~~-'ij

.:

"nfi:-i.!l

We are passing [we have not come here to stay!] from

.Bethlehem in Judah to the remote parts of the hill
country of Ephraim.

Jer 23: 16

o:h
...

O"N::l~i1 O"N::l~M "':J'-~11 !Jl1~rzjM-~~

: -

O;r,N M-70M C~~:ilMO

Do not listen to the words of the proph~~~" wh~ prophe~y

to you; they are [not really prophesying but] deluding you.

Other examples: Num 22:34; 1 Sam 18:16; 2 Sam 20:19; and perhaps
also Deut 4:21-22; 1 Sam 23:4.

Ptcp-Su with highlighting of the lexical meaning of the verb

The sequence Ptcp-Su relates to emphasis in the same way as the
sequence Su-Ptcp. One often finds Ptcp-Su in clauses where no
special prominence attaches to the participle: 29

237

Chapter 7

.,~~ plj~T?-~~Q '~~l!JMV.'-M~ Mi?i rzj"~-r~

So is one who deceives a neighbour and says, "I am only
joking!"

Prov 26:19

In these three instances, it appears that the verbal predicate as such

is in focus position (note the contrastive focus in Jer 23: 16). This
may account for the use of the sequence Ptcp-Su in these cases;
Su-Ptcp would have implied ongoing action without focus: "we
are passing through," etc.
With finite verbs, highlighting of the verbal notion often leads
to the addition of an infinitive absolute. 33 The infinitive absolute
combines very rarely with the participle. 34 Probably, the hybrid
nature of the participial phrase is to blame: functionally, it is
a verbal form taking its place in the verbal paradigm, but formally
it is a nominal clause composed of two distinct constituents. In
clauses like that in Jud 19:18, the pre-posed participle exerts two

27
28

Contrast Hoftijzer, "Nominal Clause," 502: "[Jacob] says here that he really
experiences that the attitude of his father-in-law has changed, there is no
doubt." This amounts to special pleading.
31 See also, e.g., Num 10:29; 1 Sam 19:2; 2 Sam 14:13; 20:17.
32 This explanation is different from the one proposed in Joosten, "Participle,"
150, where these cases were treated as instances of interpretation.
33 See, e.g., Ex 18:18.
34 The only examples are Jud 20:39; Isa 22:17; Jer 23:17.

30

238

The Predicative Participle

functions at once. It provides the predicate of the participial

sequence, and it represents the focus in a sentential perspective. 35

The neutralization of the opposition in negated clauses

The expected negation of the Ptcp-Su syntagm is 10' - Ptcp - SU. 36
This construction is indeed found a few times:
Deut 30: 11

oi~iJ 'TJ1~9 "~~~ ,~~ M~riJ

i14:;;iPiJ ":p

.~'iJ i1Rhl ~t,1 'TJip~ N'iJ MN~~~-Nt,

Surely, this commandment that I am commanding you
today is not too hard for you, nor is it too far away.

See also: Jer 4:22; Ezek 22:24; Zeph 3:5; Job 12:3; 13:2. In none
of these examples does the participle refer to an ongoing process.
The normal way, however, of negating the predicative participle is
with the particle r~, "there is not". The usual construction is rN-SUPtcp, where the subject can be realised as a noun,37 an independent
pronoun,38 or a suffix pronoun:
2 Kgs 12:8(7)

M:iliJ P1~-M~ o"p-~Jj~ C:?,~"~ .p1":'f~

Why are you not repairing the house?

This construction functions as the negative counterpart of Su-Ptcp,

as in the above example. But it also occurs where in the positive
form one would expect Ptcp-Su. Compare the following:
Ezek 8:6

o"fti.u Oi1

i1~
T

nrJN ilN'i1
T

-.--:

Do you see what they are doing?

O"~.u i17pij i19 ntt' 'TJ~"~iJ
Do you not see what they are doing?

Jer7:17

Other examples of r~-Su-Ptcp corresponding to positive Ptcp-Su

occur in conditional clauses and ki-clauses
Ptcp-Su is

0I;:1;~ on~ 0~~i71: "[They hear what you say,] but do it

they will not."
36 The sequence 10' - predicate - subject is the normal way to negate a nominal
clause; see Joosten, "Syntax." Examples: Gen 2:18; Ex 18:17; Num 23:19; Deut
22:2; 2 Sam 17:7; 1 Kgs 20:28; Job 36:4. The negation r~ is rare in clauses with
a nominal predicate (the only examples are: Gen 7:8; Lev 13:4, 31, 32).
37 See Gen 39:23; Ex 33:15; Lev 14:21; Ezek 8:12; 9:9; Esther 2:20; 3:5; 7:4.
38 This type of syntax is fOWld in Neh 4: 17 and in Rabbinic Hebrew; see Chapter XI.,
p.381.

Chapter 7

239

regular, see below): Gen 20:7; 43:5; Ex 8:17; 33:15; Jud 12:3;
1 Sam 19:11; Ezek 20:39.
It appears that the opposition between actual and factual present is
neutralized in negative clauses with r~.

Subject-participle
Joosten, "Participle" (1989), 140-146.

The basic function of the sequence Su-Ptcp is the representation of

an action as ongoing at reference time. In direct speech, it naturally
expresses the real present. In addition, the sequence is frequent in
the expression of the more or less immediate future. In this case, the
verbal syntagm represents the action as ongoing, but contextual or
pragmatic factors show that the action still lies in the future.
Likewise, the sequence may refer to more general situations that are
not really ongoing. 39
In narrative, a usage very similar to the expression of the real
present is found where Su-Ptcp -(introduced by i1Ji1) depicts
a situation as perceived by the characters of the story. Besides, the
sequence is used in relative and circumstantial clauses, where it
expresses situations forming the background to the main events of
the story.

The real present

As was shown in Chapter II, the sequence Su-Ptcp is the regular
way in biblical Hebrew to present an action as actually going on at
the moment of speaking. This function may be termed the "real
present" (or "actual present"), in contradistinction to the "general
present" expressing statements that are true at speech time but do
not refer to a contemporaneous process. The real present is normally
expressed by the present progressive in English. It is aspectually
imperfective: having started but not ended at speech time, the action
is naturally viewed from within.

35 See also Ezek 33:32

-z,;~J;1 c~~i7 Oij 'Wt$ 0~~:;+7ij n~!lI;1~-n~l

"But you shall require of them the same quantity of bricks
as they have made previously." Here, the process expressed by Su-Ptcp is
located in the past by the adverbial phrase, although the time of reference of
the whole statement is the present. Perhaps ot!'z,t!' z'~n~ should be read,
following Targum Onkelos and the Peshitta.

39 An exception is the following: Ex 5:8

ov~~~ 1~~~t;1 Oflj~~,

The Predicative Participle

240

The real present is found only in discursive texts,40 and particularly in

dialogue. As a corollary, pronominal subjects are frequent, and frrst
and second person subjects are relatively numerous. The position of
the participial phrase in the clause is relatively free. It may occur at
the head of the clause:
2 Sam 18:27

14rd~jO n~~'9-n~

Mtt'

.,~~

P4'~-1~ r.l'~"1'J~ n~~9~

I see the running of the first one like the running of
Ahimaaz son of Zadok. 41

Clause-initial Su-Ptcp is often introduced by a presentative, usually

M':li1 (see Chapter m):
1 Sam 14:33
M'M"t, c.,~tQi1 CVM M~il
Look, the troops are sinning against ;he -Lord. ~2
T

With auditory actions, the noun t,'p, "voice," is sometimes used as

a presentative:
Gen 4: 10

il~1~O-1~ ,,~~ c"i1~~

i"1'Jtt .,~., t,4p

Listen! your brother's blood is crying out to me from the

ground. 43

However, the sequence Su-Ptcp can also occur, with the same basic
function, within the clause. Normally, only one constituent-a direct
or indirect object, or an adverbial phrase--comes before the
participial syntagm. The fronted element in this case is in focus
position and represents the main information:
Gen 37:16

rziP;9

"~jtt "1J~cn~

I am seeking my brothers [answer to the question: 'What

are you seeking?'].44
~r_~~~~~

~fav-,rd~ c"faV~il-t,~~

1 Sam 8:8
___ ,~~~_____~_~"_~
__~~__~ ___________~"__~~~T,~-~~~-:""M~;n
. -: -

C~~

40 Where it is found in poetry it is, so to speak, simulated: the poet does not refer
to the real "real present," but takes the readers in their imagination to a point
in time where the action is going on.
41 In English, the verb "to see" is incompatible with the present progressive. In
Hebrew, however, the verb does not submit to constraints of this kind. See
also: Gen 13:15; Jud 9:36; 2 Kgs 9:17; 23:17; Jer 1:11,13; 24:3.
42 See also: Gen 29:6; 45:12; Jud 9:31; 2 Sam 16:11; 19:2; 2 Chr 20:11.
43 See also: Song 5:2; Isa 66:6.
44 See also: Gen 16:8; Ex.2:14; 10:11; Jud 19:18; 2 Sam 13:4; 24:12; 2 Kgs
4:13; 7:9; 9:17.

241

Chapter 7

l~-C~ C.,U; 11 M~ij 1~

Just as they have done to me, from the day I brought
them up out of Egypt ... so also they are doing to you.

Interrogatives are always fronted in this way:

Deut 10: 12:

lil;~ "~rD i"ij"~ M,M; il~ t,~1~: MI!J.l'l

So now, 0 Israel, what does the Lord your God require of

yoU?45

As can be seen from these examples, the real present occurs with
different semantic classes of verbs (see also the discussion in
Chapter III, pp. 90-93). Where it is used with stative verbs, it
usually implies special relevance to the here-and-now rather than
merely ongoing processes:
Gen 48:1
Your father is ill.

Reference to the future

In conversation, the sequence Su-Ptcp frequently refers to actions
not yet begun. Two usages must be distinguished.

The futurum instans

As in many other languages, the verbal construction expressing the
real present is also used in reference to situations represented as
imminent. This has been termed the futurum instans. In cases
like this, only the pragmatic context indicates that the process
belongs to the future (see Chapter III, pp. 118-119). The linguistic
form implies contemporaneousness with speech time. And the
statement remains anchored in the present. The participial
sequence is very often, though not always, introduced by M.:Iil:

l~ ~~i "~~i:'I

2 Kgs 20:5

Indeed, I will heal yoU. 46

,fav-".:I:!l c~"n~ t,~:ll:!l C",::1l1 CrJ~

You are about to pass through the territory of your
kindred, the descendants of Esau. 47

Deut 2:4

T"

":

.. -:

" -

45 The sentence adverb i1Ml1' and the following vocative stand outside the core
clause.
46 See also: Gen 9:9; 15:3; Ex 7:17; 8:17; 16:4; 19:9; Jud 6:37; 7:17; 1 Sam
3:11; 14:8; 2 Sam 12:11; 2 Kgs 19:7; 21:12.
47 See also: Gen 17:19; Deut 9:4-5.

242

The Predicative Participle

The futurum instans may be combined with an adverbial phrase of

time:
":

:":

What are you doing [taking away my teraphim]? [real

present]

However, such a combination is not entirely true to the nature of

the usage. The temporal reference of the futurum instans is, in
principle, the time of speech. The addition of a temporal phrase
represents an extension of the function. The adverbial phrase may
refer not only to "today," but also to "tomorrow" (Ex 9: 18), "next
week" (Gen 7:4), or "next year":
1~ nf?,:;h .,~~ ir~1j n,V,f irVJ ',V,i~~

2 Kgs 4: 16

At this season, in due time, you shall embrace a son.

Where it refers to future actions, Su-Ptcp comes close to the

function of YIQTOL and WEQATAL. In principle, a semantic
distinction always persists, with the participle implying connection
to speech time, in contrast to YIQTOL and WEQATAL presenting
actions as merely contemplated. In practice, however, there seems
to be a measure of selnantic overlap.

Future reference time

In a predictive or modal context, Ptcp-Su is used to represent
actions expected to be perceived at the future reference time:
'9"~~

1 Sam 10:8

,,0; .,~~~ ir~iJl ~~~jJ ,,~~~ l!11j;1

And you shall go down to Gilgal ahead of me; then I will

come down to you.

The usage is attested a few times only. On account of its similarity

to the "historic present" to be discussed below, it may be called the
,..u""'C' 13,..,1"'

49

The extended present

The sequence Su-Ptcp is used in general statements referring to
situations contemporaneous with speech time, but not actually
happening. The usage may be illustrated by the following
examples, opposing the "real present" to the "extended present":

Jud 18:3

Also Hag 2:6.

.
Similarly Ex 7:15; Jud 9:33; 2 Chr 20:16.

": T

ir~S:
irM~-ir~
0:
T T

The general present may also be expressed by the sequence PtcpSu (see below p. 256) and by YIQTOL and WEQATAL (Chapter
VIII). Presumably, each syntagm implied a distinct nuance to
speakers of biblical Hebrew, but for modem readers it is hard to
capture this nuance in every case. 51
Occasionally, Su-Ptcp is used in reference to iterative or
habitual action. In this usage, the sequence again approaches the
function ofYIQTOL and WEQATAL:
. Ex 13: 15

0"1~~jJ 0 01 '~~-~f ir~ir"~ lj~t .,~~ 1~-~.t:

it~!JN
'i~::l-~~'
e.- : .- "j::l
T

T :

Therefore I sacrifice [Su-Ptcp] to the LORD every male

that first opens the womb, but every firstborn of my sons
I redeem [YIQTOL].52

The historic present

In biblical narrative, the sequence Su-Ptcp introduced by irjir is
used to present actions as they are perceived by the characters of
the story. Such cases represent a superimposing of temporal
horizons: the "then" of the story and the "now" of its telling are
fused. The impression is created that the story is going on "before
our (the audience's) eyes" or, conversely, that the hearers are
transported into the time frame of the narrative. Bearing these
specific conditions in mind, the usage may be called the "historic
present". It is used sparingly and almost always at important
junctures in the narrative.
Formally, the historic present is limited to a small number of
narrative patterns. First, following a verb of visual perception:
2 Kgs 11: 14

~~~iP~ '1~.t:Q-~.t: '~l1 '~~ij il~01 ~1~j

See also: Ex 13:15; 1 Sam 12:2; 2 Kgs 6:22; 17:34.

See Chapter II, p. 60 (Deut 8:5).
52 See also Gen 39:22-23; 1 Sam 18:16; 1 Kgs 17:6; 22:44. The iterative use of the
participle becomes more frequent in LBH; see Chapter XI.
51

49

irr::l

What are you [a Levite] doing in this place? 50 [extended

present]

50

48

o"fqs: 0f.l~ ir~

Jud 18:18

'li-n~ ::J~i~ ~1::Jn-n~ oillir ,::Jl1 iU'lN

Deut 2: 18
Today, you are going to cross the boundary of Moab at Ar.48
T

243

Chapter 7

I,

The Predicative Participle

244

Chapter 7

Elijah ascended in a whirlwind to heaven. Elisha saw it,

and he cried ont, "Father, father! The chariots ,of Israel
and its horsemen!"

When she looked, there was the king standing by the

pillar, according to custom. 53

Second, following a verb of motion, the historic present expresses

an action perceived by the subject:
Jud 11 :34

;n":!l-~~ i1S~~i1 nM~" ~:l!l'

n;~h~~1 o"~\l~ in~li?~ nN~'; i~; iT~~i

While the first participial clause is clearly circumstantial, the

personal pronoun in the second indicates that it is not. Perhaps this
is another instance of a descriptive present within a narrative.

Deut 4: 12

Then J ephthah came to his home at Mizpah; and there

was his daughter coming out to meet him with timbrels
and with dancing. 54

Thirdly, the historic present itself may introduce movement into

the narrative:
Gen 24: 15

nN~'; iT~il' iT~;:tl '~j~ i1~:P Oj~ ~1i1-"i);j

Before he had finished speaking, there was Rebekah

coming out. 55

A special case is the use of the historic present in the report of

a dream. In this case, the syntagm creates the impression that the
speaker is reliving his dream as he recounts it:

Gen 41: 17

,k;ij n~~-~4l '~11 "~~;:t .,~~O~

In my dream, I was standing on the banks of the Nile. 56

Whether the historic present is used outside of these patterns is

uncertain. Possible examples are the following:
1 Sam 1:13

;:r:!l~-~17
T

n,:;3,C
.-t N"iT. i1~n'
ni17i V.,tJ~~ pj
4l~': ~~ ;:r~;Pl
..

T-:

Hannah was praying silently; only her lips moved, but

her voice was not heard.

rzj~y ';M~ o~.,~~ i1~i1; '~j;j

o.,~, o~~.,~ i1~1~l;'11 c"1l9~ ctl~ o"i~l ~;P

Then the lord spoke to you out of the fire. You heard the
sound of words, hut saw no form.

The participial clauses do not show the structure of circumstantial

clauses. Interpreting them as historic presents is contextually
feasible: the hearing of the voice and the absence of an image are
central features. These clauses in Deut 4 are hardly representative
of CBH narrative syntax. 57
Attendant circumstance in narrative

The historic present implies foregrounded processes. But the

sequence Su-Ptcp is used also in a variety of clauses expressing
the background to the main chain of events.
Relative clauses
Gross, "Partizip" (1975).

The sequence Su-Ptcp is the normal one in relative clauses,

whatever the time frame or literary genre. 58 In narrative, relative
clauses with a participial predicate typically fill in the background
of the main action:
Gen 47: 14

The recapitulating pronoun ~"i) shows that the fust clause is not
,+""""'+++,+,+++""+++,,' "+++"+++slmpfy' circumstiinthlI ' PerliapsTllls+rsa~'case~oIa narrator lapsing
into a descriptive present.
2 Kgs 2:11-12

245

='~fij-~f-n~ =,0;" toj:?~;j

14l~f rj~~1 o:j~~-rj~~ ~~~~ij

C"i:l~ CiT-'rzj~

':lrS:!l

Joseph collected all the money to be f~~nd i~ th~ -iand "of

Egypt and in the land of Canaan, in exchange for the
grain that they bought. 59

i1~' 17rzj"~~, o.,~rtJi1 i1'17~:!l 1i1!l~~ ~17!l'

'''~1~1 S~l~: ~~l-"~~ ~~~ P~~9 N1~;i

T

See also: Gen 26:8; 37:15; Ex 3:2; 14:10; Jud 9:43.

See also: Jud 19:27; 1 Sam 4:13; 5:3; 9:14; 25:20; 26:7; 2 Kgs 1:9; 9:5; Jer 18:3.
55 See also: Jud 4:22; 1 Sam 11:5; 17:23; 2 Sam 19:42; 1 Kgs 19:11; 2 Kgs 6:33.
56 See also: Gen 37:9.
53

54

See further in Chapter XI.

The only exception is Job 6:4.
59 See also: Gen. 39:6, 22; Ex 18:5, 14; 36:4; 1 Kgs 17:19; 2 Kgs 17:29.

57

58

The Predicative Participle

246

Circumstantial clauses
The same function is found more frequently in circumstantial clauses:

Gen 32:32

~~iJS-l1~ ':Jli 'rlf~~ rlf~iGi1 i~-n't!l'

.:

.:

i~-,.,-S; -lit,~ N~ni

:

_..

The sun rose upon him as he passed Penu:el, and he was

limping because of his hip.

The circumstantial clause has been discussed, with examples, in

Chapter IV.
In a few exceptions, a formal circumstantial clause does not
express attendant circumstance, but habitual actions:
1 Sam 17:.15

~i~~ ~~~ :J~'

,'i.n "1'

OO~-l1"il ,.,~~ 1~;;"-11~ l1ilii~

But David went back and forth from Saul to feed his
father's sheep at Bethlehem. 60

Chapter 7

Other cases
In CBH narrative, the use of Su-Ptcp to express attendant
circumstance is limited almost entirely to the types of clauses
reviewed thus far. Exceptions can often be described as extensions
of the circumstantial clause. In a few cases, a temporal phrase has
been added:

Jud 18:1

2 Kgs 9: 16

i17p~ ~~flf OJ;'' ":p i1~~~i\: l~~j ~ii1~ :J~i~j

Then Jehu mounted his chariot and went to Jezreel,

where Joram was lying ill. 62

Since causal clauses normally select the sequence Ptcp-Su, the

present examples show a hybrid character. The conjunction marks
them as causal clauses, while the word order gives them a circumstantial function.

l1~W~ i1~O~ i~-rzjre;~ "~1ij ~~~

OijQ

O"~~~i

And in those days, the tribe of the Danites was seeking for
itself a territory. 63

Such cases are remarkable because the temporal reference of

a participial clause is in any case provided by the context. The
temporal phrase is redundant.
In other instances, the sequence Su-Ptcp is used in background
material without taking the form of a circumstantial clause:
Jos 2: 15

The usage probably indicates a diachronic development in the

functioning of the circumstantial clause. Similar examples are
more common in LBH. 61
Causal-circumstantial clauses
In a few cases, the sequence Su-Ptcp in narrative is introduced
with a causal conjunction:

247

li~/jij ,~~ ~~O~ OJ,iMj

n~~;" N";:t i1~in~i i1~inij '''P~ ~l;l"~ ":p

Then she let them down by a rope through the window,
for her house was on the outer side of the city wall and
she resided within the wall itself. 64

See also: Gen 39:23; 1 Sam 18:16; 2 Sam 9:13; 1 Kgs 3:3; 5:1;
Ezek 20:16.
The free use of participial clauses in narrative is much extended in
LBH, as will be discussed in Chapter XI. The present examples are
forerunners of a change that will become more systematic in
a later stage of Hebrew.

Partici pie-subject
Joosten, "Participle" (1989), 146-152.

The sequence Ptcp-Su presents a situation as a fact contemporaneous to reference time. With very few exceptions, it is used only
in discursive texts. 65 The sequence expresses the perfective present:
This verse is lacking in the Old Greek and may reflect a relatively late addition
to the Hebrew text, see E. Tov, "The Composition of 1 Samuel 16-18 in the
Light of the Septuagint Version," in J. Tigay, Empirical Models for Biblical
Criticism (Philadelphia 1985), 97-130, in particular 123. Other examples in
CBH: 1 Kgs 10:25, 17:6.
61 See Chapter Xl.
62 See also: Jos 10:14; 1. Sam 18:16; 1 Kgs 5:4; 8:7; Jona 1:11, 13; Ezra 3:13;
Neh 6:9; perhaps also Ex 14:25.

60

See also: Gen 13:7; Deut 5:5; Jud 4:4; 14:4b.

Note that Jos 2:15b is lacking in the Old Greek, suggesting that the clause
may be a late addition.
65 Object clauses adopt the reference time of their matrix clause and should be
considered discursive (cf. also Num 22:22). The only real exception in CBH
seems to be Jud 8:4 (see below pp. 256-257).
63

64


The Pr~dicative Participle

248

a situation contemporaneous with speech time (equalling reference

time) is presented as an unanalysed whole, without attention to its
inner constituency.
The sequence Ptcp-Su is relatively rare. In the great majority
of cases its use is conditioned in one of two ways. Either the
lexical meaning of the verb does not easily allow the action to be
presented as ongoing, or the syntactic situation is such that the
ongoing nature of the action is irrelevant. Only a small minority of
cases involve dynamic verbs in free syntactic use. Some of these
may reflect highlighting of the pure meaning of the verb (see
above pp. 236-238). Some, however, show that the "factual
present" was a real option that could be used to good effect in
specific contextual situations.

Chapter 7

Morphology, however, tells only half the story. Other types of

participles also occur in the sequence Ptcp-Su when the situation
they express lacks dynamicity:
Amos 6:8

2 Sam 20: 17

::l~i" i11!1~ij i1~~y 1~NMj y.,~~ ::l'i?~j

'9Prt~ "j~' 17~rt! i~ 1~NMj

":l~N l)~fV 1~N"'

He came near her; and the woman said, "Ar~ y-o~ Jo~b?,;
He answered, "I am." Then she said to him, "Listen to the
words of your servant." He answered, "I am listening. "68

2 Kgs 18:26

~Y'Tj~C~.l11)r:t~~ c"~~~ ~~~

See also: Lev 11:4, (N~CO); Jud 7:10 and Dan 1:10 (N1"); 1 Kgs
18:27 and Hos 7:6 Ore"); Jer 33:10 (::l1n); Ps 39:5 (~in).66
Niphal participles usually express non-dynamic situations. It is no
surprise to find that they occur relatively often in the sequence
Ptcp-Su:
i1JfVN1::l:::J 1J"J!j~ Ci1 c"!ja)
Jud 20:32
T

.. T :

are smitten down before us as previously.

See also: Ex 5:8, 17 (i1!j1); 14:3 (1'::l); Num 12:7 O~N); Isa 2:22
(::ltOn); Jer 25:31 (co!jre); Lam 1:21 (nJN).67

With non-dynamic verbs, the sequence Su-Ptcp is used in circumstantial

clauses: Gen 25:29; Ex 17:12; Deut 25:18; 2 Sam 16:14; 17:2; 1 Kgs 3:20; in
a relative clause: Deut 7: 19. Other cases are exceptional: Num 9:7; 11 :26;
2 Sam 17:29; 2 Kgs 7:15.
Niphal participles occur in the Su-Ptcp sequence in circumstantial clauses:
Gen 34:19; Jud 4:21; 2 Kgs 5:18; in a relative clause: Jos 10:25; other: Gen
49:29; 1 Kgs 12:6,9.

')r:t~~ C"ll~flj .,~ n"~1~ '9"j~~-~~ Nr1~'

Please speak to your servants in the Aramaic language,

for we understand it. 69

Alas, we are guilty concerning our brother.

67

See also: Gen 3:5, 17'''; 1 Sam 19: 14; 1 Kgs 14:5; 2 Kgs 8:29;
2 Chr 22:6 i1~n; 2 Sam 15:19 i1~l; Jer 48:11 coptO; Ps 34:8 i1Jn; 87:2
::li1N; 119:162 rz.,.,rz.,; 147:11 i1~1; Song 2:9 i1~'.
Some verbs may express either a state or a dynamic action,
depending on the context. These verbs tend to occur in the sequence
Ptcp-Su when they express states while the opposite sequence is used
when they refer to dynamic actions:

As was stated already in Chapter ill, stative verbs show a predilection

for the sequence Ptcp-Su. Since states do not involve ongoing
action, this use of the sequence Ptcp-Su is expected. Many stative
verbs exhibit a qal participle of the *qatil form:

66

.,tlN~f?' '''r;Jj~l~l ::lp~: liN~-n~ .,~~~ ::l~r;J~

1 abhor the pride of Jacob and hate his strongholds.

Non-dynamic verbs

Gen 42:21

249

In the foregoing examples, the disposition and the ability to hear

are expressed by the sequence Ptcp-Su. When the actual action of
hearing is meant, the sequence Su-Ptcp is found:
1J~fV .,~~~ ni~.l1 ~ip
It is the sound of revelling that 1 hear. 70

Ex 32: 18

A comparable distinction is made with the verb i1N1 "to see". When
the verb means "to observe, to understand," Ptcp-Su is found, but
when physical seeing is meant, Su-Ptcp (see Chapter I, p. 30).
The verb tOp::l (piel) means literally "to search" but often
expresses the meaning "to want". In the latter case, Ptcp-Su may
be used:
1 Sam 19:2

68
69
70

See also: 1 Sam 3:9,10.

See also: Gen 42:23.
See also: Deut 4:12; 1 Sam 2:23,24; 15:14.

'9P"~O~ .,~~ "1N~ rv~;~

The Predicative Participle

250

My father Saul wants to kill you. 7i -

Where the literal meaning obtains, Su-Ptcp is always used.72 Note

also the following:
Eccl 7 :26

... iTw~iT-n~ n'~~ ,~ ''.IN ~sic1

I found more bitter than death ~he ~om;n. .. -

. ...

'.'

The verb ~s~ "to find" is used here of intellectual discovery.

The use of the sequence Ptcp-Su with particles

A large group of occurrences of the sequence Ptcp-Su is found in
clauses headed by certain particles, notably O~, iT, and "::l. As was
already stated in Chapter II, it is not the use of a particle as such
that selects the sequence Ptcp-Su. In fact, "::l may be followed by
either sequence. Other particles, notably iTjiT and 'ili~, always take
Su-Ptcp. The principle of selection is, rather, the temporalaspectual function imposed by the type of clause. The sequence
Ptcp-Su occurs in syntactic situations where there is no insistence
on the ongoing nature of the action. In other words, Ptcp-Su is
used when the "factual present" meaning is needed.
Conditional

o~

In conditional clauses, the participle stresses the here-and-now

quality of the process. Either the condition already obtains:

iT'1iT" orV~,,-t,~ t,~,~" iTrlN iT.lt-o~
If [as you are doing] yo"; pl~y ;h~' whor~~ 0 isr~;l, d~ no~
let Judah become guilty. 73

Hos 4: 15

Or the fulfilment of the condition is presented as imminent:

Jud 11:9

on~iTt, "ni~ OriN O":l"rz1C-O~

.:.

-.- -

..:

i't~i1;- lIJ~1

If [as you are proposing to

you
to fight with the Ammonites, and the
over to me, I will be your head.

me home again
gives them

Chapter 7

is expect~d. In a conditional clause the interest normally bears on

the question ~hether o~ not the action obtains, not on its ongoing
nature. Ev~n In a ~ase hke Hos 4: 15, the fact that Israel is playing
the whore IS more Important than the ongoing quality of the action.
Other examples of :Jim-Ptcp-Su: Gen 27:46; Ex 7:27; 9:2; 10:4;
Deut 5:25; Jos 22:19; Jud 7:10; 1 Kgs 21:6; Jer 26:15; 38:21;
42: 13; Joel 4:4.
NB. Although it never immediately follows c~, the sequence Su-Ptcp does occur
in conditional clauses:
1) It is found when another constituent comes between the particle and the
participial syntagm:
liO ~~ ~~no ~~ ilWln:R~ il~in:l~1
Num 11: 15
If this is the way you treat me, put me to death at on~e. 74
.
In this construction, the force of the particle falls on the constituent following it,
thus leaving the participial phrase free to express the ongoing nature of the

action.
2) There are a number of cases where the existential particle rzr comes between
C~ and the sequence Su-Ptcp. The subject is always realised as a suffix pronoun:
~~ 1'~~jJ ~~i~n"~ n~~j '~n c"fD17 C:lrzj~-c~ ilMl1'
Now then, if you will deal loyally a~d ~rul~~th .~y ~as~~~~: teli m~:7~

Gen 24:49

A similar construction is found with interrogative il (see below). There is an

obvious connection between im-yesh-Su-Ptcp, ha-yesh-Su-Ptcp and :Jen-Su-Ptcp.
Originally, these constructions may have arisen in order to express the real,
ongoing present in conditional, interrogative and negative clauses. In practice,
however, the exact semantic nuance they express is not always easy to detect.

Interrogative iT
syntax of the participle in interrogative clauses introduced by
iT IS anal~gous t? that of conditional clauses. Where the participial
syntag~ ImmedIately follows the particle, the sequence Ptcp-Su is
used WIthout exception. Thus in a direct question:
T~e

LORD

Num 11:29
Are you jealous for my sake ?76

In all cases where the conditional particle immediately precedes

the participial syntagm, the sequence Ptcp-Su is used. This sequence
See also: 1 Sam 23:10. The sequence Su-Ptcp is also used: 2 Sam 20:19;
1 Kgs 11:22.
72 Gen 37:17; Jud 4:22; I'Sam 24:10.
73 See also: Jud 7:10.

71

251

See also: Lev 3:1, 7; Jud 9:15; 1 Sam 7:3.

See also: Gen 24:42; 43:4; Jud 6:36. The same construction occurs in biblical
76 Aramaic, perhaps as a Hebraism: Dan 3: 15.
Other examples: Gen 18:17; 2 Sam 10:3; Ezek 8:6; 9:8; 1 Chr 19:3.
74

75

The Predicative Participle

252

Similarly in an indirect question:

Jud 2:22

Z,~lf?':-n~ o~ n;~d 1.t1~~

M4 M; 1"rrn~ Cij o",~rz,; 0

.. .in order to test Israel, whether they would take care to
walk in the way of the LORD 77

Again, the use of the sequence Ptcp-Su is expected in these clauses.

Interrogative clauses introduced by M do not present ongoing actions
but seek to establish whether or not a given statement is true.
NB. 1) When another constituent comes between the particle and the participial
sequence, Su-Ptcp is used:
Ex 2:14
Do you mean to kill me ?78
Here, the weight of the particle falls on the element following it.
2) The sequence Su-Ptcp also occurs with ~~ separating the participial
phrase from the interrogative:
n.!;'1~ !:J~I;1~ !:J~~ij~~ iT4iT; iT~~~ ~:p
Deut 13:4(3)
... iT4iT;-n~ !:J~;Ok !:J~U/:O
F or the LORD your God is testing you,
to know whether you love the LORD ...
In principle, this construction may be taken to add a nuance of ongoing nature
(" ... to know whether you are actually loving the LORD ... "). In practice, the scarcity
of examples makes it difficult to appreciate the semantic difference between hayesh-Su-Ptcp (as in Deut 13:4) and ha-Ptcp-Su (as in Jud 2:22, quoted above).79

Causal ":P
Where causal ":J is followed by a participle clause, it selects the
sequence Ptcp-Su. The reference may be a contemporaneous activity:
,..,,,.,,,...,~~~-',..,~

Num 25:17-18

,;,~
T

Harass the Midianites and defeat them,

you ...

Chapter 7

253

Up, get out of this place; for the Lord is about to destroy
the city.

The use of Ptcp-Su in causal clauses conforms to expectation. An

action that constitutes the reason for another situation is viewed as
a fact.
Other examples: Gen 19:13; 25:30; 32:12; 41:31, 32; Ex 5:8;
Lev 13:11; Num 22:22;80 Deut 13:4; Jud 8:5; 15:3; 1 Sam 3:9,10;
2 Sam 17:10; 1 Kgs 14:5; 2 Kgs8:29;81 18:26; 20:1; Isa 36:11; Jer
1:12; Jona 1:12; Ps 1:6; 149:4; Job 32:4; Ruth 3:11; Eccl 8:12;
12:5; Neh 8:9; 2 Chr 13: 11; 22:6.
NB. A different construction, limited to prophetic texts, is ki-hinneh-Su-Ptcp:
Zech 2:14(10)
1~;n=? ~r:J~~~1 N~-~~~0 ~:p l;"~rn~ ~n~i?'l ~n
Sing and rejoice, 0 daughter Zion! For 10, I will come
and dwell in your midst. 82
This syntagm adds a nuance of urgency and actuality to the causal clause.

Complement clause introduced by ":P

In object clauses depending on the verbs 1":1, lii\ ilJ (hiphU), MN',
li~~, the participle usually occurs in the sequence Ptcp-Su:

Jud 15: 11

c"rJrz.;'s !JJ~ c"'rlH~-"~

.:

P1lii"
T:
- T

~Z,M
-:

Do you not know that the Philistines rule over us?

What is relevant is the fact that the Philistines rule over Israel.
Although the process is contemporaneous with reference time, it is
represented as an unanalysed whole. Thus the use of the sequence
Ptcp-Su is entirely expected.
Other examples: Gen 31:20; 42:23; Jud 20:34; 1 Sam 3:13(x2);
20:30; 22:17; 23:10; 25:4; 2 Kgs 5:7; Jer 44:15,29; Ruth 1:18.
Exceptionally, the opposite sequence is found. In some cases,
this is due to pragmatic factors such as highlighting of the subject
(see above p. 236 on 1 Sam 3:8). In at least one case, however,

Or the participial construction may refer to an imminent event:

Gen 19: 14

Mttl

O;Pitl-l~ !IN !J~!Jp

'''liM-nN M,n" n"nrz.;o-":;,

T

...

T:

.:

80 The use of the sequence Ptcp-Su in a narrative context is striking. Perhaps the
clause is to be assimilated to an object clause .

81 In this verse, the use of the sequence Ptcp-Su in a narrative context may
See also: Eccl3:21 (where interrogative iT is to be read, against MT).
78 See also: 1 Kgs 1:3; Jer '7:19.
79 The same construction occurs in biblical Aramaic: Dan 2:26.

77

indicate that the entire passage, 2 Kgs 8:28-29, is a late addition under the
influence of the parallel in 2 Chr 22:5-6.
82 See also: Isa 26:21; 65:17,18; Jer 1:15; 8:17; 30:10; 45:5; 46:27; 50:9; Amos
6:11, 14; 9:9; Mic 1:3; Hab 1:6; Zech 2:13, 14; 3:8; 11:16.

The Predicative Participle

254

the sequence Su-Ptcp in a complement clause definitely implies

a different nuance:

2 Sam 2:19

,,":j

c"rDn'n~ ''',::1l7 .,~

~''''
. ., - : :,~~~ Tn~ .,'~ ";j11~~;

Chapter 7

takes over functions formerly expressed by QATAL or YIQTOL. 85 The

development does not affect LBH only, however. Other examples of
performative Ptcp-Su: Jer 38:14; Ezek 2:3; Ps 45:2.
A more problematic case is the following:

When David saw that his servants were whispering

together, he understood that the child was dead. S3

Here the situation is not presented as a whole but as an ongoing

action, David saw his servants whispering together. Usually
a different construction is used for expressing such a thought:

1 Sam 19:20

C"~:P~ O"~"~~iJ nRo~-n~ ~i:l

He saw the company of prophets prophesying. 84

Other uses of the factual present

Apart from the above examples where the use of Ptcp-Su is at least
partly conditioned by lexical or syntactic factors, a small number of
free uses can be found. What unites all cases is that the process
expressed with the sequence Ptcp-Su is contemporaneous with speech
time (which equals reference time), yet not represented as ongoing.
Performative expressions
In performative expressions, biblical Hebrew normally uses QATAL.
Nevertheless, a handful of cases can be found where such
expressions are formed with the participle. Interestingly enough, in
these cases the sequence Ptcp-Su is found: although the process is
dynamic as well as contemporaneous with speech time, it is not
represented as ongoing:

1 Chr 29: 13

1~ 1j"~~ c."i~ 1:l"i:j,~ i1l!1.l11

And now, our God, we give thanks to you.

case using QATAL:

Ps 75:2

O"ij'~ '9~ 1j."ii1

83
84

See also: Gen 39:3; Esther 3:5; Neh 3:33; and compare 2 Chr 2:7.
See also: Num 24:2; 2 Sam 6:16; 1 Chr 21:16.

.,~~~

Gen 15: 14

T1

1'~.P.: ,~~ "inij-n~ O~'

The nation that they will serve, too, I ~ill j~dge.

The use of the participle seems to imply that this is the divine
verdict on Egypt, pronounced more than four hundred years before
its execution.
Immediate past
Another area where Ptcp-Su encroaches on the domain of QATAL
is in the expression of the immediate past. An action that is
completed by reference time can of course be represented, and
usually is, by means of QATAL. When such an action is expressed
with Ptcp-Su, the continuing relevance of the situation is stressed:
1~~ij .,~~~ .,tl~8l;1 .,~~-,.,~~

Jer 38:26

10~ii1; n"~ "~~"~jJ "l:1~~~

I was presenting my plea to the king not to send ~e h~ck

to the house of Jonathan.

When Jeremiah will pronounce these words, the process of

presenting his plea will be over. The use of QATAL would
presumably have been possible here. However, QATAL would lay
stress on the anteriority of the action and on its possible results,
whereas Jeremiah merely wants to explain his presence at the
court. The sequence Ptcp-Su refers to the present while at the same
time indicating that the process is not actually going on.
Other examples: Isa 46: 1 (in parallel with QATAL); Job 6:4;
perhaps Isa 33:9.
A special case is the following:

We give thanks to you, 0 God.

The variation between QATAL and Ptcp-Su in performative expression probably represents a diachronic development. The
predicative participle, the renewed "present tense" in Hebrew,

255

Ex 36:5

i1~~'iP~ i1'~.P.i1 ":t~ ~"::1i1' Cl7i1 C"l1'~

The people are bringing' mor~ th~n is' nec~;s~ry Tf~r d~i~g
the work.

Although the process is still going on, its decisive phase-the

moment the offerings exceeded the required amount-is past. The
85

See Chapter II.

The Predicative Participle

256

sequence Ptcp-Su is used, it seems, to express this precise nuance.

The sequence Su-Ptcp would underline that the people were
continuing to bring more than necessary; QATAL would simply state
that the process was over.
General present
Finally, the sequence Ptcp-Su is used to present general truths.
General truths are contemporaneous without being ongoing, thus
constituting a parade example of the "factual present":

Ps 34:23

'''i~l1
iZf~j
it,jJ"
iti;!)
T T -:
0: ...
T:
-.-

The Lord redeems the life of his servants.

Other examples: Nah 1:2; Ps 31:24; 145:20; Ecc11:5. 86

257

The syntax of this verse is without parallel. In CBH, the sequence

Ptcp-Su is practically never used in reference to the past. 87 The
versions seem to reflect W AYYIQTOL instead of the participle (cf.
1 Sam 27 :2), but this may be due to later facilitation.
Jer 4:19

.,~~

ni,"p it~"TJi~ "lJ~ "lJ~

iZf"'n~ ~t, .,~t, "~-jJ~h

My bowels, my bowels, I writhe in pai~! Oh, th~ ~alls'''of
my heart! My heart is beating wildly, I cannot keep silent.

There seems to be no reasonable way to take .,~~ .,~-it~h as a

factual present. Nor does the sequencePtcp-Suappear to b~ due to
pragmatic factors.

Appendix: The verb n"n + participle

Admittedly, general truths can be expressed in other ways as well

in biblical Hebrew, notably with QATAL (see Chapter VI) and with
YIQTOL (see Chapter VIII). In the following example the sequence
Ptcp-Su is used side-by-side with Su-Ptcp to express a general truth:
Ps 19:2

t1"P10 i"~~ '''1: it~P'~1

The heavens are telling the glory of God, and the
firmament proclaims his handiwork.
Stylistically, the sequences serve a chiastic construction.
Grammatically, however, the first clause would seem to insist
more on the actual ongoing nature of the process, the second
clause more on its eternal veracity.
Difficult cases
The "factual present" interpretation can be applied without
difficulty to almost all instances of Ptcp-Su. It is certainly more
which the
syntagm puts focus on the participle (see above pp. 236-238).
Nevertheless, a few difficult cases remain:

Jud 8:4

Chapter 7

Driver, Treatise (1892), 135.5; D. Cohen, Phrase nomina Ie (1975), 317-328;

Muraoka, "Participle" (1999).

A marginal phenomenon in the verbal system of biblical Hebrew is

the periphrastic tense consisting of a finite form of the verb it.,it
"to be" and an active participle of another verb. Functionally, the
combination is transparent. The finite form keeps its usual meaning,
while the participle adds to the construction a durative nuance. 88
The construction manifests a variety of contextual usages that will
briefly be reviewed in the present appendix.89
WAYHIQOTEL

most often integrates a durative process into the

main chain of events. As was shown above, W AYYIQTOL itself
may express durative situations (Chapter VI). However, where
a writer wants to make the durative nature of a process explicit, he
can use the periphrastic construction:
W AYHI QOTEL

2 Sam 8: 15

t,~1t?':-t,f-t,lJ i111t,~~j

i~lJ-t,~~ itR1;;1 o~~~ itfy i7 i11 "0;j

N1jJ '~i7 it~'l~jJ lil1'l~ ~~~j

ir-l~ 'iZf~
ni~~-iZft,iZf1
0: -: iZf.,~it

Then Gideon came to the Jordan and crossed over, he

and the three hundred who were with him.
T

86 All examples are in poetry, but this may be due to accident.

87 The sequence Ptcp-Su is used a few times in reference to the past in LBH: Neh
6:17; 8:9; 2 Chr 22:6.

88 The durative nuance has occasionally been denied, but it is very obvious in
89 many examples and there are no cases where the durative meaning is impossible.
The lists of examples are meant to be exhaustive, but doubtful examples have
been excluded, which implies some subjectivity. Muraoka, "Participle," 195,
counts 124 cases, while the present appendix has only about 90.

The Predicative Participle

258

So David reigned [WAYYIQTOL] over all Israel; and David

administered [wAYHI QOTEL] justice and equity to all his
people.

The duration of the process may be very long, as in the above

example, or it may be shorter:
Esther 6: 1

C"~!!iT "':l"!'f nij"~jiT ,~o-n~ ~":liTt, ,~~!!'

i-~~~ ".,~~~ C"~1~~ 1'~;:r~;
T -

.. : .

He gave orders to bring the book of records, the annals,

and they were read tothe king.

Examples: Ex 19:19; 37:9; Jud 16:21; 1 Sam 18:9, 29; 1 Kgs 5:24;
2 Kgs 17:25, 28, 29, 32(x2), 41; Esther 2:7,15; Neh 1:4; 2:13, 15;
1 Chr6:17; 18:14; 2 Chr 5:8; 9:26; 17:12; 24:12,14; 30:10(x2); 36:16.
WAYYIQTOL is not limited to narrative but occurs also in
direct speech. Thus it is no surprise to find two cases of W AYHI
QOTEL in discourse: 2 Sam 7:6; 2 Kgs 21:15.

Chapter 7

259

In a few cases, the persistence of the process into the present is so

strong that one is tempted simply to render with a present tense:
~~rf1'; Tj.vrf~ 1j"~1j 1"y ni'~l1

Ps 122:2

Our feet have been (and still are) standing within your
gates, 0 Jerusalem.

Other examples: Deut 9:7; 31:27; Isa 59:2; Jer 32:30; Ezek 34:2;
Ps 10:14; Neh 6:14.
In discourse, it";' may precede or follow the participle, but this
variation seems to have no temporal or aspectual implications.
Narrative
In narrative, HAYAH QOTEL functions in different types of descriptive
clauses, usually pertaining to the background of the action. The time
span referred to may be long:
ni~~~~iJ-t,~=il t,qJi~ ;';y ;'fjt,rf1

1 Kgs 5: 1

Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms.

HAYAHQOTEL

Two basic subcategories must be recognized, depending on whether

the construction occurs in discourse or in narrative. Indeed, HAYAH
QOTEL mirrors some of the uses of QATAL rather closely, although
invariably adding a durative nuance.
Discourse
In discourse, the construction may locate a durative process in
a past time frame:
~:tl.:J it";' "MiV'i~iT iT~"~

Jer 26:18

iTl~iT;:~~~ :1n~R~-lJ .,;.,~

Micah of Moresheth prophesied during the days of King

Hezekiah of Judah.

In these cases, the process is completed before reference time.

Just as with QATAL, however, completion is not a necessary feature.
The QATAL of ;''';' may imply "has become and is still":
Deut 9:24

c~n~

"Ml1"!'f

ci!!~

iT,iT"-Cl1 cn"";,

C"'~~

You have been reb~lli~g' ~gains~ the: Lo~d "'as' 'liong' 'a~
I have known you.

Like the "has been -ing" form in English, the Hebrew syntagm
leaves open the possibility that the process is still going on.

In this case, the implication may be that of an habitual or iterative

process:
iTfDl1 ;'''iT ~1iT ciV c"fDl1 'iV~-t,::J n~'

Gen 39:22

And whatever was don~" ther~: he was the ~ne ~ho did i~~ :
T

In other passages, however, the time span encompassed by HAYAH

QOTEL is much shorter:
CO",;-t,,p nil1i nijt1~01 nirzijn1"v 'RfiJ
CIJRr;11 ~~rf t,Sr;11

Job 1: 14

The oxen were ploughing and the donkeys were feeding

beside them, and the Sabeans fell on them and carried
them off.

Examples: Gen 37:2; Ex 3:1; 1 Sam 2:11; 2 Sam 3:6; 1 Kgs 10:3;
18:3; 2 Kgs 9:14; 17:33(x2); 18:4; Jer 26:20; Ezek 43:6; Dan 8:5;
10:2, 9; Neh 3:26; 5:18; 6: 19(x2); 2 Chr 18:34; 22:3.
In a few cases, HAYAH QOTEL refers to durative actions anterior to
the time frame of the main narrative:
1 Kgs 12:6

"n
-

in';iT~
''':l~
:.
T

c"~p.:~iJ-n~ c.v~lJj 1~~iJ r,p1~1

;,fj"iV "je-n~ C"'~l1 1"iT-'iV~
:

...

T .. -:

Then King Rehoboam took counsel with the older men who
had attended his father Solomon while he was still alive.

260

The Predicative Participle

See also: the parallel text in 2 Chrl 0:6; and 2 Kgs 9: 14; Ezek
16:22.
YIHYEH QOTEL and WEHAY AH QOTEL

In biblical Hebrew, these combinations are infrequent. They express

prescriptive or predictive statements with a durative nuance:

CHAPTER VIII

i1Jrz.;
O"li:::l'N
':::li~:::l
0"17;
1"i1"
O~"J:l1
TT
T:T:.
:":.0:

Num 14:33

And your children shall wander in the desert for forty

years.

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

O"'i1~:::l ttlw~~ n""i1'

Deut 28:29

i1~~N; -';;i1 ~i~~ 'rz.;~~

T"-:T

-:

... - : -

You shall grope about at noon as blind people grope in

darkness.

Other examples of YIYHEH QOTEL: Ex 26:3; Lev 15:2, 19; Deut

19:11; Jud 11:10; 2 Sam 7:16; 1 Kgs 2:45; Isa 2:2; Hos 9:17.
Other examples of WEHAYAH QOTEL: Ex 19: 11; Isa 30:20; Mic 2: 11.
In a past-tense context, YIHYEH QOTEL occurs once, in
a "past-modal" function:

LBH,

with

Neh 13:22
O"'lirSi1
o",~flj
O"N:l1
T : :
T

And I commanded the Levites that they should purify

themselves and come and guard the gates.

Volitives

Volitives of the verb

rarely:

i1"i1

combine with the participle even more

Ex 19:15
Prepare for the third day.

See also: Ex 34:2. A similar meaning is expressed by the simple

imperative in Amos 4:12.
Gen 1:6

O:it7 O:~ r~ t,"'il~ "i)", o:ipiJ linf l1"Pl "i);

Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters and let it

separate the waters from the waters.

The two forms YIQTOL and WEQATAL present the grammarian with
a dilemma. Morphology would lead one to treat them in distinct
chapters and to describe each one independently. The semantics of
the forms, however, are so close that it is difficult to tell them apart.
Essentially, both YIQTOL and WEQATAL represent a process as not
real (irrealis), as merely contemplated.

The relation between YIQTOL and WEQATAL

Gross, Verbform (1976), 15-54.

In deciding whether or not to pair YIQTOL and WEQATAL one should

disregard the etymology of the forms. In historical perspective,
YIQTOL is indeed an entirely different entity in comparison to
WEQATAL. But languages may, in synchronic perspective, join
together items whose origin is different. In classical Greek, the main
tense forms of the verb "to see" are oparo, O'llOf..L<Xt, etoov, erop<XK<X;
of these only the first and the last are etymologically related. Yet they
make up one single paradigm in exactly the same way as do the forms
of a regular verb like A:Uro, AUO'ro, eA'UO'<X, AEA'UK<X. Similar cases of
lexical suppletion or "heterosyzygism" can be found in many other
languages. Cases of grammatical heterosyzygism are harder to come
by, but they do exist. In Sahidic Coptic, several tenses have a
negative form that is etymologically distinct from the positive: e.g.,
the negative of the first perfect, !l1Pibok "I did not go," is not based on
the positive first perfect aibok "I went". Closer to home, the volitive
paradigm in biblical Hebrew, too, is made up of elements that belong

262

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

historically to distinct modal subsystems (see Chapter IX). The

pairing of YIQTOL and WEQATAL is merely an extreme case of
a well-established phenomenon.
Another matter that should not weigh too heavily is connected
to the question of etymology. YIQTOL has a few residual functions
that set it apart from WEQATAL. In proto-Hebrew, YIQTOL probably
expressed contemporaneousness with regard to reference time (see
Chapter II). A few traces of this can still be recognized in CBH:
YIQTOL is used as a real present in questions and it perhaps
expresses concomitant processes in the past in two or three
instances. 1 Neither of these functions is ever taken on by
WEQATAL, a form that never expressed contemporaneousness in
proto-Hebrew. Perhaps the use of r~ with YIQTOL to express past
events may also be counted here (see Chapter III). Such vestigial
usages of YIQTOL do not obscure the basic functional identity of
YIQTOL and WEQATAL.
A final issue concerns the question of grammatical homonymy.
Both forms may at times be confused with homonymous forms:

Above, in Chapter VI, the cases of apparent WEQATAL in nonmodal function were classified as instances of "perfect
conjunctive," we + QATAL. These cases are not representative
of WEQATAL. It is a language-historical accident that we +
QATAL coincide formally with WEQATAL. 2 In practice, the two
homonymous forms may on occasion be difficult to tell apart.
The same phenomenon affects YIQTOL in a different way.
YIQTOL is often homonymous with the volitive forms, jussive
and cohortative. Usually, the syntax indicates which form is
intended (see Chapter I), but occasionally doubts may arise.

The
confusion with
forms is a practical
matter.
no reason to set up YIQTOL and WEQATAL as
separate paradigms.
Although none of the prima facie reasons for distinguishing
YIQTOL from WEQATAL is particularly strong, their combined
force might lead one to treat the two forms separately, at least in
In a few cases in poetry YIQTOL may be taken to express the real present.
2 The difference in accentuation that distinguishes some cases of we + QATAL from
WEQATAL is probably. a late feature that arose in the reading tradition; see
Chapter I.

Chapter 8

263

practice. The reasons for treating them together, however, are

altogether cogent.
To begin with, YIQTOL and WEQATAL never express a functional
opposition. The two forms are simply not commutable. WEQATAL
requires a position at the head of the clause and a connection to what
precedes, while YIQTOL as a rule takes the second or third position in
the clause and occurs in first position only when the connective waw
is for some reason excluded. There are no "minimal pairs"
establishing a semantic opposition. Even in those exceptional cases
where YIQTOL expresses a (residual) function not attested for
WEQATAL, there is no meaningful contrast. In clauses like ~p.;lr;n'~,
"what are you seeking?" or i1~~:r~, "then he built," WEQATAL could
not have been used. 3
Second, when one sets aside residual usages of YIQTOL, the
two forms are seen to express the same meanings:
- futurity and modality
- general present
- repetition in the past.
This is a remarkable set of functions. The fact that both YIQTOL
and WEQATAL express them indicates that the two forms are to be
identified functionally. 4
Third, the two forms co-occur very often. Indeed, it is difficult
to find a passage of any length using only YIQTOL, or only
WEQATAL. The two forms regularly go hand in hand, alternating
freely as the word order requires.
The conclusion must be that the relation between YIQTOL and
WEQATAL is unlike that between QATAL and WAYYIQTOL. For the
latter two, we do have "minimal pairs" establishing a difference in
use. 5 Moreover, in spite of much functional overlap, the functions
OFWAYYIQTOL differ globally from those of QATAL. While QATAL
and W AYYIQTOL are distinct verbal categories that sometimes

There are no cases where YIQTOL in these residual functions is continued by

a WEQATAL form expressing the same function.
One should note that both YIQTOL and WEQATAL often express these functions
alone. Contrary to what is sometimes stated, it is simply not true that
WEQATAL merely assimilates and continues the meaning of a preceding

See Chapter II.

YIQTOL.

264

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

"stand in:' for one another, YIQTOL and WEQATAL are allomorphs
representing one and the same grammatical category.6
A significant difference between YIQTOL and WEQATAL is
connected to word order. WEQATAL occupies the first position in
7
the clause, YIQTOL in principle a non-first position. The semantic
implications of this syntactic distinction are not straightforward: '
the dynamics of word order in biblical Hebrew are only partly
understood (see below in Chapter X). But some things are clear.
The default VSo order in Hebrew naturally induces the frequent
use of WEQATAL. The negation, conjunctions, and adverbs of time
take a preverbal position and therefore require the use of YIQTOL.
Different types of focus also lead to an X-V(SO) word order
entailing YIQTOL.
A corollary of the placement rules is that YIQTOL is used in
subordinate clauses far more often than WEQATAL. In Hebrew,
subor~inate clauses are regularly introduced by a particle, thus
rendenng the use of WEQATAL impossible. WEQATAL occurs only
a~ ~he. second or further verb in such clauses. Again,' this
dIstInction has no clear semantic implications. The functions of
YIQTOL in dependence on particles are practically the same as in
main clauses.
A number of instances remain where the occurrence of the
verb in non-first position is harder to explain. In the light of the
multiplicity of factors, it is unreasonable to attribute all variation
in word order to a single factor such as "sequentiality" or
"con~inuity." WEQATAL is more often sequential than YIQTOL, but
the dIfference is not clear-cut.
. A second difference between the two forms is that WEQATAL
Incorporates a conjunction. This feature establishes a connection to
the
clause or context in
be evaluated in
more
to
section on WEQATAL.
. In. recognition of the dilemma stated above, the present work
"':111. dISCUSS .YIQTOL and WEQATAL in the same chapter but in
dIstinct sections. Each form will be analysed separately and
~ For the notion of allomorph, see Lyons, Introduction, 184-187.
A WEQATAL clause may be preceded by an element belonging to it: a temporal
phrase: G~n 3:5; ~4:30-31; Ex 16:6, 7; a subject: 2 Sam 20:12; Num 19:11; Ex
12:15; a. ~lrect object: N~m 14:31; 17:3. These are to be regarded as cases of
extraposlt1on. See Gross, Pendenskonstruktion, 14,26,46,50,57,69, 119, 131.

Chapter 8

265

presented in all its usages. At the same time, their inclusion in one
chapter, and the far-reaching parallelism between the usages of the
forms, will pay tribute to their basic semantic unity.
YIQTOL and WEQATAL are far more frequent in discourse than
in narrative. Moreover, their use in narrative is similar to their use
in discourse when it is directed to the past. The organising
principle, therefore, in the following presentation will not be that
of narrative versus discourse, but of temporal spheres.
YIQTOL

In CBH, YIQTOL, etymologically the long form of the prefix

conjugation, 8 occurs almost exclusively in non-initial position in
the clause. A few exceptions to this rule occur at the very
beginning of direct discourse:
1 Kgs 22:22

Fri1f;'~n ~~ ~~:1I~-O~1 i1tl;)~ '~~!lj

The LORD said, 'You are to entice him, and you shall
succeed; go out and do it. '

In this instance, the YIQTOL form is not only the first word of the
discourse, it also makes up the entire clause. 9 Neither WEQATAL
nor X-YIQTOL could have been used without seriously altering the
clause.lO One also finds YIQTOL at the beginning of a discourse
when it occurs within a longer clause:
Gen 41:15 ink 'M~~ Oi~O 11~~I:1 'D~~ ';T'7 "r:U?~~ "~~j
I have heard it said of you that when you hear a dream
you can interpret it.

Here, although WEQATAL could hardly have been used, X-YIQTOL

was theoretically possible: the direct object could have been placed
before the YIQTOL form. Further cases of clause-initial YIQTOL are
rare in prose, and some of them are philologically uncertain: Gen

For the morphological distinction between YIQTOL and the jussive, see Chapter I,
pp. 11-12. Occasionally one finds a morphological short form (jussive) in a
syntactical slot where YIQTOL is expected. See 1 Sam 10:8; Gen 24:8; 1 Sam
14:36; 1 Kgs 2:6; Ezek48:14; Zeph 1:2.
9 Similarly the parallel 2 Chr 18:21. See also: Gen 24:58; Ex 3:14; 1 Sam 14:43;
23:11; 2 Kgs 3:7; Hag 2:13.
10 WEQATAL does occur at the beginning of discourse; see los 22:28; Ezek 30:6,
but in this case the conjunction expresses continuity with what has been said
before.
8

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

266

15:15;11 Num 20:24;12 Deut 19:3;J3 r Sam 30:8;14 Neh 2:18; 5:12;
2 Chr 10:14 (contrast 1 Kgs 12:14). Apart from these examples,
a prefix -conjugation form in first position in the clause should
normally be taken as a volitive form (see Chapter IX).15
NB. With 2 fem.sg. and with 2 and 3 mas.pl.,

YIQTOL

in some passages sports an

additional nun: e.g., rRillI:1 Ruth 2:8; ll]fll~l:1 Ex 20:23; ll]~l]P; 2 Sam 22:39. There
are over 300 cases of this paragogic nun in the biblical cOrpUS. 16 The precise
import of this feature has proved difficult to determine. To some linguists, the
forms with nun are the residue of an earlier paradigm of the non-volitive prefix
conjugation, analogous to the Aramaic and Arabic one, preserved either
accidentaily,17 or intentionally as a stylistic embellishment. 18 To others, the forms
express a distinct nuance: contrast,19 or rhetorical subordination. 20 Whatever the
function of the paragogic nun, the feature does not affect the temporal-aspectualmodal functions of YIQTOL.

VIQTOL

in reference to future situations

In the great majority of occurrences, YIQTOL refers to a process

not yet begun. In a typical stretch of text, over 80% of YIQTOL
forms will have a future-modal function. 21 According to the
context, the usage may shade into various kinds of modality:
futurity, necessity, potentiality, likelihood, desirability, and others.

11

The syntax of this verse can be explained from the peculiar rules of ellipsis
obtaining in poetry; see Chapter XII, pp. 425-429.
12 The form may be jussive. Note the use of the third person imperative in the
Septuagint.
13 Perhaps instead of the YIQTOL form r:;JI;l, an infinitive absolute (qal or piel)
of the root l::ln should be read (see the Septuagint and the Samaritan
Pentateuch).
.
~*".~ ~~.-~~- """_.".~",~""".".,,.~~~~dlallUD1eJ(tQJga1j~-!.1-sW:uiliLbe-I:esllomd-LLthe_.he'ld.of the clause; see
Notes,
15 A few cases of formal YIQTOL in first position have a volitive function and
should be regarded as volitives; see Chapter IX, p. 335.
16 See Hoftijzer, Nun Paragogicum. The paragogic nun occurs 9 times with
WAYYIQTOL (so also in an inscription written on plaster recovered from
Kuntillet Ajrud: 10~", pi") and 3 times with QATAL.
17 See, e.g. Kaufman, "Paragogic Nun."
18 See, e.g. Zuber, "Nun paragogicum."
19 See Hoftijzer, Nun Paragogicum.
20 See Garr, "Paragogic nun."
21 The estimate is based on a systematic count of YIQTOL forms in Gen 1-11 and

. .

Jos 1-10.

267

Chapter 8

In some grammar books, a distinction is made between prediction,

viewed as indicative, and other types of modality. Now, YIQTOL is
indeed used regularly in predictive clauses:
n~'i-;,fg~tI niN~;;

2 Kgs 19:31

iijii;

n~~i?

The zeal of the LORD of Hosts will do this.

Here the verbal form conveys a meaning close to that of the future
indicative in the classical languages. This "indicative" nuance,
however, arises mainly out of the speech situation. In other
situations, the same form and the same syntax may lead to other
interpretations:
ii~~-iifD.u" n'i~ii-~~

Num 15:13

Every native Israelite shall do these Tthings "'i-n

[obligation].

thi'~ Tway

ii~~~ .,~.,~ ,~~:;p 1fD ~~ '9"1~~

Num 32:25

Your servants will do as my LORD commands [commitment].

In fact, all the grammar indicates is that the process is not, or not
yet, real. Contextual and pragmatic factors determine the precise
modal function. The modal nuances produced are numerous and
difficult to categorize. Moreover, the correct interpretation is not
always easy to define. In many passages, different readings are
possible, depending on the evaluation of the context.
Two groups of occurrences stand out, YIQTOL expressing
shades of futurity (prediction), and YIQTOL expressing deontic
modality (obligation). Other usages are more restricted.
Prediction
Hoftijzer, "Zukunftsaussagen" (2001).

is frequent in announcements of future occurrences. The

reference to the future may be expressed by a temporal phrase:
jl-jii nkii it.,;,., 'n~~
Ex 8:19(23)
YIQTOL

... -

This sign shall appear tomorrow.

Or the temporal reference may remain implicit:

Ex 7:3

.,t'lnk-n~ "I:1"'~1iJ1 iili1~ :l~-n~ ;,rgi?~ "~~j

But I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and I will multiply

my signs.

The predictive force may have negative or positive overtones,

expressing menace or promise:

268

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

Gen 3: 14

i1'j~1J 11~1J ~~~1 i1i?ij:PIJ-~f~ i1~~ '1'~

1~tl 'TJ~h~-~.l7

Cursed are you among all animals and among all wild
creatures; upon your belly you shall go.

Gen 46:4

jf~.v-O~ 'TJ~-l1~ "~j~l i1i?~j~~. 'TFPS; 'j~ "~j~

I myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I will also

bring you up again.

When the verb is in the first person, the predictive modality almost
always implies a measure of commitment.
~~ere. the speaker is God or a divinely inspired person, the
predIction Involves a high degree of certainty. With other speakers,
however, the prognostic may instead be rather hypothetical:
"ilJ"~ "j:1i1N"
Surely now my husband will love me. ' , ,-

Gen 29:32

T "I't

i1M,V
T

Obligation
In di~ective ~iscourse, YIQTOL occurs frequently with a prescriptive
function. ThIS usage brings YIQTOL close to the volitive forms
(cohortative, imperative, jussive). As was shown in Chapter II, the
semantics of volitive and non-volitive forms remain distinct
in almost all cases. For YIQTOL, three types of usage may be
recognized.

Gen 18:4-5

Gen 32: 17

1':'~{1 '1J~ O~:P~ 1'~Q1 Ot)~-l1~ i1Q~~l

Here, YIQTOL has its negative value. It does not continue the volitive
force of the preceding jussives, cohortatives and imperatives, but
signals a transition to a different type of modality. 24
Obligation presented as necessity

Where a command is formulated with independent YIQTOL, the

implication is usually that of a general prescription not arising out
of the speech situation:
Ex 22:30

T:

:-

TT-:

...

-:

This twofo~d use of YIQTOL is exactly parallel to that of WEQATAL, but the
latter form IS much mote frequent following a volitive,

,,~ 11";:Il:1 iZf'j~-"rP.~~l

You shall be people consecrated to me.

1 Kgs 2:37

,,~~~ 1,:1V '''':::l'v-~~ '~~!l'

''j,v 1"~1 ''j,v 1"~ 1o"~.t;:1 Mj'li

O~"~1j 1~Ojl o:~-O.l7~ ~rMR~

r,vo 111J(l 1:J~'tl1

Let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and

rest yourselves under the tree. Let me bring a little
bread, that you may refresh yourselves, and after that
you may pass on.

continuing a volitive form

In Chapter II, it was argued that YIQTOL and WEQATAL make up

the unmarked member in the opposition between volitive and nonvolitive forms. The unmarked nature of
to a twofold
use
a
On the one hand, it
may follow a volitive form without signalling a semantic change:

22

here occurs with a neutral value. Although the verbal form

as such does not express volition, the second clause as a whole
states Jacob's will in the same measure as the first.
In other cases, however, the use of YIQTOL following
a volitive indicates a change from volition to the absence of
volition:
YIQTOL

Examples of predictive YIQTOL are much too numerous to list:

Gen 2:23; 3:4, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 4: 14, 24; 5:29; 6:3, 17; 8:21, 22;
9:2, 5, 11, 15, 25; 11:6, and many more.

YIQTOL

And he said to his servants, "Pass on ahead of me, and

put a space between drove and drove. "23

":::J

269

Chapter 8

j;''lP ~1J~-11~ ~i~.vl 'TJl';1~~ o;":P i1;Ol

111~M
11;~
T

":::J V,F1
_..

,V.,,,
-

For on the day you go out and cross the Wadi Kidron,
know for certain that you shall die.

In grammatical perspective, the prescriptions are not presented as

proceeding from the will of the speaker, but from a more general
necessity. The Israelites "must be holy to YHWH"; Shimei "ought
to know" that he may not leave Jerusalem.
Prescriptive YIQTOL is typical of legal and quasi-legal
discourse; see, for example: Ex 23:4b, 5b, 7a, 11, 13, 14, 15, 19,
23
24

See also: Gen 34:9; Num 23:5, 16; 1 Sam 1:17.

Other examples where the use of YIQTOL following a volitive is significant:
Gen 24:55; Num 12:14b; Amos 7:12.

270

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

24h; Lev 19:2, 3, 5h, 10, ISh, 17, 19, 30, 32; Deut 15: 1, 8, 10, 12,
14, 17, 20, 22.25

With the negation ~~, YIQTOL expresses general interdictions:

Gen 28: 1

ink "n~;j :lp~:-~~ pr;r~: ~lR~j

1~~f ntl~~ nrf~ n~l)-N' i~ '~N"j ~n1~;j

The context indicates that these clauses express a wish. The sv

word order and the morphology concur to show that the verbal
form is YIQTOL. In other examples, the morphology is indifferent
and only the word order indicates that one is dealing with YIQTOL
and not with a jussive: 30

Very often the prescription expressed by YIQTOL has a durable

character, but that is not a necessary feature:
1 Kgs 12:10

'b~~ iM~ ~~,~ 'rlf~ ~"'~"n '''~~ ~'::l''''

"~~ "~!;1~~ n~~ "~~R : .-~ ntb o~~ '~Nn~n

T

The young men who had grown up with him said to him,
"Thus you should say to this people who spoke to you ... ,
'My little finger is thicker than my father's loins'."

He said, "God be gracious to you, my son!"

See also: Gen 28:3; 43:14; Ex 15:18; Jos 1:17;31 1 Sam 24:20;
2 Sam 24:23.
The expression of wishes is properly the domain of the
volitive forms. The sv word order and the use of YIQTOL in the
above examples are partly due to the tendency of divine names to
induce the sv word order. 32 This cannot be the whole explanation,
however, since even in wishes involving God it is more usual to
find the jussive with VS word order. 33
Moreover, YIQTOL is also found a few times in prayers and
reverential requests not involving a divine name:

YIQTOL expressing wishes

In reverential speech, especially speech involving or addressing

1 Kgs 8:41-43

. .. ~~n ~~l~: 'TFP~';:N~': ,~~

.:-

nI;l~:-~~ '~~~-"~Rt ~'~N"j

~J"ni:l"::l l1~flj

"'~~n-~~ Cl'

n'Tn n"::ln-~~ ~~snn' ~:l~

i~~W li~~ ~:~rfiJ J1'OtJ/ 1:1 nI;l~
i~~~ ~1R:-'~~ ~~f ~"~~1

God, YIQTOL at times turns up in passages where one would expect

a volitive form:
Jud 11:10

"~~ i~"~ ~"H~~ '~N"j

Gen 43:29

Then Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged

him, "You shall not marry one of the Canaanite women."

See also: Gen 2:17,3:3; 24:37; 28:6; 37:21;26 Ex 5:7,8, and many
examples in the law corpora. 27

271

Chapter 8

.--

.:

"-:.:

Likewise when a foreigner, who is not of your people

Israel ( ... ) comes and prays toward this house, then hear

n"jJ" n,n"

nw~~ i~ ~'1~i~ '~~-o~

And the elders of Gilead said unto J ephthah, "The LORD

be witness between us, if we do not so according to thy
words" [KJv]. 28

.. """ ........,-"""~...... ,............ ~-.""" ...

rlf,,~~ :l"rzj"

~~~,~~~__,~~"_"_.""~.~,_,,"_,,,,,_,,___~,._jL.w~~ORJ[LJ::eDJIlet~~~~-];na;n.."Jns~"rcl~{.h.te01.lSIlleSS

n,n",
T

and his

faithfulness [KJV].29

25 For an interesting case involving a first person form see 1 Sam 20:5.
26 Gen 37:21 tzj~~ ~a~~ ~6 is not to be rendered: "Let us not take his life" (NRSV),
but rather: "We must not take his life." Contrast the volitives in the following
verse, and see Wenham, Genesis, vol. 2, 354.
27 A lone exception to this rule is 2 Kgs 4:28 ~I:'1k il7rlJ ~6 "Do not mislead me."
While the volitive nuance is clear from the context, the syntax is inexplicable.
28 The NRSV has adhered more rigidly to the grammar: "The LORD will be
witness ... "
29 The NRSV again renders' with an indicative: "The LORD rewards ... "

Examples like 2 Sam 14:17 show that the jussive can occur in a non-initial
position in the clause. Such examples are rare, however.
31 Contrast 1 Sam 1:23, with a jussive form.
32 See Muraoka, Emphasitic Words and Structures, 35: "It is possible t~at in
certain expressions with the divine name or a divine messenger as the subject, a
kind of religious psychology in which God occupies the dominant place
determines the arrangement of words giving S the initial. position.~' As is. a~so
pointed out by Muraoka, the SV word o~der. is not ?bhg~tory Wl~ a dlvme
name as subject, since the normal order, Jusslve-subJect, IS fo~nd m prayers,
e.g., Ex 5:21.
,
33 See Gen 30:24; 31:49; Ex 5:21; Num 6:25; Deut 28:8, 21, 36; 1 Sam 2:20;
2 Sam 2:6; 1 Kgs 8:57; 10:9; and with indifferent forms in the sequence VS
(indicating the verb is jussive as well): Gen 16:5; Num 6:26; 27:16; Deut
28:7, 12,20,24,49; 1 Sam 24:13; 2 Sam 3:39.

30

272

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

in heaven your dwelling place, and do according to all he

calls yoU. 34

"iPS; '00 itl!u~~-it9 "~ itl:i~ it, '~~"j

'9~i~-t,~ M~~~ rz.;p,~~ '9~ijl

1 Kgs 11 :22

"jn~rz.;tl nt;,rz.; "!l ~t, ,~~"'

But Pharaoh said to him, "Wh~~ 'd-o :y~~ -lack with': m~

that you now seek to go to your own country?" And he
said, "No, do let me go."

Although the examples are scarce, they are difficult to explain

away: YIQTOL does not continue volitive forms, and it does not
express general obligation. Perhaps the choice of a non-volitive
form may be explained as a mark of politeness: although the
prayer or the request does proceed from the will of the speaker, it
is not presented as such. If this explanation is correct, YIQTOL here
figures with its neutral meaning, as in Oen 32: 17 quoted above,
even though no volitive form precedes.

Other modal usages

YIQTOL is used to express many other modal nuances. The ones

Oen 42:37

Again, Reuben does not expect the process of killing to come

about, and merely wishes to state that it would be permitted if ever
he did not bring Benjamin back.
In other cases, the probability of realization is greater, yet the
implication of YIQTOL is merely that the action is allowed:
Lev 21 :22

t,~N" ~"iQ1R:jJ-i~i ~"~lR:jJ "~lR~ ,.,Ot,~ ~t)~

He [the priest who has a blemish] may eat the food of his
God, of the most holy as well as of the holy. 36

Most often, the permissive nuance is created by opposing a forbidden

practice to another one that is allowed: Oen 2: 16; 3:2; 30: 15; Lev
2:12; 7:24; 11:21; 19:25; 21:22; 22:23; 25:3,44-45; Deut 12:15, 20;
14:6, 9, 11,20; 15:3; 22:7.
Occasionally, it may be unclear whether permission or obligation
is intended:
Lev 21:3

Permission

,.,~~ it~i'~jJ it~iM~jJ iMh~~l

NTO~"

T--

nuance may be used even where the realization of the process is in

doubt:
1~~Nl: '''n~~ 'n~

it;,-it"itM itt;,~~ '!l~J "'n~

After they have' ;oid th~msel~~s thei ~hall Th"a've ~h~ righ~
of redemption; one of their brothers may redeem them.

A destitute Israelite who has sold himself in slavery to a resident

his family
wishes to redeem him, the alien may not refuse. The principle is
repeated twice more in the next verse, suggesting that it represents
a pious wish rather than a serious possibility. If the destitute
Israelite had kin able and willing to redeem him, they might have
helped him before he ended up at the very bottom of the social
ladder. YIQTOL expresses here a theoretical possibility.

See also: 1 Kgs 8:30, 32,34, 36, 39 and similarly in the parallel: 2 Chr 6:21,
23,25,27,30,33. Other examples: Isa 26:17; Ps 51:17.

;:tt,
T

rz.;.,~t, itM.,it-~t, ,rz.;~

-:

T:T

-:-:

Likewise for a virgin sister, close to him because she has

no husband, he may defile himself for her.

YIQTOL may signal that a process is allowed. The pemnsslve

34

'b~~ ''':;l~-t,~ i~i~i '~~"1

'9"~~ i~~":;l~ ~t,-~~ M"~~ "~~ "~o/-M~

Then Reuben said to his father, "You may kill my two sons if I
do not bring him back to you. "35

that can clearly be recognized are the following:

Lev 25:48

273

Chapter 8

Because of the opposition between the persons for whom the priest
may not defile himself (verse 1) and those for whom he may, it is
logical to find here a permissive meaning. But Jewish Halacha
interprets the verse to mean that the priest must defile himself for
his near kin.37
Other ambiguous examples: Num 12:14; 30:14; Deut 25:3.
Potentiality

In other instances, the modal value conferred upon YIQTOL is one

of ability or possibility:
Oen 13: 16
rl~v '~~-M~ MiJ~~ rz.;,,~ t,~i"-~~
it~~: '9~it-~~

Similarly Gen 43:9.

See also: Num 32:22; Job 21:3.
37 See Rashi's commentary.

35

36

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

274

You are a stiff-necked people; if for a single moment

I should go up among you, I would consume yoU. 41

If one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also
can be counted. 38

r.v.

c~~~: ,,p~11"~: ,~'?~ i,.v:

'~~1
The remnant of the trees of his forest will be so few that
a child can write them down.

Isa 10: 19

And the same nuance is often present in indeterminate relative

clauses introduced by ,rzj~ or ,rzj~ ~~:
Gen 28: 15

The two preceding examples have a reference time in the future.

The usage is well attested also with a present reference time:
Deut 1: 12

C~:1"" C~~tG~1 o~n'~ "':1~ ~tG~ iT~"~

Gen 31:32

nb~j 1iTf0

rtf

n10;-'~~ '; 1~~:P 0~1 ..

~1iT 1J~i

Volition of the subject

In a few cases, the realization of the projected process depends on
the will of the subject:

... or anyone who strikes another with a stone in hand

that could cause death [literally: by which one may die],
and death ensues, is a murderer.

Similarly: Gen 6:21; Lev 11:34, 37; 17:13; 22:5; Num 31:23;
35:18. 40
The usage is also attested with the negation ~~ to express
impossibility:
1 Kgs 8:27

i1~:i(~; ~~ o:~'iJ "~~1 o:~'iJ iT~0

"I}"~il ,~~ iT'!iJ n:ilij-"~ ='j~

Jud 11:23

See also: Gen 42:36; 1 Sam 21:10; 1 Kgs 21:7; Ruth 4:4.
This volitional nuance flows from the context. In the following
example, YIQTOL implies volition of a person other than the
subject (in a question):
Ex 2:7

See also: Gen 16:10; Num 35:33 (,~;:;-~~).

iT17's-n~-~~ inn~ '~~r-l'

n~j~S;iJ F~ nR~"~ :n'~-1~','''I}~1Rl1'~~~

His sister said to Pharaoh's daughter, "Shall I go and get

you a nurse from the Hebrew women?"

Eventuality
The non-volitive modality of YIQTOL makes it eminently qualified
for use in conoifionaI seftfences:-mconClitioniifcliiuses 'introduced
byo~, YIQTOL is the default form. A conditional nuance is
sometimes implied even where YIQTOL is not introduced by a
particle:

Ex 33:5

"'b~iT-n~ rzj",iiT ~~,~., "ii~~ il'iT" iTr-ll1,

. .,': T .,' 1~ri'''F1 n~~; ~~,'b., 4~~ ":JTS-~

So now the LORD, the God of" I~r~el, h~s ~o~quer~d '~h~
Amorites for the benefit of his people Israel. Do you
intend to take their place?

Even heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you,

much less this house that I have built!

'~"'~~~~~~~"~_,~_c

iT;r;T: ~~ 1"V~~rn~ N~91:1 ,~~ OS;

But anyone with who~Y'(),~ find ,your gods shall not

live. 42

Num 35:17

i~tl-'~~ ~~:P i"r:1"1~~1 1~S; "~j~ iT~01

Know that I am with you and will keep you wherever

you go.

But how can I bear ~he hea~; -b~Ird~~: ~i yo'u~ :disp~tes aii
by myself?39

A number of examples involve short relative clauses:

275

Chapter 8

='jjlriTw.j?-O,p

The implication here is: "Do you want me to go ... "

YIQTOL with final particles
Fassberg, Studies (1994), 82-94, 103-115.

is the only finite verbal form regularly used in purpose

clauses introduced by particles such as 111~~, ":111:1, 1~ or "n~:1t,:43
YIQTOL

o~~

i"I}"~~l i:P'l~~ il7,~~ 'O~ l1~j

See also: Jos 22:18; Jud 13:12 and cases with mit enumerated on'pp. 100-101.
Similarly Gen 44:9, 10.
43 Exceptions are rare and some of them text-critically doubtful (e.g., Jos 4:24;
Jer 25:7; Mic 2:10). The particle l!j is used with QATAL in 2 Sam 20:6; 2 Kgs
2:16. Ps 9:15 it'1~t;;l~ W~~ is unique.

41

42

See also: Gen 41:15 quoted above p. 265.

39 See also: Ex 4:14; and perhaps 1 Sam 21:15; Jud 16:15.
40 All examples are from the P source.
38

276

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

Deu~ 16:20 rl~o-n~ ~~j;l il:t:Tl:11.t1~7 ~ilt:1 Pl~ Pl~

J ustlCe and only justice you shall pursue, so that you
may live and occupy the land.

Ex 23:29

nQ~ n~~:p 1"~~~ 1~Wl~~ ~~

nl~ij n:1J 1"~.v n~jl n~~~ rl~O il:;:tl:1-1~

I wIll not drive them out from before you in one year, lest
the .land become desolate and the wild animals multiply
agaInst you.

'f!rl~ us~ge .confrrms the basic modal function of YIQTOL. Languages

dIStinguIshIng modal and indicative verbal forms usually employ
the former with telic particles. 44
Concluding remarks
As can be seen from the examples enumerated above, YIQTOL with
reference to the future has no implications regarding aspect or
~ktionsart. The process designated may be punctual or durative,
sIngle or repeated, dynamic or stative, according to the context and
the meaning of the verb. All that is expressed by the form is that
the process in question is not, or not yet, real at reference time.
YIQTOL is essentially prospective. It remains to inspect how this
basic function can be reconciled with the use OfYIQTOL in presentand past-tense contexts.

277

Chapter 8

1~f~~ 'jQ~ '~jtr;1 'W~

Noone, my LORD king. It is Elisha, the prophet in Israel,
who tells the king of Israel the words that you speak in
your bedchamber.

In statements of this type, YIQTOL does not present a process as

ongoing but as likely to occur.
See also: Gen 10:9; 22:14; 44:5, 15; 50:3; Ex 13:15; 18:15;
Num 12:8; 17:19; 21:27; Deut 12:31; Jud 14:10; 1 Sam 5:5; 9:6;
2 Sam 5:8; Hos 1:2.
Occasionally it is difficult to decide whether-a custom is merely
described or whether a nuance of obligation is implied:
Gen 2:24 iM~~:p

P;ll iw~~n~l '''~~-n~ tzj"~-:1Ul~ 1~-~~

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and

clings to his wife.

Note also the expression nw.v~-~~, "it is not done": Gen 20:9;
29:26; 34:7; 2 Sam 13: 12.

Proverbial expressions
YIQTOL presents processes that are not merely customary in
a certain time and place but that recur universally:
1 Sam 16:7
::J::J~~ ilN'" n,n", o"j".v~ ilN'" O'~il ":;'
Mortals look on the outward appearance, but the LORD
looks on the heart.
T

VIQTOL in reference
Joosten, "Aspect" (2004).

to present situations

As was pointed out in Chapter I, YIQTOL expresses mood, not tense.

The reference time of the utterance may be the future, the past, or the
moment of speaking. In the latter case, the form most often presents
a process as not yet realized. The examples have been surveyed
A few
usages have a somewhat stronger connection to the present, however.

Repetition in the present

YIQTOL is regularly used to present processes that come about
repeatedly or habitually:
2 Kgs 6: 12 ~~1~::P 'W~ N"~~ij .v~"~~-":p "1~~ij .,~.,~ Ni~
O"l~"ij-n~ ~~1~: "1~~7 ,.,~~
44

See Fassberg, Studies, 132-133 (Arabic), 134-135 (Ethiopic).

eo

-.-:

.-

.. -

- :

T T

This usage is very frequent in proverbs, proverbial similes and

other expressions of the same type: Ex 23:8; 1 Sam 24:13; Prov
10:1, 2, 3,4, 6, 8 and other cases in Proverbs; Ex 33:11; Num
11:12; Deut 1:31,44; 8:5; Gen 49:27, and very often.

Present with modal verbs

As was noted in Chapter III, YIQTOL may refer to the present time
with the verbs ~:J" "to be able" and .v," "to know":
Gen 44: 1

~:?,k o"eq~~o nnl;'l~~.cn~ N~"

n~~ 11":;>1" 'W~~

Fill the men's sacks with food, as much as they can carry.

Other examples with ~:J": Gen 19:19, 22; 24:50; 29:8; 31:35;
34:14; 44:26; with .v,": Ex 10:7,26.

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

278

The peculiar semantics of the two verbs may account for this
usage of YIQTOL (see Chapter III, pp. 93-94). Perhaps a similar
explanation is applicable to the following examples:
2 Kgs 6: 19

o::>nN iT::>"Z,iN' "'MN 1::>Z,

l~~p.;~ ~~~ ~;~~,-z,~

Follow me and I will bring you to the man you want. 45

:l~~ llj~ iTl!1~ "~ "ijz,~ "r:1l?':1

1 Chr 29: 17

iT::&,;'
O"'tz';"~1
-.I

I know, my God, that you search the heart, and you

want uprightness. 46

Davidson, Syntax (1896), 68; JM (20062) 113d; Steiner, "Ancient Hebrew"

(1997), 158.

With reference to processes ongoing at the moment of speech,

YIQTOL is regularly used only in questions. Two types may be
distinguished. Most often the question is of the wh- type:
1 Sam 1:8

"~~Ij iT~~ iT~lj j'!l~"~ iT~R~~ j'!l~ '~N!!j

1~~~ 17j~ iT~~l "~=?Nn NZ, iT~~l

Her husband Elkanah said to her, "Hannah, why do you

weep? Why do you not eat? Why is your heart sad?"

See also: Gen 16:8; 24:31; 32:18, 30; 37:15; 42:1; 44:7; Ex 2:13;
5:15; 14:15; 17:2; Num 16:3; 32:7; Deut 12:30; Jos 9:8; Jud 16:15;
17:9; 18:24; 19:17; 1 Sam 1:8; 2:23; 6:6; 21:15; 24:10; 28:16;
2 Sam 1:3; 2 Kgs 20:14; in indirect questions: Ex 3:3; 1 Sam 6:3.
There are also a few instances of YIQTOL in a consecutive
function introduced by"::>:
1 Sam 11:5
'~'~~'~~~~'.~~"---'w'-W:tmTis the

1:i:>:l" ,,~ Ol1t;,-iT~

lInttter with the p~upre-dra:rtheY'are'weeping?
:.

See also: Num 11:12; 16:11; and without "::>: Isa 3:15.
All these cases could be given a modal reading. 1 Sam 1:8 might be
rendered: "Hannah, why should you weep ... ?" and 1 Sam 11:5:
"What is the matter with the people that they should weep."
Nevertheless, the number of instances makes such a reading unlikely.

45 NRSV " ... the man whom. you seek."

46 NRSV" ... you take pleasure in uprightness."

Although questions always have a modal tinge, there is no reason to

think that YIQTOL presents the process as unreal in the examples
enumerated above. Thus, the usage described in the present section
does not entirely tally with the basic irrealis function of YIQTOL. As
was argued in Chapter II, the usage is probably residual. Indeed, the
predicative participle is just as idiomatic as YIQTOL in questions
referring to the present:
1 Sam 28:9

"~Ij"~O~ "~~~~ rzjp.~t:1~ iTt1~ iTrt7

Why then are you laying a snare for my life to bring

about my death ?47

1 Kgs 18:9

Real present in questions

279

Chapter 8

";r;r~.trn~ TIj~ ittl~-"~ "IjN~O iT~

"jn"~iTZ,
:lNMN-''':!l
." . - : T:-:
How have I sinned that you would hand your servant
over to Ahab, to kill me ?48

In diachronic perspective, the participle is taking over the earlier

functions of the prefix conjugation.
Synchronically, it is possible that some nuance distinguishes
YIQTOL and the participle in questions. In some passages, the use
of YIQTOL may reflect polite speech.49 Such subtle distinctions are
hard to discern, however. And politeness is probably not the only
reason why YIQTOL was used in questions. 50

Concluding remarks
In a small number of affirmative clauses, YIQTOL could be interpreted
as an expression of the real present:
1 Sam 21:15(14)
l1nMrj~

rj"N 1N,n iT~iT

Then said Achish to his servants, "Lo, you see the man is mad."
.0

: .

..

See also: Gen 37:7;51 2 Kgs 6:19 (quoted above in the section on
the Present with modal verbs), 9:20; Job 2: 10.

47 Other examples of the predicative participle in questions: Gen 37:30;

Ex 18:14; Num 14:3; Deut 1:28; 2 Sam 19:11; 1 Kgs 2:22; 2 Kgs 4:23;
8:12; Jer 44:7.
48 See also: 1 Sam 17:43; Jer 22:15.
49 Driver, Treatise, 44-45; Rattray, Tense-Mood-Aspect, 97-98.
50 See, e.g., Gen 32:30; 42:1; Ex 2:13; 14:15.
51 Although the event referred to is past, dream reports have a tendency to use
the present-tense.

~I il: :
;il'I""
11, ' \

IIII

il ',

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

280

Chapter 8

281

I ll! II,,!,

'

\:1

! \i.I

Since it does not regularly function in such a way, however, it is

preferable to search for ways to give YIQTOL a modal nuance even
in these examples. Each passage requires a different explanation:
1 Sam 21:15 could be rendered: "Lo, you can see the man is mad";
2 Kgs 6: 19 may involve a modal verb; 2 Kgs 9:20 could be
a general present; Job 2: 10 may be an expression of outrage: "You
will speak as any foolish woman.,,52 Alternatively, one could regard
these examples as further traces of an earlier usage.

II
ii

II
II

Ii

i'l
iii
ill
!II

NB. In poetry YIQTOL does appear to express the real present (see also Chapter
III, p. 102). Often, of course, one is not dealing with the "real" real present, but

iii
I'

Ii

with a fictional one:

Num 23:9

1"1

1~11rzj~ ni17il~~11~~"'~ o~,~ rzjN'~-~:P

:l~1JI;1: Nt, 0;;:\:;,11 I~~: ilil~ O,v-n:t

For from the top of the crags I see him, from the hills I
behold him; Here is a people living alone, and not reckoning
itself among the nations.

While the YIQTOL forms in the second half of the verse express the general present,
in the first half they refer to contemporaneous processes. Yet they probably do not
refer to real sight but to the prophetic vision of Balaam. Whether this fictional
aspect explains the use of YIQTOL is uncertain. One may equally well suppose
that the usage is archaizing. Other examples: Jer 6:4; Ps 29:8-9.

time may also be determined by purely pragmatic factors,

however:
Jer 36: 1 8 ,

;"":'f:l1 '~t:ljil-~li :ln~ '':IN'

Baruch answered them: "He used: ~o dic~at; ali th~~~

words to me while I wrote them with ink on the scroll. "53

Baruch's speech contains no contextual indication that the YIQTOL

form is to be set in a past time frame. The reader deduces this
information from whalhe]mows"iiboufihe situation in which the
words are spoken.
YIQTOL occurs in past-tense contexts in narrative and in direct
discourse, in both main and subordinate clauses. The modal
meaning is almost always in evidence, particularly if one allows
for the idea that iterativity and modality are closely connected.
Cases where YIQTOL seems to function as an indicative preterite
are rare and irregular in prose.

Prospective
YIQTOL may be used as a prospective form, presenting a process as
future from the point of view of the past time frame defined or
implied in the context. The clearest instances occur in relative clauses:

YIQTOL in past-tense contexts

Joosten, "Long Form" (1999).

2 Kgs 13: 14

Although Elisha did die from the disease referred to, the YIQTOL
form expresses only that, at this point in his life, he was going to
do so. In other examples, the action presented prospectively does
not in fact come about:

~~~C~~"~""'_ _ _ ~_ _

2 Kgs 3:27

T:

: - : -

And the man departed from the town of Bethlehem in

Judah, to live where he could find a place.

The narrative context indicates the time frame within which we

have to place the process referred to by the YIQTOL form. Reference

'''~~t1 ~"9:-'W~ ';~~ij ;:J~-n~ nR~j

i1~hil-~li i1~li 1i1~li!l'

Then he took his eldest son who was t~ r~i~ in his st~~d:
and offered him for a burnt offering on the wall.

i1Tlil; l:J1)~ n"~~ "'llO~ rD"~O l~~j

NS7Y' 'rDN:l1 '1~~

Whether or not the action is subsequently realized is irrelevant

grammatically.

53

52 For Gen 37:7, see Chapter III, p. 101.

;:l1 n1~: 'W~ ;"~Q-n~ i1~Q lirf"~~3

And Elisha fell sick with the illness of which he was to die.

As was shown in Chapter I, YIQTOL is indifferent to tense. The

form can be used in any time frame, preserving its basic modal
function. While YIQTOL is particularly frequent in utterances
where the reference time is the moment of speaking, it is regularly
used in utterances where the reference time lies in the past.
'~_'~""'~"-'-Mostoftell: reference tothe pastis esii:il>lisnec.r6Y llie context:
J ud 17: 8

11'ill:Jv~ '~~!lj
i1~~O l:J"'~'~Fj-~f n~ .,~~ N1i?: ,.,~~

Note that YIQTOL functions here side-by-side with the predicative participle
(in a circumstantial clause).

Ii Ii

II IiIl
I

II!

1\

III

!I

Iii

11

II'

i\

III1

11[1"

1\1

illl
Ilil\

~I

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

282

Other cases of prospective YIQTOL in relative clauses: Gen 30:38;

Ex 37:16; Deut 1:18; 4:42; Jos 9:27; Jud 17:8; 1 Kgs 7:7, 8; Jer
51:60; Ps 78:6;54 EccI4:15; Ezra 10:8; 2 Chr 2:11.
The prospective function is also found in other types of clauses,
usually subordinate in some way:
Num 7:9

iQ~ ~t, MOP .,~:t~1

'N~: ='10f~ op~~ rV1P'ij M,!:l~-"~

But to the sons of Kohath he gave none [i.e., oxen and

carts], for they were charged with the care of the holy'
things and would carry them on their shoulders.

Other cases: 2 Sam 17:17; Jer 52:7; Esther 9:1;55 Dan 1:5; Ezra
10:8(x2); possibly 'also: Ex 8:20; 1 Sam 1:10; 13:17(x2), 18;
2 Sam 15:37; Isa 6:4; Dan 8:12; Neh 3:14, 15.
The prospective function explains the use of YIQTOL in clauses
introduced by Oj~ or Oj~~ where these are embedded in a pasttense discourse:
Gen 24:45 MN~~ i1R:ti i1~iJl .,~~-t,~ ,~,~ i1~:;>l$ c,~ .,~~
Before I had done speaking in my heart, behold, Rebekah
came out.

Other examples with 0'0: 56 Gen 2:5; 19:4; Ex 12:34; Num 11:33;
Jos 2:8; 3:1; 1 Sam 3:3, 7. 57 With O'O:J: Gen 27:33; 37:18; 41:50;
Jud 14:18; 1 Sam 2:15; 2 Kgs 6:32; Isa 48:5; 66:7; Jer 1:5; 47:1;
Ezek 16:57; Ruth 3:14.
In such clauses, YIQTOL does not express that something
happened in the past, but that it had not yet happened or that it
would happen. It is prospective. 58 The usage finds analogies in
many languages of the world (though not in English).59

54 In this example, the relative clause is asyndectic.

55 Although the clause in which the prospective YIQTOL occurs is introduced by
it is probably not to be analysed as a relative clause.
56 The adverb Oi~ "not yet" occasionally occurs in a main clause (e.g., Ex 9:30;
10:7), but there are no clear examples of this usage in past tense contexts.
57 In view of the usual syntax of Oi~ as well as the parallel within the verse, the
words l1j; 01~ are probably to be corrected to l1j:, 01~ (see JM 113j).
.
58 Clauses introduced with Oi~ are not restricted to past-tense contexts. Just hke
simple YIQTOL, they may refer to the future (e.g., Ex 9:30).
59 The normal French translation of Oi~ + YIQTOL in past-tense contexts is with
avant que + subjunctive. Similarly, in Syriac the normal equivalent is 'adla +
imperfect, and in Ethiopic za ,enbala + subjunctive.
itl)N,

Chapter 8

283

The same explanation applies to clauses with 'li embedded in

a past-tense context. The usage is not attested in CBH prose, but it
does occur in epic poetry:
'''~;k "i~ 0f':-'~ 'i?lJ lJ'1:1 rV~~ij O":j~j
And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the
nation took vengeance on their enemies.

Jos 10: 13

See also: Ex 15:16, and, with 'rziN 'li, in LBH: Jona 4:5; Eccl 2:3;
2 Chr 29:34.
YIQTOL in object clause
Where YIQTOL occurs in an

object clause embedded in a past-tense

context, its function is usually prospective:
Ni:!l-'.t1 i1Q~iPij-M~ 1j"~~j
ont, 1t,~N" ord-"~ 1li~rd .,~
They made the present ready f~r' J ~seph'~ c~mi~g a~
Gen 43:25

o:lQ~ ='1~i"

noon, for they had heard that they would dine there.

Sitnilar examples occur in the main clause with the verbs'~N, rVp:J
piel, li'." i1," hiphil, rV'~, i1,::'; piel, i1N', li:JrV hiphil and the
expression :Jt, t,li o"fl!, while the particles introducing the object
clause are l"N, 'rVN, i1, .,~ and i1~. See Gen 2:19; 38:9; 43:7; 48:17;
Ex 2:4; Num 15:34; 1 Sam 22:22; 2 Sam 1:10; 11:20; 1 Kgs 18:10;
2 Kgs 17:28; Jona 4:5; Esther 2:11; 3:4; Dan 1:8(x2); Neh 7:65;
8:14; 13:19,22; 1 Chr 21:18.
One could argue that in these cases YIQTOL expresses simple futurity,
since the object clause usually corresponds to words actually said (or
thought) within the time-frame determined by the main verb. Rather
than exclude these examples altogether, however, it is preferable to
include them as a separate category.
In one instance, YIQTOL in the object clause does not express
prospectivity but repetition:
1 Sam 2:22

'k~ iPi "~.v.l

t,~1t?':-t,~~ ,.,~~ 11fz1~~ ,~~-t,f M~ li~tfl

O"iQ~ij-M~ 11:l:P~:-'W~ M~l

'lii~ t,i1k nMe MiN:J~i1

N ow Eli was very old. He heard all th~~ his ;ons ~~re d~ing
to all Israel, and how they lay with the women who served at
the entrance to the tent of meeting.

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

284

Past modal
In a slightly different usage, YIQTOL is also prospective but with an
added modal nuance. Most cases occur with the negative particle Nt,:

1 Kgs 1: 1

O"~~~ Nil lPt '11 1~~iJ1

it, en" ~t" O"'l::l::l 1il~::J'"
and adv-a~ced in y~~rs; ~~d

Now King David was old

although they covered him with clothes, he could not
get warm.

Usually the nuance, as in the preceding example, is of potentiality,

but some examples where YIQTOL connotes obligation are also
found:

r1i~iliJ "~q~ ~,,~~ ~t, 1~

0t,ilf1'''::l il'il" n::li~-t,N

2 Kgs 23:9

T T

T:

-:

..

But the priests of the high places were not allowed to

come up to the altar of the LORD in Jerusalem. 60

In other cases volition of the subject is implied:

But they would not listen to the voice of their father; for
it was the will of the LORD to kill them.

Other examples: Jud 12:6; 1 Sam 1:13; 13:19; 25:28; 1 Kgs 8:5, 8;
Jer 5:22(x2); 13:7; 24:2; Esther 9:27; Dan 8:4; 12:8; 2 Chr 5:9;
62
possibly also: Gen 2:25; 1 Sam 27:4 Q; 2 Sam 2:28; Jer 52:7.
The modal use is also attested, though less frequently, in positive
clauses:
Gen 43: 7

...rO"Nil-t,Nilf t,iNilf 1'~~!l'

iltyNil o~~:l"~; T"S-t,; it,-,nj;
0:

The man questioned us carefully... What we told him

was in answer to these questions. Could we in any way
know that he would say: ((Bring your brother down"?

Other cases: Gen 34:31; Lev 10:18; 1 Sam 23:13; 2 Sam 3:33;
Ezek 15:5.
The distinction between prospective and modal is not always
easy to make. In fact, both functions proceed from the same hasic
value of YIQTOL. The verbal form by itself merely expresses that
the action, at the relevant point in time, was not yet realized.
Exactly how this non-reality is to .be interpreted is determined by
the context and by the meaning of the verb.
The past-modal function occurs a few times in subordinate
clauses introduced by particles:
Ps 78:5-6

: -

-: - -

60

The NRSV is less attentive to the syntax: " ... did not come up ... "

61

It is perhaps not superfluous to explain how this volitive nuance is compatible

with the non-volitive mood expressed by YIOQTOL. While the volitive forms
imply a relation between the speaker and the process, in 1 Sam 2:25 the
volitive nuance concerns the relation between the agent and the process: the
sons of Eli refuse to listen.
62 The verse may be rendered: "All the men of war wanted to flee, and they went
out of the city ... " .Possibly, however, the text is not in order; see the
Septuagint and the parallels in Jer 39:4 and 2 Kgs 25:4.

t,~1~:~ o~ il1in1 :lPi?~~ r11'.v. 0R~1

Oij"~:lt,

. :.

61

1 Sam 2:25 OO"~q~ il1il; r~o-"~ OtT~~ t,ip~ 1179~: ~t,1

285

Chapter 8

O'v",iilt, 1j"ni:lN-nN il1~ ,ilfN

T' : li,6~ ,i"1 "~17-;~' p;~~
ov,,~~~ !1'E?Q", ~oR: 1'~~: O"~il

He established a decree in Jacob, and appointed a law in

Israel, which he commanded our ancestors to teach to their
children; that the next generation might know them, the
children yet unborn, and rise up and tell them to their children.

See also: Ezek 20:26; EccI3:14, and perhaps Deut 29:5.

Iterative and durative
The most frequent usage of YIQTOL in a past-tense context is the
iterative one:

Gen 2:6

il7tl~O-,,~~-t,f-n~ ilR~01 rj~O-l~ il~~~ '~1

But a mist went up from the earth and watered the whole
face of the ground [RSV].

The implication of the YIQTOL form is that the process was

repeated again and again during the period to which the narrative
pertains. The usage often serves to describe habitual actions or, as
in the example, natural processes. But the time frame within which
the iteration occurs may be more limited:
Jer 36:23

O.V,1i?: il.v~1~1 nin~., rOt,~ "j1il; Ni'i?~ "0;1

n~o-t,~ ,~~ rO~O-t,~ 1~~iJ1 '~biJ '~t1~

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

286

As J ehudi read three or four columns, the king would cut

them off with a penknife and throw them into the fire
that was in the brazier. 63

See also: Ex 17:11; Jud 12:5.

With stative verbs, the equivalent function is not iterative but
durative: 64
2 Sam 4:2
i~:~:;l-t,l) :~"f.I n;'~:p-o~ ":p
For Beeroth was considered to belong to Benjamin.

Other examples: Ex 13:22; 33: 11; 36:29; Deut 2:20; Jos 13:3; Isa
7:23. The stative-durative function is also found in the description
of borders and artefacts: Jos 16:8; 17:10; 18:20; 1 Kgs 6:8; 7:15,
23, 26, 38. 65
The usage is particularly frequent in narrative, but it is regular
in direct speech as well:

i1l":ti1-nN 1J'~T
We remember the fish 'we ~~ed 'to e~t in Egyp; i~r n~thi~g.T

Num 11:5

o~n O"';:;~::l "~Nj-'rvN

See also: Oen 31:39; Deut 11:10; Jos 23:10; Jud 9:38; Isa 14:8.
It is usual to explain the iterative function of YIQTOL as a manifestation

of its imperfective meaning. As was argued in Chapter I, the

connection between iteration and imperfectivity is not a necessary one.
Many languages of the world use irrealis forms to express repetition in
a past-tense context.66 Biblical Hebrew appears to do likewise. This is
confirmed by the fact that YIQTOL almost never expresses ongoing
processes in the past (see Chapter II).
Examples of iterative YIQTOL in a past-tense context: Oen 2:6,
10,19; 6:4; 29:2; 30:38, 42~ 31:39; Ex 1:12; 13:22; 17:11; 18:26;
19:19; 33:7-11; 34:34; 36:29; 40:32, 36-38; Num 3:31; 4:7, 9,
Deut 2:20; 11:10; Jos 13:3; 16:8;

Driver takes this form as an expression of instant action in the past: " ... the
king, in a passion, seized the roll, rent it with his penknife, and cast it into the
fire" (Driver, Introduction, 249). The syntax would be practically without
parallel in biblical prose. Also, if the king threw the whole scroll into the fire,
it is unclear why he had to tear it with his knife first. It is better, therefore, to
interpret the verse as an expression of repeated action in the past (cf. JM
166m). The morphology is puzzling, however. The expected form would be
i1~.V,'lP: (see Chapter I).
64 See Voitila, Present et impaifait, 206, n. 105.
65 See Driver, Treatise, 14'5-146.
66 See S, Lazard, "Eventuel"; M~nnesland, "Frequentative."

63

Chapter 8

287

17:10; 18:20; 23:10; Jud 2:18; 6:4-5; 9:25, 38; 10:4; 11:40; 12:5,
6; 14:10; 17:6; 21:25; 1 Sam 1:5 " 7' 2:14"
19 ,
22'9'9'14'47'18'5'
.,.,.,
21:12; 27:9,11; 29:5; 2 Sam 1:22; 5:8; 12:3; 13:18; 14:26; 15:2,6,
32; 23:10; 1 Kgs 3:4; 4:7; 5:7-8, 25, 28; 6:8; 7:15~ 23, 26, 38; 10:5,
16, 17, 22, 28-29; 13:33; 14:28; 17:6; 2 Kgs 3:25; 4:8; 9:20; 12: 13,
14, 15-17; 13:20; 18:7; 25:14; Isa 1:21; 6:2; 7:23; 14:8; 23:7; Jer
36:18, 23; Ezek 1:24; Ps 42:5; 55:15; 78:40; 95:10; 99:6-7; 103:7;
106:43; Prov 7:8; Job 1:5; 4:3; 22:6; 29:2, 6, 7, 9, 12-13, 16-17; Esther
2:12, 13, 14, 15; 3:2; 4:3; Ezra 9:4; Neh 9:27, 28; 1 Chr 9:24, 27,
28; 11:8; 12:23; 15:22; 20:~; 2J:14;2Chr 1:16-17; 4:2; 9:4, 15, 16,
21; 24:11; 25:14; 31:18.
Preterite YIQTOL?
In a .smal.l number .of cases, YIQTOL appears to be used to express
non-Iterative events In a past time frame, without any modal overtones.

2 Kgs 8:29 = 9: 15

t,N~'l~:~ N~j~iJ~ "1~~iJ OJ;'' :~~j

.
i1~,;a o"~j~ 1il~~ 'W~ O":P~iJ-i~
And KIng J or am returned to he healed in Jezreel of the
wounds which the Syrians had given him at Ramah.
No prospective, modal or iterative nuance can be detected here.
The function is clearly indicative. Possibly the text is not in
order. 67 Normal usage would lead one to expect a QATAL form in
this verse, expressing anteriority with regard to the main line of
events (see Chapter VI).68
Other examples: Oen 37:7; Deut 2:12; Jud 2:1;69 1 Kgs 7:8;
20:33; 21:6.
Preterite YIQTOL is found in Ugaritic, and it is rather frequent in
biblical poetry (see Chapter XII). The above examples are too
scanty t? attest the usage ~n biblical prose. Rather than classifying
the few Instances as archaisms or dialectal variants, they should be
regarded as local anomalies, to be explained on an ad hoc basis,
whether as textual, linguistic or literary.

67 Could this be an isolated instance of a yiphil formation (in a northern text)?

:: The parallel in 2 Chr 22:6 has the expected ~i1~0.
.
See Chapter III, p. 117.
.

288

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

WEQATAL
In classical biblical prose, WEQAT AL functions as a modal form
largely synonymous with YIQTOL. As was already stated, the two
verbal forms often figure side by side. Their teaming-up is
a remarkable phenomenon that can only be understood in
historical perspective. A few preliminary remarks will address the
question of the etymology ofWEQATAL.
Introduction
Moran, "Hebrew Language" (1961), 64-65; Krahmalkov, "Future Tense" (1986);
Smith, Origins (1991), 6-15; Hatav, Semantics (1997), 143-150.
Cursory reading of a stretch of biblical prose will soon reveal that
WEQATAL, in the vast majority of cases, differs functionally from
QATAL. 70 While QATAL typically refers to processes anterior to the
moment of speaking, WEQATAL typically refers to the future. Even
where WEQATAL occurs in a past-tense context, it expresses an
iterative function uncharacteristic of QATAL. Although some scholars
have attempted to argue the functional identity of QATAL and
WEQATAL, 71 most grammarians accept that they are to be treated as
distinct verbal forms. How to explain the distinction is a different
matter.

The origin of WEQATAL

Traditionally, the different function of WEQATAL was attributed to
the force of the waw hippuk, the conversive waw. Just as the
conjunction is able to change the meaning of YIQTOL from future
into past, so it changes QATAL from a past tense into a future one.
This "explanation" has become unacceptable today. To begin with,
it does not
the facts: what typifies WEQATAL is
not
used to express
iteration in a past-tense context. More importantly, the reason why
a morpheme meaning "and" should change the temporal function
of verbal forms remains obscure. In Chapter V, it was shown that it
70 In a relatively small number of cases, we + QATAL functions like QATAL; see
Chapter VI, Appendix.
71 Functional equivalence of QATAL and WEQATAL (and of YIQTOL and
WAYYIQTOL) was a central postulate in Ewald's "aspectual" system; see
Ewald, Ausfuhrliches I:..ehrbuch, 352-353. More recently, see Garr, "Driver's
Treatise," lxxxii.

Chapter 8

289

is not the waw that changes modal YIQTOL into preterite WAYYIQTOL.
R~t~er, the waw serves to distinguish two homonymous forms, the
ong~~ally long form and the originally short form of the Northwest
Semttic prefix conjugation. What, then, is one to make ofWEQATAL?
~everal attempts have been made to find in WEQATAL the
survIv~1 of an older use of the suffix conjugation, related to the
AkkadIan present-future iparras, or the permansive paris. 72 Such
~roposals are based on the perception of an "imperfective" nuance
In WEQATAL. 73 The impression is illusory, however. None of the
uses of WEQATAL are imperfective. The form never expresses the
real ~resent, or attendant circumstance. Its iterative use can be
explained from the modal meaning, as was argued above. 74
A more pr?I?ising. solution was first intimated by Ginsberg.75
The W e~t SemItic suffIX conjugation shows a potential for modal,
or opt~tIve, use. Examples may be found in U garitic, Arabic and
AramaiC, as well as biblical Hebrew itself (see above in Chapter
VI, pp. 208-212).76 One could submit, then, that in Hebrew this
mod~l use came to be associated specifically with the combination
of wand QATAL. Once the composite form WEQATAL was felt to
be marked .for modalit.y, it could be used freely and ended up
supplementing YIQTOL In the way described above.
~ more precise analogy was signalled by Moran, who drew
attention to some remarkable uses of the suffix conjugation in the
Amama letters. 17 The cases he identified of "perfect with future
reference" all occur in conditional or quasi-conditional clauses:

allu patarima awilut bupsi u ~abtii bapirii iila

"Behold, if the serfs desert, the Apiru will seize the city"
(EA 118: 36-38)

dukiimi etlakunu u ibassatunu kima yatinu

"Kill your LORD, and then you will be like us" (EA 74:25-27)
72S"ee B au~r, "Tempora;
"G. R.

Driver, Problems; more recently T. D. AndersenEvolutIOn."

'
73
74 See, e.g., Andersen, "Evolution."
See above.
75 ~ee H.. L. Ginsberg, ''The Rebellion of Baclu," Orientalia 5 (1936) 161-198
76 m particular 177; Ginsberg'.s solution was adopted by Meyer, Satzl~hre, 53. '
In Hebr~w, modal QATAL IS someti~es found side by side with WEQATAL:
Gen ~0.14 and 2 Kgs 5:20 (followmg O~ ~:;,); Num 23:19 and Jud 9:9 C
questIOns).
m
17Moran, "Hebrew Language," 64-65.

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

290

A similar usage was found by Krahmalkov in Phoenician, and by

Sivan in Ugaritic. 78 This has given rise to the idea that Hebrew
79
WEQATAL originated in conditional clauses. The hypothesis is
plausible, although it too would suppose a further extension of the
function of the fonn. In synchronic perspective, the uses of WEQATAL
cannot be reduced to the conditional one.
In fact, the modal and the conditional explanations should not
be opposed to one another. Future or counterfactual reference in
conditional clauses is essentially modal. The two hypotheses are
compatible. 80

Chapter 8

CtJN;1 C\:I":;111
C~"n!:l~~ it1it; 17~~r'W~

rj~o-n~ Ctl~''''

This entire ~?mmandment that I command you' tod~y

you must dIlIgently observe so that you may live and
increase, and go in and occupy the land that the LORD
promised on oath to your ancestors.

In some instances, the process expressed by WEQATAL is tightly

connected to what is stated in the preceding clause:
Lev 19: 12

Cook, "Semantics" (2004), 264-269.

In the light of what has been said thus far, the waw in WEQATAL is
not conversive, but diagnostic. It does not act upon the verbal
form, but serves to distinguish modal from non-modal QATAL. At
the same time, the waw preserves its meaning as a conjunction.
Even where it occurs at the beginning of a discourse unit, WEQATAL
usually signals that the discourse links up with something:
._:"

IT:

Lev 19: 14

____..;;;cjj1~31~~ ~:t,~_~_}W~ it1~~ij-Sf

li"r:tr;11~~~ n;fli~~ li'~~r;1

Krahmalkov, "Qatal"; Sivan, "QTL and YQTL," 92.

M. Smith, Origins and Development; Garr, "Driver's Treatise," lxxvii-Ixxviii.
80 This is stated explicitely by Moran, "Hebrew Language," 65.
81 GKC 112d, p. 331; Waltke and O'Connor, Introduction 523: " ... usually
(though not always) signifies succession (temporal or logical) ... "; 1M 119a:
"(the w-qatalti form) has roughly the same values as the yiqtol form, to which
it mainly adds the idea of succession." Further on, however, in 1M 119f, it is
said: "Loose or improper use of w-qataltf [ ... ] in cases where there is no idea of
succession, is fairly common."

idj/j S~Rt;1-~S
'TJ"OS~7P tl Nj;l

Here, WEQATAL does not submit to the negation of the preceding

YIQTOL, but expresses an adversative nuance. 84
It is necessary, then, to distinguish between meaning and use. In
regard to meaning, WEQATAL would appear not to express succession
or consequence. Indeed, the verbal form is regular in usages that
exclude the idea of temporal succession. 85 Verbs of speech are
followed by the WEQATAL form of '~N:

Other cases of double-duty negation with YIQTOL - WEQATAL: Ex 28:43;

33:20; Lev 22:9, 15-16; Deut 7:25; 1 Sam 29:8; and see GKC 152.3.
Cf. also Jud 13:3 quoted below.
84 Other examples: .Gen 17:5;.Ex 7:4; ~ Sam 5:23. WEQATAL behaves similarly
whe~ the prece~mg clause IS su~ordmated by means of a telic particle: it may
contmue the fmal clause, or It may start a new independent clause (see
below). In a conditional sentence, WEQATAL may continue the protasis or
introduce the apodosis (see Gen 28:20-21; Ex 21:19 where both types occur
side by side).
85 See the similar conclusion in regard to WAYYIQTOL in Chapter v.
82

79

Stv~~ 1~~ ~S ,~S; "~~~1

Thou shalt not curse the deaf, nor put a stumbling block
before the blind, but shalt fear thy God [KJV]. 83

T:

See also: Ezek 11: 17; 13: 13.

This leads on to the question whether WEQATAL implies
a sequential or consecutive function. Grammar books usually state
that it does. 81 And in the great majority of occurrences, WEQATAL
does present a process that is temporally successive or logically
dependent on what is told in the preceding clause:

78

'TJ"OS~ cw-n~ t;l7~"1

Here WEQATAL links up with the preceding verbal form to the

extent of submitting to the negation qualifying the former. 82
This consecutive quality would appear to be optional, however.
In other instances, exhibiting the same syntax, WEQATAL shows
more independence:

.. J:r"~~ !1170rz.;, it'it,,-SN0 :itidb

,~~"'
":
0:-

But Moses said to the LORD, "Then [i.e., if you do what

you just said] the Egyptians will hear of it ... "

Dell18:1

'R'~ "~~::;l il1=il,~-~S1

And you shall not swear falsely by my name, profaning

the name of your God.

The consecutive function

Nurn 14: 13-15

291

83

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

292

Deut 26:5'9"ijt,~ i14i1; .,~~~ 1;l'~~1 tl"~0\11

... .,::l~ i::lN

.,~,~

You shall make this response before the LOR~ y~ur G~d
and say, ~~A wandering Aramean was my ancestor ... "

See also: Num 18:26; Deut 21:7; 25:9; 27:14.

Adverbial verbs are followed by WEQATAL:
Gen 45: 13

O"'~~::l "i;::l~-t,~-n~ "::l~t, OMi~i1'

.-: .: . : cn"N', i~~-t,; M~'

...

i1~i1
"::l~-n~
T .,
T
":

.:

": -:

..

oni,in, on,n01
...:

"..: -

In other cases, too, a WEQATAL form may refer to a process that is

contemporary or overlapping with the process referred to in the
preceding clause:
'9~=?~~~-t,:;p

tl.,tq 0\11 i!:i~I:) o"~: nWrP.

Six days you shall labour and do all your work.

See also: Gen 28:20; Ex 6:6; 30:30; Lev 5:21; Num 20:26; Deut
20:20; 1 Kgs 9:8; Isa 1:19-20; 19:5; Jer 3:16; 22:22; Mic 4:8.
Likewise, WEQATAL is regularly used in passages that do not
involve the notion of logical consequence:
Jud 13:3

In the evening you shall know that it was the LORD who
brought you out of the land of Egypt.
It is much rarer with a subject or a direct object:

Num 14:31

OI;1k ".t:'l~"~ijl i1;i;l: T:;;l7 O~ni;~ ,~~ o:?'Ef~1

i1f of;19~~ ,~~ rJ~V-n~ 1111;1

But your little ones, who you said would be booty, I will bring
in, and they shall know the land that you have despised.
The precise function of extraposition and the semantic difference between the

clauses quoted here and other clauses with YIQTOL falls outside the scope of the
present work. 86

1~ ~i~:l n"i01 ~i~: ~t,1 i1lR~-t;1~ ~rn~0

WEQATAL

in reference to future situations

In the vast majority of occurrences, WEQATAL refers to processes

not yet begun at the moment of speaking. Within the future-modal
domain, the form expresses a large range of nuances created
mostly by contextual factors.
WEQATAL is sometimes described as a kind of semantic
chameleon, taking on the meaning of the preceding verbal form,
whatever it may be. 87 This view does not accord with the fact that
WEQATAL often introduces the future-modal time frame after
a clause with a different temporal orientation. 88 But even where
WEQATAL figures in a sequence of clauses oriented toward the
future, it does not necessarily carryon the full meaning of the
preceding verbal form:

Although you are barren, having borne no children, you

shall conceive and bear a son.

Ex 4:14-15

See also: Num 14:31.

"I:1~j: "1~iJ '9"l)~ liO~ Nt,O

'9P~li?~ ~~;, ~1i1-i1~0 o~l ~1n '~j; '~j-"~

,.,~~ tl'~i1 ;::l~~ n~~1 i~'1

We may conclude that the notions of succession and consequence

are not expressed by WEQATAL as such. The verbal form does not
~m_____~~__~~=~,_~~___=_,_,_n,,_e~c=e~,s;;",,;;_s_a_ri~lyJ!p.-1?lLand then ... '~':~ll(t_~Q!~,!,"_Qr "(lnd therefore ... "
Where such meanings occur, as they do very often, the implication
of continuity is due partly to the conjunction and partly to the VS
word order (see Chapter x).
NB. Since in biblical Hebrew the conjunction 1 is always clause-initial, WEQATAL
occurs in principle at the head of its clause. Where a constituent precedes
WEQATAL, it stands in extraposition (left dislocation). Extraposition is frequent
with temporal phrases:
Ex 16:6

293

You must tell my father how greatly I am honoured in

Egypt, and all that you have seen. Hurry and bring my
father down here.

Ex 20:9

Chapter 8

o:'l~~ rJ~~ o:?,I;1~ ~~~ii1

i11i1;

~:;>

0tl.i?''''

::lJ~

'''~::l
C"'::l'i1-n~
":
"T:":

MOfZ1,

TI-:

What of Aaron your brother, the Levite? I know that he

can speak fluently; even now he is coming out to meet

See Gross, Pendenskonstruktion, 14,26,46,50,57,69, 119, 131.

Driver, Treatise, 123: "If, for instance, the principal verb involve will, would, or
let (... ), the subordinate verbs connected with it by 1 consecutive must be
understood in the same tense or mood ... "; GKC 112.2: ''The imperfect
consecutive ( ... ) always belongs to the period of time expressed by the
preceding tense, or its equivalent, with which it is connected as the temporal or
logical consequence."
88 Although such temporal transitions are rather infrequent, they are entirely
regular: Ex 5:5; Num 16:10; 1 Sam 25:10-11; Isa 66:9; Ps 50:21 (the absence
of the tone shift is due to the revia); Job 32:15-16.
86
87

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

294

you, and when he sees you his heart will be glad

[prediction]. You shall speak to him and put the words in
his mouth [command].

Other examples: Gen 47:30 (prediction - request); Ex 17:6

(command - prediction - potentiality).
It is better, then, to qualify WEQATAL as a full-fledged verbal
form possessing its own grammatical meaning. In context, this
meaning may be inflected under the influence of the preceding
clause; but many other factors come into play: the meaning of the
verb, the grammatical person, the relative status of speaker and
addressee, and the speech situation (see Chapter III).

Chapter 8

Also: Gen 32:13; Ex 4:12; 7:3; 8:23; Lev 26:34; 1 Sam 19:3;
Isa 19:16, and very frequently.
Or it is used after a participle referring to the imminent future: 90
Gen 48:4

Also: Gen 7:4; 16:11; 17:19; 41:29; 48:21; Ex 8:17; 16:4; Deut
31:16; 2 Sam 12:11; 1 Kgs 11:31; 16:3; 20:13, 36; 21:21; 2 Kgs
19:7; 22:20.
Or after temporal expressions:
1 Sam 10:2

is very frequent in predictive discourse. Following a

past- or present-tense statement, WEQATAL suffices to signal a
switch to a future time frame:

'1~~-'~~ t,~:f 1"~i~U/1 '1~.il "~j~ i1~01

1 Sam 27: 12

t,~'fv"::l ;~11~ tzj"~::li1 rC~::li1

T: .:

ct,;~: '::l~~ ~t,

n"r,-,

He has made himself utterly abhorre~t to': his peopi~

Israel; therefore he shall always be my servant.

See also: Gen 17:4, 20; 20:11; 26:22, 24; 28:15; Ex 6:6; Num
14:24; 1 Sam 12:23; 17:36; 1 Kgs 17:12; Isa 9:7; 31:2.
In fact, the form may introduce a prophetic oracle:
i1'~" ,.,tzj,iG~ '~:I'

.,tzj.,

'OM ~~."
A shoot shall come o~t' fr~~ Tthe '~~~~p of'J es~e, a~d

Isa 11: 1

l1t~~

a branch shall grow out of his roots.89

Gen 50:24

"r:,.~ nj~i?-c.il
See also: Gen 3:5; Ex 17:4; Lev 26:26; Jos 23:16; Jud 8:7.
Predictions expressed with WEQATAL may be reliable or
hypothetical, depending on the speaker and the speech situation.
They may have a promissory or minatory character. First person
statements usually imply a commissive nuance.
Obligation
~QATAL is very frequent also in prescriptive discourse, expressing
different nuances of obligation.
WEQATAL

continuing a volitive form

Foll~wing

a volitive, WEQATAL often assimilates to it semantically.

In this case, no temporal or modal nuance distinguishes the two forms:
Ex 3: 16

pe8ifi~~uGh~4.llG:ref:requent,

...cv~~ ~i~~' "~'lt?': "~i?~-n~ Tr;1=?Q~1""

Go and assemble the elders of Israel, and say to them ...

n"~1:1U/;:t1 ~~ "~1P ;M~~~ C~~'l; '~~lIj

Cl1::l," ntzj~ "M~-"~ 111'" ~t"
Jeroboam said to his wife, "GoT ':li~gui~~ y~~rseif, s~"tha~

1 Kgs 14:2

c~~~ 'P~: 'P~ c"i:it,~J n~ "~j~

n~tij r'l~v-l~ c~~~ it7~v1

it will not be known that you are the wife of Jeroboam."

I am about to die; but God will surely come to you, and

bring you up out of this land.

90

89 See also: Isa 2:2.

c"t;'~~ .,~~ tlN~91 "j~.il~ c;lIij 1I;1~~:f

When you depart from me today you will meet two men
by Rachel's tomb.

however,
where it follows other expressions of futurity. Thus, it expresses
the future after YIQTOL:

. I"~~""W~~-~~~~~-~"'~'-"~~'T.ttt;-ex:presMflg

C"~.i} Siji?~ i"~O~1

WEQATAL

Know that I am with you and will keep you wherever you go.

il)"~i;:t111~~ "~~0 .,~~ '~~lIj

I am gOIng to make you fruitful and increase your

numbers; I will make you a company of peoples.

WEQAT AL expressing prediction

Gen 28: 15

295

Where the participle refers to the present, a following WEQATAL form will still
refer to the future: 1 Kgs 17:12.

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

296

See also: Gen 45:9; Jos 7:13; 9:11; 1 Sam 6:7-8; 1 Kgs 1:13; 2 Kgs
9:1-3; Ezek 12:3.

In one passage where volitive and non-volitive forms are interspersed

in a way that appears to be random, the text may not be in order:

1:l",t,t, ~~n~' t,~'fzr "J~-n~ ,~

.. :n-~~~ TO"'~ o:~tQ~ n~'Q~~

Command the Israelites to give from the inheritance that

they possess, towns for the Levites to live in. 92

Compare this with a sequence of volitives:

Num 5:2

I!'I

... ~1'~-t,:;P ii~Q~ij-l~ ~n~rq", t,~1~: "~~-n~ ,~

Command the Israelites to put out of the camp everyone

who is leprous ...

'i'i"

Ii.,!,

Let a young virgin be sought for my LORD the king, and

let her wait on the king, and be his attendant, let her lie
in your bosom, so that my LORD the king may be warm .

The third clause, unexpectedly reverting to the jussive, is lacking

in the Greek Antiochene text and seems to have intruded from
verse 4. 95
Obligation presented as necessity
WEQATAL is also used to express commands without a preceding

volitive:

T:-

[cohortative], and cast him [cohortative] into some pit,

and we will say [WEQATAL], some evil beast hath devoured
him: and we shall see [cohortative] what will become of
his dreams [KJV].93

The three volitives in the first part of the verse indicate the
brothers' desire to get rid of Joseph. The following WEQATAL
form does not express a process willed by them, but a contingent
The last clause then resumes the initial pitch of the

':l-,-t,::D
TT

.,t,~ 1:l'''~
_

TT:

cF1nt,rzh
".-:-:

Although the "speech act" is manifestly directive, the grammar

perhaps implies an expression of simple futurity: "you will do such
and such" is pragmatically determined as "you must do such and
such." The usage is very common, however, both in combination
with YIQTOL and without it.
See also: Gen 45:13; Ex 3:22; 17:6; 33:21; Deut 2:4; 10:16,
19; 11:1; 30:19; Jos 6:3; 2 Sam 15:36; Ruth 3:3.
The same nuance may occur in interrogative clauses:
Gen 29: 15

See also: Jud 11:37; similarly Gen 19:2;94 27:43-44; Ex 12:32;

Jud 1:3; 19:9; 2 Sam 13:5; 1 Kgs 2:31.
Fassberg, "Sequences," found several examples of sentences that are similar
except for the variation between WEQATAL and the imperative; compare
1 Kgs 14:7 with 2 Sam 7:5.
92 See also: Gen 8:17; Ex 8:12; Num4:19.
93 The identification of some verbal forms in this verse as cohortatives is based
on their position in the clause, the forms themselves being indifferent.
94 See Chapter II, p. 70.

... -:

Their two sons are with them there, Zadok's son Ahimaaz
and Abiathar's son Jonathan; and through them you shall
report to me everything you hear.

-n"n

:';n~~n T1"~"~;~ iiN,Tj ;

Come now [imperative] therefore, a~d i~t ~~ sl~y hi~

"Jrzj 1:l~11 1:lrD-ii~ii

,~:~~~ 10~4;'''1' pi'~~ r~~"D~

111~rDM 'rD~

ni'~ii 'n~~ 1ii:hrDj, 1ii~'iij' 1~t, iiMl1'

1~nS;:~ ~~,
~~'~Ni

- --:

1:lii"J:l

2 Sam 15:36

In other passages, however, the transition from a volitive form to

WEQATAL obviously does imply a semantic nuance:
Gen 37 :20

ii~1n~ ii1~~ l~~ij .,~.,~~ 1rDP:;;

nd~b it,-"0t;'l~ l~~ij .,~~~ ii1~.vJ
l~~ij .,~.,~~ cr:q '9R"1J~ ii~~~J

1 Kgs 1:2

It is hard, in these examples, to discover in what way the sequence

volitive - WEQATAL differs from a sequence volitive - volitive. 91
The same is true in a few instances where a volitive is followed by
a WEQATAL form involving a different grammatical person:

Num 35:2

297

Chapter 8

1:l~n
T"

"JF1,:ll1,
.-

:--:-

iiM~
"n~-":m
T"T
.-:

Because you are my kinsman, should you therefore serve

me for nothing?96

91

The secondary nature of the clause is suggested in an unpublished sample of

1 Kgs 1: 1-7 prepared by S. McKenzie for the Oxford Hebrew Bible project.
The suggestion will be retained by the present editors of 1 Kings (J. Joosten
and J. Koulagna).
96 See also: 1 Sam 25: 11.

95

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

298

The use of WEQATAL expressing obligation is very typical of legal

discourse: Ex 21:6; 23:5; 25:10-18, 23; Lev 17:15; 18:30; 19:37;
20:7; Deut 12:5-7; 13: 15; 15: 12, and many more.
WEQATAL expressing wishes
Driver, Treatise (1892), 142.

In a few passages, WEQATAL is used as a precative or mild imperative:

Jud 11:8
1.1

nI;1~:-~~ '.i?~~ "~i?t 1'~~!!j

1jrFll ~=?~01 'T["~~ 1j=il~ nI;1.l1 1~~
1;~.l1 "~=il~ I;1~lj~~1

The elders of Gilead said to him, "Nevertheless, we are

turning to you now; come with us to fight the
Ammonites" [NIV].
1.1

The speakers, the elders of Gilead, have no authority whatever

over the addressee, Jephthah. All they can do is appeal to his
goodwill. One would have expected the use of a volitive form, as
in the initial request of the elders:
Jud 11:6

1"~R~ 1j~ nI;1":01 n~7 nI;1~:~ 1'~~!!j

1;~.l1 "~=il~ n~Q~~1

They said to J ephthah, "Come and be our commander, so

that we may fight with the Ammonites."

The use OfWEQATAL in Jud 11:8 may reflect a touch of humility.

Instead of putting the request as a personal wish (as they did at
first, vs. 6), the speakers present it as an impersonal suggestion.
The other cases ofWEQATAL expressing a wish.occur in similar
contexts. The speaker has no leverage on the agent addressed in
the wish:
1 Sam 24:16

'T[t:;.l1 "~"~ ~~~11~j~ n~n;

"~~~~-"~-~~""_"~.==~.__.._.~.~-May: 1h~~. .he~judge,_andgive

;':01

sentence

between me and you.

See also: Gen 24:14; 40:14;97 1 Sam 20:5; 25:27, 29, 31; 1 Kgs 3:9;
8:28,30,32,34,36,39; Ps 25:11; Ruth 3:9; 2 Chr6:19, 21, 23, 25,
27, 30, 33, 35, 39.
The usage is found also after the idiomatic expression
'T["~".v.~ 10 "D~~~ ~ro~, "please":

97 Note the use of the particle NJ with WEQATAL.

299

Chapter 8

Jud 6: 17

10

'T["~".v.~

"D~~~ ~ro~

"~li '::l'~ nr-l~rzj n;~ ,,~ n"foli'

-T:
....

-:

T-T

If now I have found favour with you, show me a sign

that it is you who speak with me. 98

In other attestations of this formula, it is followed by a volitive

form; see: Gen 18:3; 47:29; 50:4; Ex 33:13; 34:9; 1 Sam 27:5.
Other modal usages
Close study will show that the possible readings of WEQATAL are
legion .. Nevertheless, a few categories may be signalled here
expressly because they may pose a problem of interpretation.
Permission
Sometimes WEQATAL is used to present a process as permitted:

1 Sam 11: 10

1j~

on"fD.u,

c~,,~~ ~:;;;j 'n~

.~. ~~"j~'li; -::l;~M-~;;

'.'

.... :

Tomorrow we will give ourselves up to you, and you may

do to us whatever seems good to you.

See also: Gen 47:23; 2 Sam 14:32; 18:20.

Eventuality
WEQATAL is used rather frequently to express processes that are
thought of as merely possible:

Gen 20:11

"r-l'~~ "::!) on':l~ ,~~!!'

niij o;pW~: -OT"ijS~ n~1::'1"~'

pi

"r-lrzj~ ':l"=T-~li "jilin,

Abraham said, "I did it because I thought, There is no
fear of God at all in this place, and they may kill me
because of my wife."99

:.

-:

T -:-

When successive WEQATAL forms are used in this way, the nuance
can be brought out in English by the use of a conditional sentence:
Gen 44:22

''':l~-n~ :ltli~ ili~n ~~1"-~~

',0

-: -

no,

IT

''':l~-n~
-T
.:

:n.u,
-TI

The boy cannot leave his father, for if he should leave

him his father would die.

98 See also: Gen 33:10.

99 NRSV " ... they will kill me ... "

300

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

See also: Gen 20:11; 33:13; 34:30; 42:38; 44:29; Num 14:13; 30:12;
2 Sam 17:9; 2 Kgs 7:9; Ruth 2:9.
WEQATAL is very frequent in both the protasis and apodosis of
conditional clauses.
Volition of the subject

In a few passages, the process expressed by WEQATAL is dependent

on the will of the subject (agent):
rJ~o o~ i1I!1~ O"~j-FJ i1i"l~ '9Nllj
ori~::l~~ onk C.tl:::HDn,
Pharaoh continued, "Now they are more numerous than the
people of the land, and yet you want them to stop working."

Ex 5:5

:..

... -

i1'i1"~ no~ i1~.v1 ,~ '9t;1~ 'il:-"~1

Ex 12:48

':;l'-~:; i~ ~i~i1

If an alien who resides with you wants toT ~el~brate th~

Passover to the LORD, all his males shall be circumcised.

See also: 2 Kgs 14:10.

WEQATAL with final particles

"I;1;~~-~~-n~ c~T~'p'j i':P~r:1 1-11~7

O:;?,"H~~~ o,,~.,p 0P":;:T1

SO you shall remember and do all the commandments,

and be holy to your God.

The connection is particularly clear when the particle is 1~, "lest":

!,'['

Gen 32:12(11)

,i,,:,:

,Ii:

,~.p. ,~~ "8~ ,~~ ~~ "~~"~iJ

O"j:::l-~li C~ "j:l:>n, Ni::l"-lEl ___ink

":;j~ ~,,,-,,~
"___
Deliver me, I pray tnee, from the hand of my brother,
from the hand of Esau: for I fear him, lest he will come
and smite me, and the mother with the children [KJV] .100

~""'-'C~_"'_'-'-',,"=""'_''''''''-{'-''*'~''''_'''''"'_"'''''''''i!___ .~'''Y_",, __u--''>I_''''_~''''' _ _

.. _._,_._".~~._
_ .-_",,,."~,t..~,~,,,,_.r_,,",,,~~.....,,.

""~_..,_

"T .

.OT

See also: Gen 19:19; 32:12; Ex 19:21; 23:29; Deut 4:16; 8:12;
2 Sam 12:28; 20:6.
The particle may govern successive WEQATAL forms following
the YIQTOL form:

301
OJlJiJ-l~ i'~~ O~~-pj'

Jos 6:18

OJlJiJ-l~ ClDr:'lR71 17Y'i01:1-1~

;ni~ C.tl,:;)l1, o'n~ ~~,tc" i1jn~-n~ C.tl~fD'

As for you, keep ~~:~y fro'~: th~ T~hing; - de~oted: ~~

destruction, so as not to covet and take any of the

devoted things and make the camp of Israel an object for
destruction, bringing trouble upon it.

The processes expressed by the WEQATAL forms are all undesired

and depend on the negative particle 1~. See also: Gen 3:22; Ex
1:10; Deut 11:16; 1 Sam 31:4; 2 Sam 15:14.
However, WEQATAL does not necessarily submit to the force
of a preceding particle. It may signal a break and a transition to
a new main clause:

o"~liO c:;?,~ 111~~:-1~ i:;)~ i1lOO

Jos 2:16

O"~" nrz.;~rzj i1~rz.; cn~n~'

-T

may come and kill us all ... "

:-:

In the overwhelming majority of cases, WEQATAL refers to

processes not yet begun, or to repeated action in the past. A small
number of examples exist, however, where WEQATAL refers to the
present time frame. In this case, the reference is practically never
to processes that are really going on at speech time, but to more
general facts or circumstances.
Repetition in the present
Driver, Treatise (1892), 127-128.

is used in statements referring to habitual or recurring

processes in a present time-frame:

WEQATAL

Ex 1: 19

i1i11~-~~ n'7:~iJ l'TtNr-lj

T

i1~i1 ni"n-"~ n~'::llii1 n~'~~i1 o"rz.;~:; ~t, ,,~

T ..

1"7;" nl~:~iJ lPs.~ ~i;~ CJ~~

The midwives said to Pharaoh, "Because the Hebrew women

are not lik.e the Egyptian women; for they are vigorous
and give birth before the midwife comes to them. "

,,~~ ~~
-

1i1'p'j
NRSV " ... he

TT

in reference to present situations

Ex 18:16
100

.::

Go toward the hill country so that the pursuers may not

come upon you. Hide yourselves there three days.
WEQATAL

Because of the waw attached to it, WEQATAL cannot be used

immediately after other particles. It can, however, link up with
a YIQTOL form governed by a telic particle:
Num 15:40

Chapter 8

,::l, Oi1~ i1"i1"-"~

TT

":T

... : - .

j":;;li rzj"~ p~ "1:1rp;l~'

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

302

303

Chapter 8

When they have a matter and it is brought to me,101

I decide between one person and another.

and all your brother Levites with you; yet you seek the
priesthood as well?

See also: Isa 28:25.

The case appears to be unique.

The usage is rather rare and only slightly more frequent where
a YIQTOL form referring to the general present:

WEQAT AL

WEQATAL continues

O"iit,N 'll'''-''~ 1j"N' nrn o;"n

"n, OiNn-nN

Deut 5:24(21)

.::

-:.

-: -

Today we have seen that god may speak to s~~e~~eT and

the person may still live.

in past-tense contexts

Fokkelman, "Iterative Forms" (1991); Joosten, "Disappearance" (2006).

In past-tense contexts, both narrative and discursive, WEQATAL

occurs abundantly in expressions of iterative action. In other
functions, prospective or past modal, it is attested very meagrely.

See also: Gen 2:24; Jer 12:3.

Prospective

Proverbial expressions
WEQATAL occurs in proverbs and other statements of eternal truths:

Notarius, "Prospective WEQATAL" (2008).

Prov 30:20

iJ"~ ntJ09 1 n7=?~ n~~~~ n~~ 1111~

n~ "r;1~~~-Nt, n"'~~1

This is the way of an adulteress: she eats, and wipes her

mouth, and says, "I have done nothing wrong. "102

in a past-tense context, may signal a process expected

to take place. The temporal analysis of such cases is (R < E) < s: the
reference time is situated before the moment of speech, but the
event time is subsequent to reference time:

WEQATAL,

2 Sam 17: 17

See also: Prov 18: 17 Q; 22:3; 26: 19; 27:25; 29:9; 30:20.
And following YIQTOL in the same function:
Prov 16:29

:l;~-~t,

See also: Prov 18: 10, 17; 20:28; 24: 16; 29:6.
Present with modal verbs?
There are no examples of WEQATAL referring to the present with
the verbs t,~" and .t7i". A possible case with a different modal verb
is the following:
'1'1:

"",'",",it~~~~"~"~'~'~~"'~'~'-"-~"'-'-'~~"""~,Nmrrt~*6*"-'--0:>n~
. t,~,~"jfz,~"t,"':lir-"~'
o~~
~.t7~n
i
.,' :.,'
.. T : '
..
.,':
.:.

.,'.
-:iii!l

'''7~ o~~~ :l"ii?iJ~ t,~l~: n,~~

1l!1~ .,,~-,,~=? '9"p~-t,f-n~l '9~k :lji?~j

;i"i

n~t::t:p-o~ CtJ~~~1
Is it too little for you that the God of Israel has separated
you from the congregation of Israel, to allow you to
approach him ( ... ). He has allowed you to approach him,

i,!

,!:',

"T

Jonathan and Ahimaaz were staying at En Rogel. A servant

girl was to go and inform them, and they were to go and
tell King David [NW].103

111f ;:>"~in11n'v'j n~~; 0i?O rz.;,,~

The violent entice their neighbours, and lead them in

a way that is not good.

t,"i-1"'v'f o"i~.v r~~"1J~j ll}~;n",

ont, n,"an, nnE,jttJn n:>t,n,
l 1~~S '1,,,T~~i ~~~; o~i

At first blush, the syntax suggests that the carrying of secret

messages to David was repeated several times (see the NRSV
translation). However, in the light of the chronology of the story,
and the physical distances involved, this is all but unthinkable. It is
better, therefore, to accept that WEQATAL and YIQTOL here function
as prospectives: they tell the reader what is going to happen, once,
in the sequel to the tale.
See also (possibly): Amos 7:4; Esther 2:14.
Past modal
There is a sprinkling of cases where WEQATAL occurs in a past-tense
context expressing a modal function. Different types of modality are
in evidence:

Gen 26:10
101
102

The form ~il is a participl~ standing in apposition to the preceding noun.

The QATAL form expresses anteriority: " ... (after) she has eaten, she wipes ... "

103

NRsv"
. 1 use d t 0
. ...a servant -glf

go ... "

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

304

oitJ~ 1J"Sl.' n~:lii1

One of the people might easily have lain ~ith y"OTurT wii~:
and you would have brought guilt upon us.

Lev 10: 19

1:l"'j?iJ O;!!ij Ii] ii~b-S~ liQ~ 'ilj;1

ii1ii" "J~S onSlrn~1 on~~n-n~
O;!!ij n~~r:t: "~~~~1 Tn~~f""'nk Tii~Nlj?~1
ii1ii" "J"l.'~ :l~"!!ii

And Aaron said to Moses: "See, today th~y :oife~~d th~i~

sin offering and their burnt offering before the LORD; and
yet such things as these have befallen me! If I had eaten
the sin offering today, would it have been agreeable to
the LORD?104

In both these passages WEQATAL expresses eventuality: the process

is presented as a mere possibility within the past time frame.
2 Sam 14:7

1'~~!!1 '9p~~~-S~ ii~~~;Pij-S~ ii~R ii~iJl

l'ii ,rzj~ 1"n~ rzj~J~ 1iin~J1 1"n~ ii~~-n~ "JM

ii'~rzj; T,rzjN -~MSn;-nN': ~:ll:>"'~';!!ii~n~ o~- ii,~'~~J:1

Now the ~h:oie f;~riy has '~isen: ~ga'in~t y'~ur- se;v~~~:

They say, ~~Give up the man who struck his brother, so
that we may kill him for the life of his brother whom he
murdered, even if we destroy the heir as well." Thus they
would quench my one remaining ember.

If the highlighted clause continues the temporal perspective of the

QATAL and WAYYIQTOL forms at the beginning of the verse,
WEQATAL here implies volition of the agent in a past time frame.
Possibly, however, the last clause represents a switch from the past
to the present time frame.lOs
See also: EccI9:15;106 Neh 10:39.
The past modal is found once in a subordinate clause introduced

;nSitJ O"iiS~-~S ii~ii1 ii'''~~1

T: . 'ISS: ,~, "n~1:l;ii' ;~
~l"~cl~~~ ~1ii '1:>f?' 1~~~ ;,-~T~ ~~~~Ol ii~~;~l
l.'l O~~ ov~ ;':01 "tl~~01 prii~~~l

Neh 6: 12-13

104 The form does not exhibit the tone shift and may have been regarded as we +
QATAL in the tradition. Its modal function is clear, however.
105 Note the KJV: " ... and so they shall quench my coal which is left."
106 Isaksson, Studies, 97-98.

305

Chapter 8
And, 10, I perceived that God had not sent him; but that he
pronounced this prophecy against me: for Tobiah and
Sanballat had hired him. Therefore was he hired, that
I should be afraid, and do so, and sin, and that they might
have matter for an evil report.

Iterative and durative

In narrative contexts, WEQATAL occurs rather often with an
iterative-habitual function. The usage is also found a few times in
discursive texts. It can be explained from the basic modal function
of the verbal form. IterativewEQATALexpresses processes that
might be expected to come about because they had repeatedly
done so before. Many other languages of the world use modal
forms in the presentation of iterative action. 107
Within a past-tense context, WEQATAL positively signals that
repeated action is meant. No other syntactic or lexical indications
are needed to induce the iterative interpretation:

LORD

S1~rzj Ol.'~ ii'O ii1ii" n1'1

ii1ii" n~~ iil.',-n1' irJn17:li
had Td~pa;~~d fr~~ Saul,- ;~d

LORD

would torment him.lo8

1 Sam 16: 14
Now the spirit of the
an evil spirit from the

TT

T:

While the simple QATAL form iilt? refers to a single event, the
following WEQATAL form implies an action that occurred
repeatedly. Recurring psychological or spiritual malaise is indeed
what Saul experienced, as is told further on in the story.
With stative verbs, the implication may be durative rather than
iterative:
1 Sam 13:21

The charge was two-thirds of a shekel.l o9

The verbal meaning may be accompanied by an adverbial

expression of iteration:
1 Sam 1:3
N ow this man used to

ii~"~" O"~!!~ ;'''l.'~ ~1iiii itJ"~ii ;,t,17'

g~ ~p ye~~' by y~~r fro~ hi~ ;OW~.T :

107 See above, note 66.

108 The NRSV does not render the variation of verbal forms.
109 This is also the value of WEQATAL in the description of borders; see, e.g., Jos
15-19 (see the following note).

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

Iterative WEQATAL often co-occurs with by YIQTOL expressing the
same nuance:

Ex 17: 11

., ., -,.,~~~ o"~16: r,~t,~ :'il1~

,.,~~~
'''11-t,11'
z - ~t, nn~
-.
- : nn~
T*:

'''11-t,11 "rl'~~ii'
I-Z-:

Iterative WEQATAL tends to occur in clusters. It is common to

encounter a sequence of WEQATAL forms, combined or interspersed
with YIQTOL forms. Clusters contain between two and nineteen
forms. At times, they serve to describe customs and circumstances
necessary for the understanding of the narrative. In this case, they
often occur near the beginning of a narrative unit:
Gen 29:2-3

iiife::l

'~:l ii~ii' ~'!l'

O.,~S; o"~~i 1~~-"-}1V. ii~~~ c~~ii~~i

o"jl~O 1P~~ ~'iJij '~:Pij-l~

":p

'~:pij .,~-t,l} ii~i~ l~~Ol

O"'il1ii-t,:;,

ii~rzj-1:JO~~'

'~:pij .,~ ~~~ l~~oT-n~ 1~~~i

l~~ij-n~ 1P~iJ1

rT~p~~ '~:pij .,~-t,l} l~~o-n~ 1:l.,~tr1

As he [Jacob] looked, he saw a well in the field and three
flocks of sheep lying there beside it; for out of that well
the flocks used to be watered. The stone on the well's
mouth was large, and all the flocks would gather there,
and the shepherds would roll the stone from the mouth of
the well, and water the sheep, and put the stone back in
its place on the mouth of the well.

1 Sam 16:23

t,1~tzj-t,~ 0"jft,~-n1'
T

.,.

ni"ii::l ;''';''

'i;~~-n~

i11 MR~i

it, :li~1 t,1~~~ M:1'11 ii;:p 1~~1

iil1'ii n1' ,.,t,11~ ;"0'
TTT

TT

TTl

And whenever the evil spirit from God came upon Saul,
David took the lyre and played it with his hand, and Saul
would be relieved and feel better, and the evil spirit would
depart from him.

t,~,to.,

':ll' ii" iitzjb C"," ,rzj~~ ii";"

. T: -Tp~7tT~ ~;l~1 ;-i: fj~.~: -'~~~i

Whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed, and

whenever he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed.

And I also withheld the rain from you when there were
still three months to the harvest; I would send rain on
one city, and send no rain on another city.

307

More rarely, the cluster serves to integrate iterative actions into the
narrative sequence:

Ol'

orzj~ii-n~ O~~ "Ml1j~ ":;'~~

Amos 4:7

Chapter 8

Chains of iterative forms (WEQATAL and YIQTOL) may be introduced,

interrupted or continued by WAYYIQTOL or QATAL forms.
Other examples of single. WEQATAL_(ex1ill1ples . in discursive texts
in bold face): Gen 37:3 [?]; 47:22; 1 Sam 14:52; 2 Sam 20:12;
1 Kgs 9:25; 18:4; 2 Kgs 3:4; Jer 6:17 [?]; 25:4.
Clusters of WEQATAL (examples in discursive texts in bold
face): Gen 2:6, 10; 6:4; 29:2-3; 30:41-42; 31:8; 38:9; Ex 16:21;

17:11; 18:26; 33:7-11; 34:34-35; 40:31; Num 9:19,21; 10:17-18,

22,25; 11:8; 21:9; Deut 11:10; Jos 6:8,13; 15:3-11; 110 16:2-3,6-8;
17:7-9; 18:12-21; 19:11-14, 22, 26-29, 34; Jud 2:18-19; 6:3, 5 Q;
12:5; 19:30; 1 Sam 1:3, 6; 2:13-16, 19, 20, 22; 7:16; 13:19-21; 16:23;
17:34-35; 27:9; 2 Sam 12:16 [?], 31; 14:26;' 15:2, 5; 1 Kgs 4:7; 5:7;
14:28; 18:10; 2 Kgs 3:25; 6:10; 12:10, 12, 15; 18:7; Isa 6:2-3; Jer
18:4; 20:8-9; Ps 78:38; Job 1:4-5; 7:14; 31:29.

Concluding remarks on

WEQATAL

Although the uses of WEQATAL are widely analogous to those of

YIQTOL, the precise distribution of the two forms differs. In the
future time frame, WEQATAL connotes permission less frequently
than does YIQTOL; moreover, WEQATAL seems to be unattested
as an expression of potentiality. In the past time frame, the
prospective and modal uses are much less frequent with WEQATAL
than with YIQTOL.
These statistical differences do not militate against attributing
to the two forms the same modal function. The uses attested more

110

According to GKC 112rr, the WEQATAL and YIQTOL forms in the description
of borders in Jos 15-19 show that an originally prescriptive text was
transformed into a narrative by a redactor who failed to adapt the verbal
forms. The occurrence of the second person plural pronoun in Jos 15:4b
tends to support this view (but see the Septuagint). Note, however, that in
other contexts too, similar descriptions use YIQTOL and WEQATAL: 1 Kgs
7:8, 15,23; 6:8; and perhaps Num 21:15,21.

il
:l,
YIQTOL and WEQATAL

308

Chapter 8

309

1!,1

'il

often for YIQTOL as a rule involves short sentences with one verbal
form. WEQATAL could not have been used here.
The statistical difference between the use of WEQATAL and
YIQTOL in the present time frame is probably more significant. As
was stated above in the introduction, YIQTOLwas formerly, in
Proto-Hebrew, the regular expression of processes contemporary
with the moment of speaking. In Classical Hebrew prose, YIQTOL
has almost entirely abandoned this function to the participle. But
there is a residue of cases where YIQTOL refers to the present time
frame, although in a way that does not conflict with its modal
function. This may explain why YIQTOL is more frequent in presenttense discourse than WEQATAL. Even in this usage, however, it is
impossible to find a clear functional differentiation between YIQTOL
and WEQATAL. In none of the examples enumerated in the relevant
section above would it be possible to replace YIQTOL with WEQATAL.
Over against the differences in detail stands a large measure of
overlap. WEQATAL and YIQTOL share a number of striking usages.
Moreover, the outline of their use, as distributed over time frames
and text types, is very similar.

Appendix: Non-volitive

w + YIQTOL

Diehl, "Hebraisches Imperfekt" (2004).

The rules of word order in Classical Hebrew prose described
above exclude the use of YIQTOL after the conjunction l Where
the non-volitive-modal function is needed after the conjunction,
WEQATAL must be used. Ostensible cases of WEYIQTOL are to be
regarded as we + volitive.
Generally, these rules work very well, but there are some
Ex 24:7

~'~~~j

o.!/v .,~\~~ ~lf?:j n"l~jj ,~~ nR:j

l1~rzf~' n~l1j n,n" '~1-'rli~
T

I':

-:-:-

-:

-:-:

t,:;,

Then he took the book of the covenant and read it in the

hearing of the people; and they said, "All that the LORD
has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient."

The verse is surprising for more than one reason. One would have
expected the "hearing" to be mentioned before the "doing" (see
Deut 5:27). On the grammatical level, one would have expected
WEQATAL in the lastclause. One does not expect an expression of

volition or purpose to continue a YIQTOL form, nw~~, expressing

prediction and commitment.
Other possible examples of we + YIQTOL in the corpus of
Classical Hebrew prose are: Gen 22: 17; Ex 23:8, 12; Deut 2:4;
13:12 11~l:1; 16:19; 17:13; 19:20; 21:21; Jos 3:13; 7:9; 19:29 K;
1 Sam 28:19; 1 Kgs 11:39; 14:15-16; 2 Kgs 7:12. This list does
not include cases of we + 1 m.sg. YIQTOL expressing "light subordination" after another volitive form (see Chapter IV, p. 146). 111
To these cases may be added a few examples where the verb is
characterized as a short fonn but exerts no volitive function: 112
Ex 19:3

o"iit,~n-t,~ nt,l1 nrlib1

'b~~ 'vv~l~: ~~n~- ,.,~~ ~l-f?:j

t,~lf?': .,~=?~ ,.,~O, ::lp~~ n"~~ '~~n n:;,

Then Moses went up to God; the LORD called to him from
the mountain, saying, "Thus you shall say to the house
of Jacob and tell the Israelites."

See also: Num 16:5; and "0'" in 1 Sam 10:5; 2 Sam 5:24; 1 Kgs
14:5. 113
Altogether, there are 22 examples of non-volitive we + prefix
conjugation in the corpus of classical prose (Genesis - 2 Kings).114
In LBH prose, the form is relatively much more common: in
a corpus about a third the size of the CBH corpus, we find over 60
cases of we + non-volitive prefix conjugation. 115 These figures suggest
that we + non-volitive YIQTOL is a relatively late feature, at least in
prose texts. The cases in the CBH corpus would be the harbingers
of a development that becomes more visible in LBH.
It is necessary, however, to look beyond the statistics. Not
all the attestations of we + YIQTOL in the classical corpus are
111 Admittedly, it is not always easy to make the distinction between nonvolitive we + YIQTOL in main clauses and cases of light subordination
(difficult cases include Ex 26:23-24; 28:27-28; Num 17:3). As was shown in
Chapter IV, marked YIQTOL forms sometimes nevertheless function as light
subordinates (p. 148).
112 Probably the use of the short form in these cases is due to the interference of
later grammar on the scribal tradition; see Chapter XI.
113 See more extensively Qimron, "Consecutive and Conjunctive."
114 For poetry, see Chapter XII_
115 Eccl 7:7; 8:10; 12:4-7; Dan. 8:12; 9:25; 11:4-7, 10, 11, 15-19,22,25,28,30,
36, 40, 42, 45; 12:4, 10, 12, 13; Neh 3:14, 15; 6:13; 8:15; 9:27, 28; 2 Chr
2:15; 7:14, 20; 12:8; 20:9; 24:11; 34:25.

YIQTOL and WEQATAL

310

representative of normal prose syntax. In fact, three lines of

analysis lead to the elimination of almost all the examples.
To begin with, in several passages the text seems not to be in
order:
Jos 3:13

iqi1; 1;'~ "~~j C"~O~iJ "~~j n;e~ lJt1f i1;01

l1i~iJ "~~ rl~O-t,i! 1;'~

'n~
T":

pnli!: l1i~iJ "~

, j 1'017"" i1t,170t,O C",,"i1 C"~i1

:--:

T:T:"

":-

.--

When the soles of the feet of the priests who bear the ark
of the LORD, the LORD of all the earth, rest in the waters of
the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan shall be cut off; the
waters flowing from above shall stand as a single heap.1l6

The awkward position of the conjunction in the last clause

suggests a textual corruption. Perhaps the Septuagint is to be
followed in relocating the waw before the subject. The resulting
clause, with YIQTOL in second position, would be entirely regular.
Similar considerations apply to: Num 16:5;117 Jos 19:29;118 1 Sam
28: 19; 119 1 Kgs 11 :39; 120 and to the cases of non-volitive "0",.121
Secondly, in several cases the verb involved is primae yod (""!j).
This opens up the possibility that the original author did not intend
to write we +YIQTOL, but WEQATAL:
Gen 22:17

'9~it-ntt i1~i~ i1~iiJl '9=?1~~ 11~-":P

C"i1 n!:lrii-t,17
T-

-:

,rzj~ t,;n~'
-:-:

-:

c"orSi1
--T-

"~~i~:!l
:

'''~;k '.l1~ n~ '9~it rz.;j:1

I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as
numerous as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is
on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate
of their enemies.

simplifies: " ... the waters of the Jordan flowing from above shall be
cut off; they shall stand as a single heap."
117 As was suggested by Geiger, 111~' "and may he make known" is probably
a scribal correction for I1j~l "and he will know," designed to secure the
notion of divine omniscience (for the syntax, see Ex 16:7). See A. Geiger,
Urschrift und Uebersetzungen der Bibel (Frankfurt a. M. 19282),335.
118 The ketiv has we + YIQTOL while the qere has the expected WEQATAL.
119 See Driver, Notes, 218.
120 The entire verse is omitted in the Septuagint, suggesting that it may have
been added to the text by a later hand.
121 See Driver, Notes, 80-81.
116

NRSV

Chapter 8

311

The highlighted form could easily be revocalized as a WEQATAL

form, which would be regular. 122 Likewise, the forms of the verb
~,", "to fear," in Deut 2:4; 17:13; 19:20; 21:21, could easily be
read as WEQATAL forms.123 Justification for the idea that WEQATAL
was originally intended in all these cases may be found in the
Samaritan Pentateuch. As is well known, the Samaritan text tends
to substitute later forms, representative of the Hebrew of the
Second Temple period, wherever the consonantal text allows it. 124
In several instances, primae yod (""!j) verbs that are vocalized as
WEQATAL in the MT are read as WEYIQTOL in the Samaritan
~radition: for example, rOj;1 in Nl1.:rii27: 11 is read wyfras, and 1~i;1
In Deut 28:10 and 31:12 is read wyfrifii.125 These cases suggest
that a process similar to the one that affected the Samaritan
Pentateuch left its mark, to a lesser degree, on the Masoretic Text
as well. While the authors intended WEQATAL forms, later scribes
more familiar with late and post-biblical Hebrew vocalized them
as we + YIQTOL.
Thirdly, several instances may reflect poetic syntax rather than
the normal rules of prose. In Ex 19:3; 23:12, and in Ex 23:8 =Deut
16:19, we + YIQTOL occurs in the second of two parallel clauses.
These cases can be explained from the peculiar rules of ellipsis
obtaining in poetry, as will be explored in Chapter XII.
If these remarks are judicious, only two undoubted cases of
non-volitive we + YIQTOL remain for the CBH corpus: Ex 24:7
quoted above and 2 Kgs 7: 12.

122 Although the tradition incorporated into the MT is generally very dependable,
a few cases have been discovered where late biblical and post-biblical
features have crept into the reading tradition. See the seminal article by
H. L. Ginsberg, "n"o~~ il1:J~," Tarbitz 5 (1934), 208-223 [Hebrew]. See
also J. Hughes "Post-Biblical Features of Biblical Hebrew Vocalization," in
S. E. Balentine and J. Barton (eds.), Language, Theology, and the Bible:
Essays in Honour of James Barr (Oxford 1994),67-80.
123
In
124 Deut 13: 12 the paragogic nun in I1N'~' could be a secondary feature.
See, e.g., Z. Ben-Hayyim, A Grammar of Samaritan Hebrew (Jerusalem
2000),4.
125 S
ee also: Ex 16:4; Lev 14:3,8,38; Num 32:17; 35:25.
T"

CHAPTER IX
THE VOLITIVE FORMS
As was argued in Chapter I, the first person cohortative, second
person imperative and third person jussive makeup a single
suppletive paradigm of affirmative volitive forms. The negative
counterpart is ~~ + cohortative in the first person and ~~. + jussive
in the second and third persons. In the singular, the paradigm is as
follows:
Affirmative
Negated
1 pro
coho il:mCN
~N + coho il~SN-~N
2 pro
imp. il~P.
~~ + juss. tc~l.:l~~~3 pro
juss. ";:1:
~~ + juss. 'r:r".-~~
In the plural, the paradigm is analogous.
T

Syntactically, too, the volitives are distinguished from YIQTOL.

While YIQTOL forms almost always occupy a non-initial position
(see Chapter VITI), volitives show a strong tendency to occur at
the head of their clause. 1 With forms that are ambiguous morphologically, position in the clause has a diagnostic function. An
indifferent form is in principle to be interpreted as YIQTOL when it
figures within the clause, but as a volitive when it opens the clause.
In regard to semantics, the volitives are modal, like YIQTOL
and WEQATAL, but they add a volitive nuance. They express the
will of the speaker.

It seems that the first scholar who realized this was Rosen, "Comparative

Assignment," 215. See more extensively Niccacci, "Neglected Point," and

Revell, "System," 14-17.

The Volitive Forms

314

Introduction

'ili,i!!,:,

!.'~"

!:I :!'~:'
::[,\:::1:"

Historically the Hebrew cohortative, imperative and jussive have

different backgrounds. 2 In biblical Hebrew, they drifted together:
their semantics and their syntactic behaviour are similar. In the
present work, as in most Hebrew grammars, these forms are
treated as representing one single paradigm. 3 This approach is not
self-evident, however, and a number of problems should be
recognized.

"li'II!I,
1"lli':I':',',
!,l'I'I',i!t[\'i'.\

l'ii,!!!II,I,
l,ilil:li',I',!'
I'WI'II:'l!

'lill\!IIII"
! i !I I'!l,~ i' , ,

Problems in positing a volitive paradigm

The main problem is that the morphology, syntax, and semantics
of the volitive forms all show some overlap with YIQTOL.

Ililli!',lli',!:!,

Illiill,II,\I",
II,III!,l\,!!,!
II\i,I,'\,II,I:I'::,'!
I !111:,!iill

11:li\,jli1i i

Ili:il':,lil',i

i
li\!11:l
1 ~lil: t:'"
li:I,t!!:I!:

Morphology
While the imperative is always morphologically distinct from
YIQTOL forms of the same grammatical person, this is not the case
for the cohortative and the jussive.
_ The cohortative form is usually distinct from YIQTOL, but

Chapter 9

are no longer attested. Some anomalies in the classical corpus may

reflect an early stage of the developments issuing in mishnaic
Hebrew. Others will be due to the unfamiliarity of later scribes
with the distinction between volitives and YIQTOL forms.
Syntax
The lack of morphological clarity has been compensated to
a certain extent by syntax. The volitives regularly take the first
position, YIQTOL a non-initial position in the clause (Chapter I).
The criterion is not watertight, ho\V~ver.YIQTOL may occupy the
first position in the clause, although this happens rarely and is
mostly limited to the beginning of direct speech (see Chapter
VIII).6 Conversely, the volitives sometimes occur in second
position? In this case, the constituent figuring at the head of the
clause is either focused or topicalized: 8

Jud 14:3

ili'I'i!!'

all other cases, the two forms are formally identical.

Even when distinct cohortatives and jussives are available, the
I:~i::,
forms are not always used where one expects them.' Cases where
'llil'!'l'!'l';i:,
a YIQTOL form occurs instead of an expected volitive, or vice
11~1~
versa,
are probably attributable to the fact that the Hebrew verbal
I
,ilill'II',!!,
system is undergoing a transition: the distinction between volitive
~"'i__~'__________'Y'_'_-I~~~,~Y~I~TO~L~is~sl:;;;:o:.,:;w:.:,I,-:e~roding. Indeed, in LBH the different
forms are still extant, but they noloIigerlmpIy"a'oiffereritmeaning
(see Chapter XI). In mishnaic Hebrew the cohortative and jussive
11'lt,'/"',:I:,::',
Illi"I!i'!!

See Rainey, "Hebrew Prefix Conjugation"; Dallaire, Syntax ofVolitives.

See Jotion, Grammaire, 114 (apparently this was an innovation of Jotion);
Bergstdisser, Grammatik, 10; Waltke and O'Connor, Introduction, 564-565.
4 The cohortative is attested for the verb ~':l and for the hiphil stem of ill-aleph
(~"Z,) verbs. Other instances are exceptional (see Isa 56:12; Ezek 26:2; 2 Chr

1:10).

See the exceptions discussed below in the sections on the cohortative and the
jussive.

"~".v.~ nl~: ~"0-":P "~-nR rll;1iN

Get her for me, for she pleases me. 9

Gen 22:5 n!D-i-i' n:J~j '17~jJ' "j~' 'i~nn-017 ne O:J~-1:lrzj

Stay here with th~ d~nl~~~;: tI~; -boy ;~d i will g~ ove~

~o::~:::~~:~! ~:-~~;:~t~r~:~;~~efnhs~~~ ;~~~4 of m-h

(ii"t,) verbs, some forms of II-W/Y (,"17 or ""17) verbs, some forms of
the hiphil and in some suffixed forms (see Chapter I, pp. 11-12). In

315

there. 1o

6 Note the following minimal "pair": 2 Sam 18:19 ,~~;:n'~ i1l~~~j ~~ i1~1'~; 2 Sam
18:22 ~~-i1~':1~ i1i? 'i:n; 2 Sam 18:23 y1'~ i17i-'iJ",. Twice Ahimaaz expresses
the wish to run and announce victory to King David, and twice Joab refuses
permission. The third time, Ahimaaz does not express a wish but announces:
"Come what may, I will run." The clause consists of a single word, thus
making it possible to use YIQTOL in first position. Contextually, the marked
non-cohortative and the absence of the particle ~j throw the contrast between
volitive and non-volitive forms into relief.
7 See Shulman, Modal Verb Forms, 240-249. Perhaps the cases where the
element preceding the imperative is a second person pronoun should be set
apart. In clauses with this structure, the pronoun functions as a vocative, and
vocatives stand outside the clause structure as such; see: Gen 9:7; Ex 28:1;
Num 1:50; 16:16; 31:19; Jos 6:18; 2 Sam 20:4 (the pronoun precedes a clause
with fronted adverb); 1 Kgs 12:4, 10.
8 For the definition of focus and topic see Chapter x.
9 According to the exhaustive research of Shulman, the imperative follows
another constituent in 61 out of 1515 cases in the prose of Genesis - 2 Kings.
Other examples with the imperative: Gen 8:17; 14:21; 19:17; 20:13, 15; 21:12;
23:6,15; 31:16; 42:18; 43:11,12,13; 47:6; Ex 12:32; 16:23; 17:5; Lev 8:3;
Num 16:6; 17:2; 31:17, 18; Deut 1:38; 2:4, 24; Jos 2:16; 22:8; Jud 6:20;
1 Sam 14:36, 40; 21:4; 28:11; 2 Sam 20:4; 1 Kgs 2:26; 13:31; 20:18; 2 Kgs
9:27; 10:19; 11:15; 16:15.
10

Other cases with the cohortative: Gen 33:14; Num 20:19; 2 Sam 6:22; 18:14.

The Volitive Forms

316

Gen 44:33

"~i~~ i~~ '.l7~ij riTjtl '91~.l7 ~r:lw:. i1I;l.l71

'''n~-Ol1 t,11" '17~i1'
T ...

;:l-"i1M-t,~ 1~i'" o.,t,~l1~iO"t, 1~,~~j' 1~t,

Come let us sell him

hands on him.l 2

~~ th~ Ish~aelite~,: ~~d no'~: iay ou~

Even though the examples of this construction are rare, the mere
possibility of putting a volitive in second position weakens the
diagnostic force of syntax.

Semantics
Finally, the semantics of volitives and YIQTOL also show some
overlap. In Chapter II, the relation between these forms was
described as a privative opposition. The volitives are modal,
irrealis, like YIQTOL, but they add the nuance that the process is
willed by the speaker. According to markedness theory, the
unmarked form may at times be used in contexts where the marked
form would be expected. This is precisely what one finds in the
present case. In practically all types of utterances normally associated
with the volitives-wishes, commands, requests-YIQTOL (and
WEQATAL) may be found as well. Appreciating the semantic nuance
between the two forms is not always easy.
In sum, neither morphology nor syntax permits the distinction
between volitives and non-volitives to be carried through in all
cases, and the semantics of the two groups of forms partially
overlap. At this point, the question arises whether a volitive
paradigm is to be reckoned with at all. One could instead consider
~=~~_'7~___ '_'~_m__ . rot prefixed fonns as rel'reseftttft~,1t-iSingle.~paraGigm . . exhibiting
a variety of forms and covering a range of modal meanings. This
view was in fact held by Hebrew grammarians before Wilhelm
Gesenius rediscovered the distinct function of the modal forms in
the nineteenth century.13 Nevertheless, there are good reasons to

Other cases with the jussive: Gen 1:22; Deut 1:11; 2 Sam 14:17; Job 3:4, 7.
12 Other cases with a negated volitive: Gen 19:8; 37:27; 45:20; Ex 16:19; 19:24;
Lev 10:9; Jud 13:14; i9:20; 1 Sam 9:20; 2 Kgs 23:18.
13 See Gesenius, Lehrgebaude, IV and 770-771.

11

317

continue postulating the existence of the volitive paradigm in

classical biblical prose.

-- :

Now, therefore, please let your servant remain as a slave

to my LORD in place of the boy; and let the boy go back
with his brothers.ll

Gen 37:27

Chapter 9

Positive reasons for maintaining the existence

of the volitive paradigm
A strong argument in favour of retaining the volitive paradigm is
the postulate that distinct grammatical forms usually express
distinct meanings. In addition, sundry observations confirm the
existence of two separate modal subsystems in CBH.

Different and indifferent forms

Where distinct volitive forms are found they almost always
e~press a distinct semantic nuance. In LBH and in poetical texts,
thIS correlation between form and function is less apparent,14 but in
CBH the cases where a morphologically distinct volitive does not
imply expression of the speaker's will, nor light subordination, are
extremely few. 15
If, then, the distinction between cohortative and YIQTOL, and
between jussive and YIQTOL, can be made in certain formal
categories, one is led to assume that the same distinction exists
with verbs whose morphology does not allow for distinct forms.
Indeed, it is illogical to suppose that the Hebrew language should
have volitive forms for certain morphological classes only. If it
was possible to say t,.l7~ "let him go up," in contradistinction to
i1~~~ "he will go up," one expects it to be possible to say i'1~ "let
him go down," even though the verb i'" does not overtly mark the
distinction between third person jussive and third person YIQTOL
In this connection it is relevant to point out that in other
languages too the distinction between moods can be partly
obscured in the morphology.16 In French, with verbs of the first
group (like aimer, donner) the present subjunctive and the present
14 More precisely, it is less apparent with regard to the cohortative and the
15 jussive. The imperative keeps a distinct function in LBH.
See below p. 334.
16 In English, the subjunctive is partially homonymous with the present indicative.
For. exa~ple in the clause "The principal suggests that Tom come early," the
subjunctIve takes a non-homonymous form, distinct from the indicative
simple present "comes.'" In "The principal suggests that Tom and Mary come
early," the subjunctive formally coincides with the indicative simple present.
See Driver, Treatise, 63.

The Volitive Forms

318

Chapter 9

indicative are homonymous in the singular: j'aime, tu aimes, il

aime (in the plural, distinct forms are used: nous aimions
[subjunctive] versus nous aimons [indicative]). In a clause like
"Dieu vous garde," the verbal form is therefore ambiguous; only
the context can tell whether "God keeps you" or "God keep you"
is intended. Similarly, a form like 1~~ should be considered
a jussive in a clause like that in Deut 20:6, even though the form is
indistinguishable from the normal YIQTOL form of this verb:
Deut 20:6

corpus of prose passages in the books of Genesis - 2 Kings, second

person YIQTOL forms occur in first position in the clause only seven
19
times. Strikingly, in three out of the seven cases the text seems not
to be in order.20 Of the four remaining cases, two occur at the
beginning of direct discourse, where clause-initial YIQTOL is
occasionally tolerated (see Chapter VID). Two cases remain one
'
with waw (see Chapter VIn, appendix), and one without. 21
Conclusion

;~~n ~~, O,::D l1~j-,tzjN tzj"Ni1-"~1

:.

: ....: - T;n"'~~

:l~;11~~

On t~~ whole, t~en, .the. viability, even the necessity, of positing

a vohttve paradIgm IS evident in spite of the problems reviewed
above.

Has anyone planted a vineyard but not yet enjoyed its

fruit? Let him go back to his house. 17

The position in the clause, the fact that it is coordinated with

a jussive form and the grammatical function show that 1~~ is
ajussive.
Light subordination
The use of cohortatives, jussives and imperatives in the function
of "light subordinates" has been explored in Chapter IV. In that
function, the volitives clearly form a paradigm expressing a distinct
nuance that cannot be expressed by YIQTOL or WEQATAL. 18

~~~-,-,---,~~,-

Absence of second person prefixed forms at the head

of the clause
A curious statistical fact confirms the view that YIQTOL and the
volitives make up two distinct paradigms: the near-total absence of
second person prefixed forms at the head of the clause.
If YIQTOL (with WEQATAL) and the volitives constitute two
distinct paradigms along the lines suggested in this work, this
wountteao one to exl'eet efY fe~0s-ef~seGOnd,person forms of
the prefix conjugation occurring in first position in the clause.
Indeed, in the non-volitive paradigm, the second person should be
expressed by non-initial YIQTOL or by WEQATAL, while, in the
volitive paradigm, the second person should be expressed by the
imperative. This expectation is borne out by the facts. In the entire

17

NRSV " ... he should go back ... "

18

The morphology of "light subordinates" is not always as one would expect,

however. As is noted in Chapter IV, YIQTOL forms turn up rather often instead
of jussives or cohortatives in the "light subordinate" function.

319

As i~ Chapter IV, the volitives will be sorted here according to

g~ammattcal person. This approach takes cognizance of the
dIsparate morphology of the volitive forms. In addition, volition of
the speaker affects the semantics of the form differently, according
to whether the subject of the process is (or includes) the speaker,
the addressee or a third person.

Cohortative
Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996), 196-239; Warren, Modality (1998), 171193; Jenni, "Kohortativ" (2002-2003).

Among the volitive forms, the cohortative is the one most often

missin~ wher~ ?ne would expect it. Where the clause links up with
an earher vohtlve, a question or another type of clause, we often
find we + first person YIQTOL, functioning as a "light subordinate "
ins~ead of the expected we + cohortative. 22 With the negation ~~,
whIch is used in volitive clauses only, first person YIQTOL also
19

Gen 15:15; 41:15; Ex 19:3; Num 17:25; Deut 19:3; 1 Sam 20:19; 1 Kgs
22:22. These seven cases form a dwindling minority compared to over
20 a thousand cases of second person WEQATAL forms.
In Num 17:25: a 3 fem.sg. qal form should be read (see BHS); for 1 Sam
20:19, see Dnver, Notes, 167; in Deut 19:3, a form of the verb pn "to
measure" is probably to be read (cf. the Septuagint).
21 As ~ill be shown in the chapter on poetry, both these instances can be
exp!~med as cases of ellipsis, with the verbal form virtually in second
pOSItIon (see Chapter XII, p. 429).
22 S
ee Gen 38:16; Jud 16:20; 19:11; 1 Sam 7:5; 11:14; 12:3; 2 Sam 10:12; 15:7;
17:2; 19:27,38; 1 Kgs 11:21; 12:9; 2 Kgs 4:10; 6:13 (for other examples, see
Chapter IV).

The Volitive Forms

320
23

occurs a few times instead of the cohortative. These inconsistencies witness to a kind of "laziness" in the language: where the
volitive character of the verbal form is indicated by other factors,
the marked form can be dispensed with. Indeed, when there are no
contextual markers, the cohortative mostly turns up where one
expects it. Notably, a first person form of the prefix conjugation
almost always takes the cohortative ending when it occurs in the
24
first position of the clause.
Third-weak verbs do not distinguish between cohortative and
YIQTOL in the first person. With these verbs, position in the clause
is an important diagnostic feature. An ambiguous form occurring
in clause-internal position is normally to be interpreted as
YIQTOL: 25

2 Sam 9:7

'~lj '97pll il~i~ itfz;~ ":p Nl"I:1-~~

Do not be afraid, for I will show [YIQTOL] you kindness.

In clause-initial position, the form is to be interpreted as a cohortative:

rz.;O~-j~ j1JO-Oll '~lj-il~ i~
2 Sam 10:2
I want to show [cohortative] kindness to Hanun son of
Nahash. 26

This rule of thumb is valid in practically all cases. The following

is a list of all relevant first-person forms of III-h (i1"t,) verbs in
Genesis: 27
_ First position, volitive meaning: Gen 1:26; 2:18; 6:7; 11:4;
19:32, 34; 30:31; 46:31.

Chapter 9

321

Non-initial position, non-volitive meaning: Gen 3:16; 16:2, 10;

18:29, 30; 22:17; 24:14, 45, 46; 27:37; 29:35; 30:30; 31:43;
32:21; 39:9; 44:9, 34; 46:4; 47:30.

In the classical prose corpus, there are no attestations of the

cohortative in passages where the volitive nuance is inappropriate. 28

In poetry, however, the cohortative is found in a few passages where

the volitive nuance is hard to perceive:

il:;'~N "~,, ,,~,~
In the noontide of my days I must depart. 29

Isa 38:10

T....

- T

:.

In this clause, the verbal form does not express volition or

readiness, but simply states the inevitable. Whether cases like this
have to be attributed to poetic licence or whether they admit of
another explanation is difficult to decide. 30

First person singular

The fundamental function of the volitives is to present a process as
proceeding from the will of the speaker. In the first person singular,
speaker and grammatical subject coincide. The cohortative, then,
indicates in principle that the speaker wants to engage in the process
expressed by the verb.
Volition and control
Where the verb designates a process controlled by the subject, the
form indicates that the speaker will do what is necessary to realize
his intention:

Gen 18:21

,,~~ it~iljJ rtOR~~fjJ it~i~1 N~-il"~

il17'N
N~-ON'
it~:!)
1fz;17T
TT
.:
TT

="&"'''~''"''''~="",>AA~'''''_~'''''=~

1 Sam 12:19; 2 Sam 13:25; Ps 25:W;r(;fif~2r:f3~ut~in the parallel, 2 Sam

14:14, the cohortative is used).
24 Exceptions in the CBH corpus are very few, and text-critically uncertain: Oen
30:32 (the Septuagint reflects a third person jussive); 1 Sam 30:8 (probably,
an interrogative n is to be added before the verbal form; see BHS); 2 Kgs 7:4
(with N':l, which here seems to behave as a III-aleph [N"t,] verb). In Oen
24:58, ,~~ is a regular YIQTOL form in a clause made up of one constituent
only. In poetry many more exceptions are found.
25 In the corpus of classical prose, the cohortative occurs in non-initial position
in only five passages (not counting cases with nnl1, p' and IN); see above,
note 10.
26 NRSV "I will dealloyaUy."
27 This list excludes cases of light subordination, for which see Chapter IV.

23

Excepting pseudo-cohortatives in the WAYYIQTOL form (Oen 32:6; 41:11;

42:21; Num 8:19; Jos 24:8 K; Jud 6:9, 10; 10:12; 12:3; 1 Sam 2:28; 28:15;
2 Sam 4:10; 7:9; 12:8; 22:24 and much more often in LBH). These cases are
to be explained as due to analogy: since the jussive appeared to be used in the
third person singular of WAYYIQTOL, the analogous cohortative was used in
the first person.
29 See also: Mic 4:6; Ps 57:5; Prov 7:7.
30 According to JM 114c n. 2, this is an erroneous use of an archaic form' but
'
the usage is defended by Warren, Modality, 190-191.
28

322

The Volitive Forms

I want to go down and see whether they have done

altogether according to the outcry that has come to me;
and if not-I want to know. 31

Ex 14:25

"~jfli" "JS~ ilC1~N O"j::~ j~~ll'

.. T'

~.,~~~~ Cj1~ onS~ ~i'n~ .,~

T:

.:

...

T:

The Egyptians said, "Let us flee from the Israelites, for

the LORD is fighting for them against Egypt. "32

With processes not controlled by the subject, the cohortative may

express a desire that something happen to the speaker:
Ps 69: 15(14)

o:~-"P.~~iP~1 .,~~ttr~ il7~~~

Let me be delivered from my enemies and from the deep

water.

The form can also express resignation:

Gen 46:30

o~~iJ ilI;l10~ =,~;.,-,,~ "~1f?': jt?~llj

1"~~-n~ .,t1;~i "10~

Israel said to Joseph, "I can die now [Zurcher Bibel: Jetzt
will ich gerne sterben], having seen for myself that you
are still alive."

While the basic function of the cohortative remains the same in all
these examples, lexical and pragmatic features lend the form a great
number of nuances. As these examples illustrate, the cohortative can
be used both in soliloquy and in dialogue.
The cohortative and the addressee
In dialogue, the relation of the cohortative to the "conative"
function of an utterance, i.e., the way it affects the addressee, is
particularly interesting. The form often occurs in passages where
the speaker seeks support for his action from the addressee:
"~~--"-_"~4_4M"~__~"-"---uerr-3j:~t5-- ~l:I~ ,~~., !:!~"'~l7?-~97F~N~=i"'t~~~,,~~ jt?~llj

So Esau said, "Let me leave with you some of the people

who are with me. "33
"I must go down and see whether they have done altogether according
to the outcry that has come to me; and if not, I will know." The NRSV and
'other modem versions are not very sensitive to the volitive nuance of the
cohortative. In the present section, divergences from the NRSV will not be
indicated systematically.
'
32 L iterally the Hebrew means: "Let me flee." The Egyptians are presented here
as one single person; see below, p. 324.
33 Other cases: Ex 4:18; Jud 8:24.

Chapter 9

323

Or requests permission:
2 Sam 18:19

l~~iJ-n~ ilj';~j N~ il~1j~

Let me run and carry tidings to the king. 34

This addressee-oriented nuance arises from the speech situation,

however. Other cases exist where the speaker does not seek
support or permission, but simply expresses his intention or desire
to engage in a given process:
=,O;"-i;li ::Jj "~1t?': jt?~llj
n1~~ OjCO~ 1~~j~' il:>'N
Israel said, "EnoughfM:y';~~'j~~eph is ~;iil aiiv~. 'I ~a~~
to go and see him before I die. "35

Gen 45:28

"0 "~:p

In a few cases, the course of action envisaged is expressly contrary

to the addressee's interests:
i1i:l~N OWli r-lj~~ jrzj~ n;j1~~j1-0li'
2 Sam 6:22
With the maidens of wh~~ yo~' h~~~ ~pok~n, wi~h ~he~
I want to get honour. 36

There is no suggestion here of David's seeking Michal's support

or permission for the action he envisages. On the contrary, David
expresses his desire to be honoured by the female servants for no
other reason than to hurt his wife at once as regards her nobility
and her femininity.
Special case
In classical Hebrew prose, the cohortative form always expresses
a volitive nuance. There is, however, one difficult case that needs
to be discussed separately:

Ex 32:30

j1'''~ j1~con on~con Or-l~ Olij1-"~ j1rzjb j~~ll'

o~t1~~b i~~-' il"~:>N-' ""~N- j1'~~-"~' j1~'li~ ~'r-llii

Moses said io' the people, ~'Yo~ have ~i~ed a g;~~t ;i~.'
But now I will go up to the LORD; perhaps I can make
atonement for your sin."

31 NRSV:

:: See also: Gen 18:30; 19:20; Num 20:19; 21:22.

Other cases: Gen 18:21; 32:21; Ex 15:1; Deut 17:14; note also the use of the
form in soliloquy: Ex 3:3, 17; Deut 12:20; 32:20, 26; Jud 16:20; 1 Sam
18:11; 2 Sam 14:15; Ecc1 7:23; 1 Chr 22:5.
36 See also: 2 Sam 18:14 (but see Driver, Notes, 329-330).

The Volitive Forms

324

The adverb "~1~ combines with QATAL, the predicative participle,

nominal clau~es and, very often, YIQTOL. This distribution is
expected because "~1~ defines the "epistemic" nuance of a statement,
i.e., the extent to which the knowledge of a situation is certain. The
combination of the word with a volitive form is striking, however,
since volitives are not associated with epistemic as much as with
"deontic" modality (see Chapter I, pp. 31-32). In the present case, the
meaning "perhaps I can make atonement" could presumably have
been expressed with "~1~ + YIQTOL. 37 Nevertheless, it appears that the
use of the cohortative adds an important nuance: Moses states that,
although he is not certain he can make atonement ("~1~), he wants to
try doing so (cohortative). The clause is an anacoluthon.

First person plural

The first person plural is much more complex than the singular.
"We" can imply a plurality of speakers, or a single speaker
associating others with him- or herself; in the latter case, "we" can
be inclusive, "I and you (singular or plural)," or exclusive, "I and
some other person(s), but not you (singular or plural)." The
speaker is included in the subject, but the two do not necessarily
coincide.
Plurality of speakers
In Hebrew, it is not unusual to find the first person singular when
a group is thought of as a single speaker:

Num 21:21-22

'9011:l~ i1'~H1 i1''';;~ '9tR~ iT'jP; iT~1'

Be exalted, 0 LORD in your strength! We will sing and
praise your power.

Ps 21: 14

Single speaker
In other cases, the first person plural does not imply a plurality of
speakers but one single speaker:
1 Sam 14:36

used:

'9~1~~ ~~-n'~lf~ ~~,~: i~ 'ti N"1

And Israel said to him, "Let us pass through your land." 39

The form is used very often, as in the preceding example, where

a speaker would like to engage in a process together with the
addressee(s). In this case, the "we" is inclusive, meaning "I and you."
Very often, the form serves to express a proposal:

See Gen 16:2; 1 Kgs 18:5.

See also: Ex 14:25 quoted above.
39 See also: Jud 20:32.

c"'n~ c"ii~~ "'n~ i1~~~

Deut 13:3(2)

C';17~' 'c~~,~~~~ i~N

":TT:

T:-:

.,.-:

Let us follow other gods whom ye have not known and let
us serve them. 40

Here, the speaker tries to influence the addressees and to elicit

their consent to act together with him. This "conative" nuance is
not necessarily present, however:

i1~;~ iT~~ '91~1 :li~ 4'P,~~ ~1~if 'tiN"1

1 Sam 9: 10

Saul said to his servant, "Well said. Come, let us go."

Since the servant himself has proposed to go to see the prophet,

Saul knows he will agree to his proposal. The clause merely
expresses his willingness to go together with the servant.
A special case of "single speaker" is when the speech is
represented as reciprocal:
Num 14:4 iT~"'~~ i1:l1tzj~,

In cases like this, the plurality of speakers is conventional or

fictitious. In reality, there will have been one salient participant

37

iT~;b _C~r;1~~~ ""10~ n'1~ ~1~if 'ti N"1

'R!:ljj 'i~-'.l1 Cz:r~ nt!:l~1

Then Saul said, "Let us go down after the Philistines by
night and despoil them until the morning light."

'9~1~~ n'~lf~ 'b~~ "ib~y-1~ti

"~--~-~~~"~--W~"~"W~fnottrell'aSsages, however;wthe-fil"st~"pers6ft"plufalis

325

expressing himself in the name of the collective. Real plurality of

speaker is possible in liturgical contexts:

In"Q-~~ C"~~~~ ~~r~~: n~~~1

Then Israel sent messengers to King Sihon of the

.
"Let me pass t h rough
Id
sayIng,
your
an ."38
Amorltes,

Jud 11: 19

Chapter 9

T:T:'

T:

roN'

i1~rI~ '''n~-~~ itl.,~ 1'~N'"

T l e T ..

: -

So they said to one another, "Let us choose a captain,

and go hack to Egypt. "41

40

38

41

Other examples: Gen 19:32; 31:44; 33:12; Ex 1:10; Deut 13:7, 14; 1 Sam 4:3;
1 Kgs 20:31; also Gen 1:26; 11:7 in divine speech.
See also: Gen 11:3.

The Volitive Forms

326

In other contexts, a single speaker refers to himself or herself and

others by means of the first person plural while addressing another
party in the second person:
J ud 13: 15 :

illn; 1~~~-~~ lji:ITt '~Nl!j

o"i.ll "i~ '9"~.~~ ilfg ~~110;N N~-il'~l?~

Manoah said to the angel of the

you and prepare a kid for you."

LORD,

"Allow us to detain

Chapter 9

imperative and similarly named forms in European languages.

While in Greek, for instance, the imperative usually implies some
form of command, the Hebrew imperative may be used also for
mere wishes. The difference may be illustrated with an example from
the Septuagint. While the great majority of Hebrew imperatives are
rendered with imperatives in Greek, one also finds a few cases where
the optative is used:
Deut 33:27 Kat eK~aAet <l1tO 1tpoaro1to'\) ao'\) ex9pov
AYOOV a1tolo\o

In such contexts, the cohortative often implies a request for support

or permission in undertaking the process:

Ex 5:3

1:1"~.v N1i?~ o"!~llv "ij~~ 1'~Nl!j

,~!~~ o"~; n~~r 111 N~ il~~~.

Then they said, "The God of the Hebrews has revealed

himself to us; let us go three days' journey into the
wilderness. "

327

And he will drive--out-theenemy -before you, saying,

"May you perish!"42

There can be little doubt that the Septuagint here reflects not the
MT' s i~~iJ "destroy" hiphil, but the niphal i~~;:t, expressing the

Here, the desire of Jacob to send the brothers to Egypt in order to

buy food is already evident; no request for support or permission is
necessary.

speaker's wish that the addressee should perish. This form was
correctly rendered with an optative: it is impossible to command
one to be destroyed. In Hebrew, accordingly, the imperative,
although very frequent in directive utterances, may be used in
other types of discourse as well.
The imperative is the prototypical volitive. Being unambiguously marked as second person by the zero morpheme, it is not
homonymous with YIQTOL in any instance. It is therefore always
immediately identifiable, unlike the cohortative and jussive. The
imperative is also much more frequent than the other volitive
forms.43

The cohortative expressing subordination

Directive speech acts

However, as with the first person singular, this "conative" nuance

is produced by the context only and is not always present:
Gen 43:4

1:1I!l~ 1:1"Dtcn~ lj~~~ '9r~-o~

~:?,k '9~ il'~tf/ ~1 il1i~

If you will send our brother with us, we are ready to go

down and buy you food.

Following another volitive, and occasionally also in other syntactic

constellations, the cohortative may be used as a "light subordinate"
-~~-"_"_~~~w~_~~_~_,exPIessing 111.lIRQSe Qr r~~ult:
W_~""""-----_~ ____""~,
Gen 23:4

.,~~~~ "Ij~ il'~i?ttl O:?,~ll '~R-ntc!~ .,~ 1:1I;1

Give me property among you for a burying place, so that

I may bury my dead out of my sight.

This use has been discussed with examples in Chapter IV.

Imperative
The imperative expresses basically that the speaker wants the
addressee(s) to enter into the process designated by the verbal
form. This makes for a slight mismatch between the Hebrew

Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996), 27-139.

In biblical prose," the imperative is used most often in utterances

that seek to influence the will of the addressee. The precise force
of the form depends on the speech situation.

The speaker is superior to the addressee

When a superior speaks to his subordinates-God to human
beings, the king to his subjects, a father to his children-the
imperati ve often expresses" an order or a command:

42

See also: Jud 9:19; Ps 128:5,6.

43 In 2 Sam 11-15 the imperative occurs about 56 times,the jussive about 21 times
and the cohortative about 11 times. These figures are typical for dialogue.

The Volitive Forms

328

pii~~ 1~~iJ '~Nllj

2 Sam 15:25

'''liO O"i:Tt,~O li'~rn~ :lqlO

Then the king said to Zadok, "Carry the ark of God back
into the city."

See also: Gen 26:16; 38:11; 43:31; 49:29; Ex 3:5; 4:3,27; 5:1,13;
16:16; Num 12:4; 16:20; 22:35; 24:10; 31:3; Jos 2:3; 3:10; 5:15;
6:18; Jud 3:19; 1 Sam 1:14; 13:9; 14:42; 15:32; 18:22; 19:15;
20:31; 25:19; 2 Sam 11:6; 13:9; 15:9,25; 1 Kgs 2:30; 13:13; 2 Kgs
2:17; 4:12; 20:7,18; and many more.
When the speaker is superior, the command must usually be
carried out even if the addressee is unwilling. The imperative does
not imply unwillingness on the part of the addressee, however.
Thus it may be used to grant permission:

"TJ"~.~~ "~1~ i1~.i} 1~~"~~ '~Nllj

Gen 20: 15

:lql "TJ"~.".v.~ ::li~~

Abimelech said, "My land is before you; settle where it
pleases you."

See also: Gen 23:6; 47:6; 50:6; 2 Sam 5:19; Jud 11:38; 20:28;
1 Sam 30:8; 2 Sam 2: 1; 1 Kgs 22:6, 15.
And the form may also be used in giving advice:
I,!

:1,,1,,"',,1,
'

inl"~ 1:l~ 1~~iJ '~Nllj

2 Sam 10:5

I , ~, I

,::,!

o~~~l o~~R~ n~~;-i.r;

The king said, "Remain at Jericho until your beards have

grown and then return."

Speaker and addressee are equals

In dialogue among equals, too, the imperative most often expresses
a command or a request:
'_""'''''''=W"~=~'_""'''''''__"'l''-'''''''''''A''''''''=~''''''''.w>

'

~~iT~"""~iT"MtIIt~"'""""''''i ... uL ,',....~~,

~"'."

I II ... ~'"

",.,' I~ -1-11 I

... ~" -;;'

' ... ~"~.,

So she said to Ab;~ha~~ "Ca;t o~t this ~iav~ ~~~a~,' and

her son."

See also: Gen 19:9; 20:13; 32:27; Jud 14:15; 15:12; 19:22; 20:3;
1 Sam 15:1; 19:17; 1 Kgs 2:22;44 5:20.
But again, the form does not imply unwillingness on the part of the
addressee. Notably, it may be used in invitations:

44

In this verse, the imperative is used ironically (see similarly Amos 4:4).

329

Chapter 9

Gen 24:31

i11'; 11'~ Ni:O '~Nllj

n:~iJ "n"~~ "~j~l r1n~ ib~rJ i1~~

He said, "Come in, 0 blessed of the LORD. Why do you

stand outside when 1 have prepared the house?"

01~~-t,~ 0'19-1~~ '~Nllj

1~-nR tzj~101 tzj~~iJ "~-1~

Gen 14:21

Then the king of Sodom said, "Give me the persons, but

take the goods for yourself."

The first imperative expresses a request, the second a proposal that

is in the interest of the addressee.
The speaker is inferior
Where humans speak to God, a subject to his king, or a child to his
father, the imperative is used very often to express a request or an
entreaty:
,bNt, '''::IN 'i~n-t,N O::ltzj '~Nll'
i1~~~ .nNTij ~1~~iJ-M~ .,~~nR

Gen 34:4

So Shechem spoke to his father Hamor, saying, "Get me

this girl to be my wife."

See also: Gen 27:34; 47:19; Ex 10:7; 17:2; 1 Sam 6:2; 11:1; 12:10;
1 Kgs 12:4, and many more.
When the speaker is inferior and has no power over the addressee,
the imperative is frequently accompanied by formulas of
politeness or entreaty:
Ex 4: 13
But he said, "0 my

nt,tzjM-i"~ Nj-nt,rz.; "j'1N .,~ '~Nll'

pie~se -~eni so~~o;e ~ls~.",' -

LORD,

See also: Num 11:28; 1 Sam 24:12; 28:22; 2 Sam 20:6.

While inferior speakers cannot grant permission to their superiors,
they can express acceptance of what their superiors intend to do to
them:
O::l"j"l1~ ,tzjll::l' ::li~~ .,t,-1rDl1 O::li"::l "jji1 "j~j
But as for me, 'h~r~ :1 a~ -i~ yo~r hand;. ri~ :~ith: ~e '~s
seems good and right to you.

Jer 26: 14

See also: Jos 9:25; Jud 11:36; 1 Sam 3:10; 14:36,40; 2 Sam 19:28,
and perhaps Num 11:15; 1 Kgs 3:26; 19:4.

The Volitive Forms

330

331

Chapter 9

'I'

Non-directive speech acts

Warren, Modality (1998), 170-17l.

Much more rarely, the imperative is used where the speaker does
not intend to influence the addressee. Roughly, the examples fall
into two categories.

Blessing and well-wishing

Where God blesses his creatures, the use of the imperative comes
very close to the one described in the preceding section:

'bN~ o"H~~ ol;lk 'l~;j

O"~"::l O"~i1-l"1N 1Nr,~1 1::l'1 1'5)

Gen 1:22

- -

The addressee is not the agent of the action commanded

In specific situations, a speaker may authoritatively demand that
a process should happen over which the addressee has no control
(see Chapter III):

Gen 42:14-16

iO~ O~~ 1n7~ ... =,Qi" tJv~~ '~~"j

1'9~ij O~~l O~"T)~-l"1~ nR:l

I",i

Ex 8: 1(5)

li!'1

iii'!;"

T T:

ii/

III1

iii,'

lif"1

And of Zebulun he said:

out."

~~Rejoice

-:

Zebulun, in your going

See also: Gen 27:29; Prov 5:18.

Similarly, in utterances that are not formal blessings but mere
expressions of well-wishing, the imperative may be used to state
the desire of the speaker in regard to the addressee's future,
irrespective of the capacity of either to bring this desire about:

oi~~7 ":;>7 '~~"j .,~.v. 1';;:1

'~~~-l"1~ It1: ~~l~: "H~Nj
i~17~ M~N~ 'rVN

1 Sam 1: 17

O""'1k;iJ-~';; l"1iy~iJ-~';; '9~~f '91;-l"1~ i1~~

Aaron will be able to produce frogs only because God commanded

him, through Moses, to do so. The will of the speaker completely
overshadows the agency of the subject.

'9PN~f 1~1::l\n~fq ,~~ 1~1::l\~1

Deut 33:18

::

...

-:

Then Eli answered, "Go in peace, and the God of Israel

grant the petition you have made to him."

I,II' !!:, I

i:l

And they blessed Rebekah and said to her, "May you,

our sister, become thousands of myriads."

liO~-~~ 'b~ i1rgb-~~ i1~i1; '~~"j

And the LORD said to Moses, "Say to Aaron, 'Stretch out

'i:",'.'1
your hand with your staff over the rivers, the canals, and
'.I .',!.I:.'.~"~',-~~~~~~--",",~""-,,,".'
... ___,,_-1b~J120Is and ,make, frogs COm~.!1JLQ!!.1heJ;;tl!c:tQf Egypt'"

n~ 1'~~"j i1R~"'1-l"1~ 1~1~;j

i1::l::l, "!j~N~ ""M
MN- 1Jl"1hN
'""1:
..-:

Gen 24:60

O:l;;~ rl~-~';; o"srrl~;;iJ-l"1~ r,,pijl O"iP~~Y-~';;l

li:ll!

...

But the imperative is also used in blessings by human beings who

merely wish that their words should become true:

As in its other usages, the imperative here expresses the will of the
speaker; its literal meaning is "I want you to be incarcerated. ,,45
Unlike other instances, however, the will of the speaker is not to
be realized by acting upon the will of the addressee.

In the preceding examples, the process willed by the speaker is of

itself non-agentive. In a few cases, however, even agentive
processes can be commanded in this way:

See also: Gen 1:28; 9:1, 7; 35:11; Jer 29:6b.

And Joseph said unto them ... ((Send one of you, and let him
fetch your brother, and ye shall be kept in prison." [KJV]

Other examples: Deut 32:50; Num 5:19; Isa 44:27; 49:9; 60:1;
Ezek 16:6. 46

God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and

fill the waters in the seas."

Similarly: Gen 44:17; 1 Sam 1:17; 20:42; 25:35; 2 Kgs 5:19; Jos
22:7-8.
Ps 11 0:2

'9"~;k :J1R,f

Mji

li"~ i1~i1; n~~: '9'\~-i1~~

The LORD sends out from Zion your mighty sceptre. May
you rule in the midst of your foes. 47

See also: 2 Kgs 19:29; Isa 37:30.

See also: Ps 128:6. 48

45
46

JM 114o; Warren, Modality, 170-17l.

In other passages, non-agentive verbs occur in an imperative clause functioning
as a light subordinate: Gen 20:7; 42:18; 2 Kgs 5:10, 13; Isa 45:22; Ezek 32:19.

It is also possible to take the second clause as subordinate: " ... so that you
may rule ... "
,
48 For cases of curse or ill-wishing, see Num 32:23; Isa 8:9; 23:4.
47

332

The Volitive Forms

In prayers, the imperative may express the desire of the speakers

that God should be exalted:
Ps 57:6
Be exalted, 0 God, above the heavens.

The imperative used as an interjection

Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996),63-65; Diehl "Imperative" (2004).

Some verbs of movement and perception-notably l~it "to go,"

~':l "to come," o'i' "to stand up," and it~, "to see"-occur very
often in the Hebrew Bible. 49 As a result of frequent use, their
meaning shows signs of wearing. Notably, in the imperative, these
verbs are used in ways approaching that of discourse markers
without lexical content. The imperatives are turning into interjections. In deciding whether an imperative has turned into an
interjection two criteria may be used. First, when the imperative
governs an object or an object clause, this tends to show that it
preserves its full verbal force. However, where the imperative
stands isolated, or where it is connected to the preceding or
following clauses by a mere waw, the interjectional interpretation
becomes possible:

Ah, the smell of my son is like the smell of a field that the
LORD has blessed.

While it~' has a wider meaning than English "to see," it is

doubtful whether it covers olfactory perception. It is better,
therefore, to take the imperative here as a mirative interjection
roughly equivalent to itjit. 50
Even where they function as interjections, the imperatives of
l~it, ~':l and o'i' almost always occur in contexts expressing the
will of the speaker. The imperative of it~', however, tends to
occur in contexts where thevQIitiyenuance is practically absent:
Deut 1:8

Here the transformation of the imperative into a mere grammatical

element appears to be complete. 51
The imperative expressing subordination

The imperative may be used as a "light subordinate" expressing

purpose or result when it follows another volitive form, a question
or a modal statement:
Isa 45:22

'~H"~1 "~"~ i~ O"D~~ it~"1

See, God is witness betwixt me and thee. [KJV]

Secondly, where the lexical meaning of the verb appears not to fit
the context, the imperative may be considered to function as an
interj ection:
'C4~___F_'_C_ _=_~~_~~

__
c

CC

c_

~-~~~"i"!-o~it~~~'-n:Jw~j-C1i:J

T :

T:

T:

Now sit up [literally: stand up and sit] and eat of my game.

Gen 27:27

49

it,it"
;~'::l
'W~
itift)
T:
-:..
.,' -:
.,' T

n",:!)
-

.. :

"j::l
.:

n", itN'
-

..

Whether ii;;:t "come on" belongs here depends on whether one considers this
element to be derived from a verb (attested in Aramaic, Arabic and Ethiopic)
or not. In biblical Hebrew, only imperative forms are found, but the meaning
is verbal, "give," and the forms may govern a direct object. From a strictly
Hebrew perspective, this may be an interjection that turned into a verb.

f'1~-"~~~-~f 117rt/~01 "~~-1j~

Turn to me so that you may be saved, all the ends of the

earth.52

Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie
with him.

Gen 31 :50

f'1~o-n~ o~,,~~~ "t:1Ij~ it~"1

See, I have set the land before you.

;~S; it~:P~~l 1:~ 1j"~~-n~ itR~d it~7

Gen 19:32

333

Chapter 9

This use has been discussed with examples in Chapter IV.

Jussive
Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996), 159-176.

Historical and comparative considerations show that, in ProtoHebrew, the volitive and non-volitive prefix conjugations were
distinct in all cases: jussive (and preterite) *yaqtul was opposed to
non-jussive *yaqtulu. The loss of final short vowels in the history
of the Hebrew language largely effaced this opposition. Only in
a limited number of morphological classes was the distinction
maintained, notably in the singular of third-weak verbs, hollow
verbs and the hiphil (see Chapter I). Third singular suffixes, too,
Compare 2 Sam 7:2 with 1 Chr 17:1, and see Jer 1:9-10.
Note the singular used in addressing a group (similarlyDeut 11:26).
52 NRSV "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth."
50
51

The Volitive Forms

334

were attached differently to the jussive and to YIQTOL (jussive

1ir'1~~: versus YIQTOL 1~1~~:). In all other forms, the jussive and
YIQTOL coincide morphologically.
To a certain extent, the problem of the morphological similarity
of jussive and YIQTOL can be overcome with the help of syntax.
A prefixed form in non-initial position is to be identified as YIQTOL:
;"i~

Lev 26:4
And the trees of the field shall yield

ir1~jj Y.P.l
their fruit.

Ttl:

[YIQTOL]

But in first position it is to be identified as jussive:

Num 5:21
The

LORD make

ir~~~ 1tl;~

ir'V'; Ttl:

[jussive] you an execration.

The jussive occurs in non-initial position only rarely. Where

another constituent precedes the jussive, it is almost always
strongly focused in one way or another: Gen 1:22; 44:33b; Deut
1: 11; 15:3; Job 3:4.53 These rules would in theory permit the
jussive and YIQTOL to be distinguished in most cases.
In practice, however, one observes a certain amount of
amalgamation between the jussive and YIQTOL, even in classical
biblical prose. In particular, the following aberrations may be
signalled:
a) Jussive forms occasionally occur where analogy would lead one
to expect YIQTOL. Thus after temporal or conditional particles:
t~, 1 Kgs 8:1 = 2 Chr 5:2; ";:', Ex 22:4;54 also following ~", Gen
,"
24:8; 1 Kgs 2:6; Ezek 48: 14.55
i;ii
In a few cases, the ostensible use of the jussive is due to morphological
'ii;!':':!
irregularities of the verb in question. This explanation certainly applies to
",':i'!
some forms of the verb Psy and probably to forms of swj as well. 56
IIil:1
b) In clause-initial position, one finds an occasional jussive instead
~-~~',-'----~~'~--~-or expectea WEQATAL: 5'l Numlo:S;T'~anrTO:5; 2 Srull 5:24;
1 Kgs 14:5.

Chapter 9

335

c) Conversely, one finds a few distinct YIQTOL forms in first

position expressing a jussive meaning:
Gen 27 :31

;jf ,.,~~ "~~"1 ":;l~ cR~ ''':;l~~ '~~"j

And he said to his father, "Let my father sit up and eat of

his son's game."

2 Sam 14: 17

ir01j~~ 1~~jj "~'~-';l ~~-ir~0".

May the word of my LORD the king bring me rest.

[NIV]

Similarly: Gen 41:34; 2 Sam 15:26; 2 Kgs 20:10; Prov 9:4, 16;
Ruth 1:8 K. In these cases one wonders whether the original text
may have had the jussive form (see the qere in Ruth 1:8). See,
however, Chapter XII, pp. 433-434.
d) Against expectation, one finds a few second person jussives not
preceded by ,,~: Ex 19:3; Num 17:25; 1 Sam 10:8. 58 Since the
volitive function is normally expressed by the imperative in the
second person, these cases are anomalous.
As was argued above, these irregularities do not justify
disregarding the jussive as a verbal category in its own right. They
do show that the system of classical prose is on the verge of
a development in the course of which the jussive will disappear.
NB. In LBH, the jussive form turns into a syntactically conditioned allomorph
of YIQTOL, as will be explained in Chapter XI. Otherwise, the jussive behaves
normally in most of the prophetic and poetical books (see in more detail Chapter
XII). In the book of Job, however, the jussive is used in a seemingly anarchic
manner. Although there are a number of jussives in volitive passages (e.g., Job
3:4, 6, 7, 9; 6:10; 9:33, 34; 11:6; 12:7; 13:5; 21:2; 27:7), many jussive forms do
not have jussive meanings: Job 10:16, 17; 13:27; 15:33; 17:2; 18:9, 12; 20:23, 28;
22:28; 23:9, 11; 24:14; 27:8, 22; 33:11, 21, 27; 34:29, 37; 36:14, 15; 37:4, 5;
39:26; 40:9, 19. The jussive form is used freely in non-initial position: Job 23:9,
11; 24:14; 27:8; 39:26; 40:19. There are even a few instances of first person
jussives: Job 23:9, 11. The use of the jussive in Job is unlike both classical and

late usage. But it is unclear to which rules, if any, it obeys.

53 See above pp. 315-316. In 1 Sam 10:8 the second person jussive form is
suspect: there are hardly any second person jussives in biblical prose, except
following z,~.
54 See also: Job 27:8; but in Job there are many cases of anomalous jussives (see
below p. 335).
55 The first person jussive in 1 Sam 14:36 is highly unusual. Perhaps instead of
,~~~ the niphal ,~~~ should be read?
56
.
.
See Chapter I, notes 7 and 8.

57 See also the appendix in Chapter vrn.

58 For Ex 19:3, see Chapter XI, p. 406; for Num 17:25, see above, note 20; for
1 Sam 10:8, see note 53 ..

336

The Volitive Forms

Commands and requests

Volitive forms typically occur in dialogue. They belong, in Buber's
terms, to the realm of "I and thou."Third person volitives are
therefore per se atypical. They are used where a speaker wishes to
influence a person or a thing absent from the speech situation.

Utterances acting immediately upon the third person subject

In practice, this type of speech act is limited to very specific situations.
Mortals do not normally have the power to influence things absent by
word only. God does:

,iN "i1"
: t:l"H~N

*:: '~~I!'

Gen 1: 3

*:

Then God said, "Let there be light. "59

And so do the prophets when they are speaking in His name:

2 Kgs 1: 12

t:l:~~iJ-F~ rv~ ,,~ .,~~ t:l"H~~O rzj.,~-t:l~

'Tj"~~O-rl~l 'Tj~k ~:;l~rll

If I am a man of God, let fire come down from heaven
and consume you and your fifty. 60

This type of jussive can occur also where the utterance is

"performative," i.e., where it brings about what it announces. The
attested examples of this usage are very few:
'Tjl~l=1 "i); 1~

Gen 30:34

1ij 1~~ '~~I!j

Laban said, "Good. Let it be as you have said."

By agreeing to Jacob's proposal, Laban establishes the contract

between them; by saying, "Let it be so," it is so.
Jud 5:24

"~"f.iJ ,~O rlW~ ~'p'; t:l"rq~ .,'j!ltr;l

Most blessed of women be

J ael, the wife of Heber the

The words pronounced by the angel of YHWH effectuate Yael's

blessing.
Some of the blessings and curses listed below should perhaps
also be listed in the present section. According to one conception
59

60
61

See also: Gen 1:6, 11, 14,22,24; Isa 47:3.

The form ij~ could be YIQTOL or jussive, but the position in the clause shows
that the latter is meant.
Again the form is ambiguous, but the clause structure shows that it is to be
taken as a jussive.

337

Chapter 9

of the speech acts involved, blessings and curses are capable of

bringing about the process they evoke (see Num 22:6; Prov 26:2).
It is preferable, however, to treat blessings and curses employing
the jussive as wishes.

Utterances acting upon the addressee

Much more often, the jussive is used to influence the addressee. In
many passages, the third person jussive disguises an utterance in
the second person:
Gen 41:33

~-~~-o~r;rl-li=~ rzj"~i1171~ N'~

i1r;'l.i11

t:l:'l;;~ rl~-~.i11i10"rq",

Now therefore let Pharaoh [i.e., you] select a man who is

discerning and wise, and set him over the land of Egypt.

2 Sam 24: 17
.,~~ rl":;+il 1 ":;1 'Tjl; N~ "i)tr;l
Let your hand, I pray, be against me and against my
father's house.

See also: Gen 33:9; Deut 15:3; Jud 15:2; 1 Sam 26: 19a; 2 Sam 14:17;
24:22; 1 Kgs 22:13; Mic 5:8; Ps 22:27b; 33:22; 80:18; 119:173.
But even where the jussive is not an imperative in disguise, the
speech act often involves the addressee:
Gen 44:33

'.i1~iJ

rlr::Ttl 'Tj"lil.i1 Ni-:1~:. i1r;'l.i11

'''MN-t:ll: t,l:" 'l:~i1' "J"N~ i:ll:
T""

--

---:.

-: ...

Now, therefore, please let your servant remain as a slave

to my LORD in place of the boy; and let the boy go back
with his brothers.

The first jussive refers virtually to the first person,62 the second to
the third person, but both clauses formulate a request to the
addressee.
Similarly: Gen 13:8; 44:33; Deut 20:5-8; Jos 7:3; 2 Sam 19:38;
1 Kgs 17:21; 20:32; 2 Kgs 2:9; 5:8.

Wishes, blessings and curses

In addition to the directive speech acts enumerated above, the
jussive is fairly frequent also in utterances expressing the mere

62 The sentence adverb

verbal form
ajussive.

::l~;.

iiI;l,!;1 stands outside the clause structure proper, and the

occupies the first position, showing that it functions as

The Volitive Forms

338

339

Chapter 9

desire that some process should happen without implying an

attempt to act on the will of the subject or the addressee.

See also: 1 Sam 10:24; 1 Kgs 1:25, 31, 34, 39; 2 Kgs 11:12; 2 Chr
23:11.

Wishes
The jussive expresses a wish when speakers have no control
whatsoever over the actions that they want to take place. Often the
subject of the action is God:

However, the pragmatics of the expression are rather different. In

all its occurrences in the Bible, the formula implies recognition
and acclamation of a new king. "Long live the King" means as
much as: "I/we accept this person as king over us."

'b~~ '10;" ;~~-n~ ~1i?t:1j

Gen 30:24

'1J~ 1~ .,~

And she named him Joseph, saying, "May the

to me another son."

nV'; '10~

LORD

add

Blessing and curse

It is natural to find the jussive used to express a wish in
expressions of blessing and well~wishing.Where the blessing is
pronounced by God, it may have performative force:

See also: Gen 31:49; Ex 5:21; 1 Sam 1:23; 24:16; 26:19b; 2 Sam
2:6; 24:3; 1 Kgs 8:57; Jer 28:6; 42:5.
Some of these clauses typify the biblical attitude that ascribes all
events to YHWH's agency. But the same mode of expression can be
used where the subject of the action to be taken is another god:
Jud 6:31

;nf~~-n~ rtl~ .,~ ;~

::1,: ~1n t:J"H~~rt:J~

Gen 1:22

God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill
the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth."

But where humans speak in this way, no performative force is

implied:

If he is a god, let him contend for himself, because his

altar has been pulled down. 63

The jussive may also be used in wishes that have no religious

component:
."., "nM-~~ ,~~ ~1~rzj,
'T O~Mrzj~S-'~ ;::1-"iln~
For Saul thought, "I will not raise a h~n'd' ~gainst hi~;
1 Sam 18: 17

;~

let the Philistines deal with him."

See also: 1 Sam 18:21; 2 Sam 18:22,23;64 2 Kgs 2:10; Mic 4:11;
the third person stands for the first in Num 23:10; for the second in
1
1:31.
Grammatically, the expression "Long live the king!" has the form
of a wish:
2 Sam 16: 16 '1~~iJ "l'J; '1~~iJ

'I,,: t:i~~:t~-~~ "~1n '~N!lj

nv,;

See also: Gen 9:26, 27; 48:20; Ex 10:10;65 Num 6:24, 26; Deut
1:11; 28:7-9, 12; 33:6, 24; 1 Sam 2:20; 20:13; 1 Kgs 1:37,47;
10:9; Ps 113:2; Prov 5:18; Job 1:21; Ruth 2:19; 2 Chr 9:8.
Similarly, some curses are formulated as wishes using the
jussive:
p~~ '9~1~ '~~-n~

Deut 28:24

nv,; Ttl:

May the LORD change the rain of your land into dust. 66

See also: Deut 28:20, 22, 25, 27, 28, 35, 36,49; Ps 35:6; Mal 2:12;
Ps 12:4; 69:23, 26.
Problematic case

Lev 15:24

i1nk rzj"~ ::1::Jrzj" ::1~rzj t:J~'

t:J"~" n1'::1rzi TN~to" , .. ~;: ~n"':TjT "iln~
-T

-:

OT:

TT

TT

.,

65 Coming from Pharaoh, "Let the LORD be with you" is probably ironic.

See also: Jud 6:32.

64 In 2 Sam 18:22, 23 (quoted above in note 6), the expression il~

.,

,~.cr '9.,~~ ,.,~~

,~~
The LORD make his face to shine upon you, and be
gracious to you.

Num 6:25

Hushai said to Absalom, "Long live the king! Long live

the king!"

63

1::111 1'=f 'b~~ t:J"H~~ t:Jt;lk '1'~;j

r":),~~ ::1'~ '1;1'01 t:J .. ~:~ t:J:~iJ-n~ 1~~~1

"come
what may," is not a real wish but a formulaic speech act corresponding more
or less to English "I don't care."
';:1""

"The LORD will change ... " The verbal form is ambiguous, but its
position in the clause indicates that it is to be considered a jussive (note the
jussive form in verse 36).

66 NRSV:

The Volitive Forms

340

If a man lies with her, then let her uncleanness be upon

him [?]-he shall be impure seven days.

Several readings have been proposed for the remarkable jussive in

this verse. Some exegetes have argued that the second clause continues
the protasis: "If a man lies with her and her menstrual uncleanness
comes on him... "67 This interpretation is hardly compatible with the
grammar, however. One would expect WEQATAL. 68 Moreover, the use
of the paronomastic construction shows that the intercourse itself is
considered the most important element of the condition. The
woman referred to is the menstruant mentioned in verses 19-23:
"If he sleeps with her ... !"69 Nevertheless, the jussive may still be
part of the protasis, if it is regarded as a light subordinate: "If
a man lies with her so that her uncleanness is transmitted to
him ... "70. However, since the transmission of the woman's
menstrual uncleanness to the man is a new piece of information, it
would be better to take the second clause as an independent
utterance expressing a wish. In this case, it should be considered a
first apodosis: "If a man goes so far as to have intercourse with her
(i.e., with the woman having her period), in that case, let her
uncleanness come upon him: he will be impure for seven days"
(like the woman herself). The use of the volitive in a legal text
would be an expression of the legislator's outrage.

Chapter 9

unsurprising, therefore, to find that volitive forms are not always

used following t,~, even where they exist. Thus we find t,~ with
a first person YIQTOL instead of the expected cohortative:

See, e.g., G. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus, NICOT (Grand Rapids 1979),
215, 220: " ... should a woman's period commence while she is having
intercourse with her husband ... " The Septuagint and the Peshitta render the
verse similarly.
68 Hardly' + YIQTOL as proposed in JM 167e.
69 See J. Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16, Anchor Bible (New York 1991),940-941.
70 See Driver, Treatise, 213.'
71 In 1 Sam 27: 10, cr;JtprgPf-z,~ is probably corrupt; see BHS.

o;t,~:t~-t,~ '~~iJ '~N!lj

1~7~ 1~~ N~-t,~ "~f-t,~

2 Sam 13:25

But the king said to Absalom, "No, my son, let us not all
go. "72

Or we find t,~ with a second or third person YIQTOL form instead

of an expected jussive:
Gen 19: 17

'9"10~ to.,~tI':'~~ '9~~~-~.i1 ~~~i) '~N!lj

He said, "Flee for your life; do not look back."73

In such cases, the function of the syntagm appears to be the same

as when a marked volitive form is used. Functionally, the forms
following t,~ are to be considered volitives.
Conversely, the jussive (never the cohortative) turns up a few
times with the particle Nt,. The certain examples of this
phenomenon are few:
Gen 24:8

'9"10~ n~~~ jJ'~O jJ~Nn ~t,-o~l

jJ~~ :uP.tl Nt, "~f-n~ pj nNT "I:1~~~~ tl"iNl

But if the woman is not willing to follow you, then you

will be free from this oath of mine; only you must not
take my son back there.

Negated volitives
The negation of the volitive verbal forms requires t,~. Conversely,
t,~ in principle occurs only with volitive forms.71 An ambiguous
form following t,~ is to be considered a volitive: jJ~i~-t,~ (Gen
21:16) is t,~ + cohortative, and Nl"r;l-t,~ (Gen 15:1) is ~~'+ jussive.
~~~.~~~~~. ~~~~~~.~_~~~~_,__,~~~~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.~~j~~~~~~~,evenwhenitis
used in isolation, suffices to mark a volitive expression, the
combination of t,~ with a volitive is doubly characterized. It is

341

1 Kgs 2:6

t,k~ r:jt,~f ;n~"w "in-Nt,l '9P~=?O:P tl.,tQ~l

Act therefore according to your wisdom, but do not let his

grey head go down to Sheol in peace. 74

The examples occur in directive speech, which may account for

the jussive form. Syntactically, however, the ostensible jussives
occur in environments where one expects YIQTOL: non-initial
position in the clause (Gen 24:8); following WEQATAL (1 Kgs 2:6).
Semantically, too, the YIQTOL form is possible in these examples. 75
It is preferable, then, to suppose that the jussive form in these

67

72

See also: 2 Sam 13:25; 1 Sam 12:19.

73 Contrast 1 Sam 16:7 O~l.:l-z,~; see also Jos 1:7; 2 Sam 13:12; 1 Sam 25:25;

Jud 6:18; Jer. 17:17; Prov 23:22; Job 3:9 (contrast Job 20:17); Neh 3:37;
2 Chr 32:15.
74 Other cases: 2 Sam 17:12 (but 'Oi:l may be parsed as QATAL); Ezek 48:14.
Cases with the verbs 01n and =,0' are to be excluded here (above, note 56).
75 See Chapter II, pp. 67-69.

The Volitive Forms

342

Chapter 9

passages arose in the later reading tradition and does not reflect the
grammar of CBH.
Finally, it should not be forgotten that N~ + YIQTOL
encroaches upon the domain of the volitives in the function of
"light subordination" (Chapter IV).

First person
The syntagm ~~ + cohortative is found only a few times in the
CBH corpus. It indicates that the speaker does not wish to engage
in the process designated by the verb. When the process is not
subject to human control, the syntagm implies a wish that
something should not happen to the speaker:
2 Sam 24:14

'''~n' O":::l,-":;' ii'ii"-''':l ~~-ii~S~

n7~~~~~: 01~-'~~~
T

-:

The LORD appeared to Isaac and said, "Do not go down

to Egypt; settle in the land that I shall show you. "

-:

'TJ~7ri~1 ~~~ no~'i~~~

The particle ~~ may be added to bring out the personal nature

of the request. Being enclitic, this particle attaches itself to the
negation:
Num 22: 16

,;s:;;-r~. 1'7~ ,~~ ii~

"7~ ~~t'J~ 17~~lj N~-"~

Thus says Balak son of Zippor, "Do not let anything
hinder you from coming to me."

Far less often the negated jussive is found in the expression of

wishes:
Gen49:4

In the plural, .and with a process subject to human control, the

syntagm implies a call not to behave in a certain way:

Jer 51:6

'''1~~r~f-~~ iI~"~i?~-~~11;rzj~~ 1ii~~11;:'~

Come let us strike him with the tongue, and let us not
heed any of his words.

In one case, the cohortative combines with ~~:

il7""k

2 Sam 18:14
'TJ"~.~~
1~-N~ :l~;" '9 NlI j
J oab said, I will not waste time like this with you.
In this case, however, the force of the negation falls on the adverb I;:'.

Unstable as water, you shall no longer excel.

j:'t~i~~ 1T01t:'l-~~ ;tV~~ tV"~ 1~~~1 ~~~ 1;r-l~ 10~

Flee from the midst of Babylon! Save your lives, each of

you! Do not perish because of her guilt. 76

See also: Jer 29:6.

Third person
The use of ~~ with third person jussive mirrors the positive use
of third person jussives. Very often the syntagm implies a direct
or indirect appeal to the addressee:
1 Sam 19:4

'11~ ;~~~:p 1~Wij N~O~-~~

The king should not sin against his servant David. 77

person

Ex 16:19

Shulman, Modal Verb Forms (1996), 141-148.

ii~"'~~ "rJ-~~ '~NlI' ii'ii" ,,,~~ ~'1I'

'TJ"~~ :;~k ,~~: r-i~~ 1~~
T : T:'

....

'R!!l-'~ 1~W~ 'Oi"-~~ tV"~ OV~~ iirgb '9NlIj

And Moses said to them, "Let no one leave any of it over

until morning. "78

In Hebrew, as in other Semitic languages, the imperative is used

only in positive clauses. Its negative counterpart is ~~ + second
person jussive. The syntagm is very frequent as an expression of
negative commands or requests:
Gen 26:2

I prayed to the LORD and said, "LORD God, do not destroy

the people who are your very own possession."

See also: Gen 21:16; Jer 17:18; Ps 25:2; 31:2, 18; 71:1; 1 Chr
21:13.

::;e4~0l1la

ii'ii" ,,~.,~ '~k' ii'ii"-~~ ~t;,sn~'

Deut 9:26

Let us fall into the hand of the LORD, for his mercy is
great; but let me not fall into human hands.

Jer 18:18

343

It is also possible to read the clause as a light subordinate: " .. .lest we perish
because of her guilt."
77 Similar examples: Ex 8:25; 32:22; 1 Sam 22:15; 2 Sam 13:32, 33.
78 Similar examples: Gen 21:12; 31:35; 44:18; 45:5; Ex 16:29; 36:6; Deut 20:3;
Jud 6:39; 1 Sam 17:32; 2 Sam 11:25.
76

The Volitive Forms

344

Even where the command applies to a third party, the utterance

often imposes the execution upon the addressee:
Ex 5:9

il:::l-1fli17'" C"rajNil-~17 ili:J17il i~~M

T

-;-;

'R~-"i.~i~ ~;~:-~~'l

Let heavier work be laid on them, then they will labour

at it; and let them not pay attention to deceptive words. 79

The syntagm is also used in non-directive utterances, expressing

a wish, a blessing or a curse:
2 Sam 3:29

171~~1
T:

:::ItT :::lNi"
T

..

UT

In the function of "light subordinate," ~~ + volitive is attested only

a few times.

il.v~tptc~~l o"~~ "~~"~iJ

Go to Pharaoh in the morning. 81

The implication here is: "I want you now to go to Pharaoh

tomorrow." See similar examples with "tonight" (Jud 9:32);
"tomorrow" (Num 16:7, 16; 22:8, 19; 2 Kgs 10:6); "on the third
day" (1 Kgs 12: 12).
In other passages, the temporal clause shifts the entire speech
situation into the future:

Rescue me from sinking in the mire.

1 Sam 10:7

The regular negative counterpart of the subordinate volitive is N~

+ YIQTOL, as was demonstrated in Chapter IV.

Concluding reflections
The enumeration in the present chapter illustrates the functional
consistency of the volitive subsystem in main clauses. There are
admittedly a number of exceptions. Non-volitive forms, notably
YIQTOL, are encroaching upon the volitive domain. And occasionally, a jussive form is used without volitive meaning. The volitive
system is fraying at the edges. Nonetheless, in classical prose, the
~-~~~~~$"-~-"~~a4Yal-~~~the distinction ~betweenvolitive and nonvolitive forms is still very much in the preliminary stages.

Volitives and the "here and now"

The function of the volitives is by nature tightly linked to the
speech situation. Proceeding from the will of the speaker, the
temporal benchmark of direct volitives is almost always the time

Other examples: Ex 19!24; 34:3; Jos 7:3; Jud 13:14; 1 Sam 21:3.
80 See also: Ex 20:19; Deut 33:6; 1 Sam 20:3; 1 Kgs 20:11.

79

1R!:l~ il171~-~~ ;~

Ex 7: 15

-:

light subordination

345

of speech. The default reading of the volitives is: "I want this
process to happen now, or from now on." But the link between the
volitives and the time of speech is not infrangible. Occasionally,
the connection between the speech situation and the force of the
volitive is loosened. In a few cases, it is only the expression of the
will of the speaker that is located at speech time, while the process
is to be realized later. In this case, the future time frame must be
specified by means of an adverbial expression:

n"~~ n1~"-~N'

And may the house of J oab never be without one who has
a discharge, or who isleprous. 8o

Ps 69:15(14)

Chapter 9

;~ il~~O ninko il~~:::l~ ":P il:Ol

"Tn: N:;~r:'l 1~~ 1~ nfP, ~

N ow when these signs meet you, do whatever you see fit

to do. 82

Here the construction implies: "After these things will have

happened, then I want you to do whatever needs to be done." The
same effect is found where the volitive forms the apodosis in
a conditional sentence:
1'~.l1~ Ci~~ :::liO 1~~" il~-C~
i~~~ il171il iln~~-"~ 17~ i~ il1n" ilin-CN'
If he says, 'Good!' it will h~ well ;~th yo~ serv~~~'; bu~ if h~

1 Sam 20:7

is angry, then know that evil has been determined by him.

The force of the volitive applies only when the second condition is
met. See also: Lev 15:24; Num 5: 19; 32:23; Deut 28:20, 22, 24,
25,27,28, 35, 36,49;83 2 Kgs 2:10.
In the preceding examples, speaker and audience are transported
into a future time frame. In one rather curious passage, Ob 11-14,

Similarly Ex 8:16; 9:13; 1 Sam 19:12; 29:10.

See also: 2 Kgs 19:29; Isa 37:30.
83 The curses in Deut 28 are dependent on the condition formulated in verse 15.

81
82

346

The Volitive Forms

they are transported to a past time frame. The passage is clearly

situated in the past by the introductory verse 11: "On the day that
you stood aside, on the day that strangers carried off his wealth,
and foreigners entered his gates and cast lots for Jerusalem ... " The
following verses contain a number of volitive clauses pertaining to
what Edom should not have done at that point in time:
Ob 12

i'=?~ Oi"~ 1"1}~-Oi"~ Njt1-t,~l

Oi:::lN oi"~ i1i1i1"-"~:::l~ n~forl-t,N'

T: T

n7~T Oi~~ "~.,'~ t,-:t~~-t,~1

But you should not have gloated over your brother on the
day of his misfortune, you should not have rejoiced over
the people of Judah on the day of their ruin, you should
not have boasted on the day of distress. 84

Although there is probably no better way to render the verse into

English than is done here in the NRSV, the Hebrew seems to imply
something like: "(On that day) I did not want you to gloat over
your brother ... "
The connection between the volitive function and the time
of speech is further loosened where the volitives express light
subordination.

Direct and indirect volitives

This brings us back to the question how volitives used in main and
subordinate clauses relate to one another. Materially, the forms
used as ttdirect" and ttindirect" volitives (using Jotion's
terminology, JM 114 and 116) are practically the same. Moreover,
the use of forms expressing volition in purpose clauses is well
attested in other languages. From representing a process as
~_"#"~~~."".""~""""""_~"w~J~nLQ.n the will of th~ sEeaker, !!!~_~<:>!~!!y"e~ could easily be
adapted to express dependence on another process.
There are some characteristic differences between the usages.
While in main clauses the imperative is far more frequent than the
cohortative and jussive, in subordinate clauses the imperative is
somewhat less well attested than the other two. In subordinate
clauses it is the jussive that has the most occurrences. Direct
volitives are limited to direct speech, while indirect volitives occur
a few times in narrative.
84

Similarly verses 13-14. See Konig 190b.

Chapter 9

347

The possibility of "uncoupling" the volitives from the actual

speech situation, illustrated in the examples of the preceding
section, shows that the difference between direct and indirect
volitives is not absolute. Although it is in principle connected to
the statement itself and to the person making it, the force of the
volitives can be transposed to a non-actual situation, in the future
or even the past. The unlinking of the volitive nuance from the
speech situation has extended even further with indirect volitives.
But the potential for doing so is already well attested in direct
volitives.
All in all, then, the coherence of the volitive system, as it functions
in main and subordinate clauses, is sufficiently established.

CHAPTER X
VERBAL FORMS IN TEXTUAL PERSPECTIVE
In Chapters V to IX, the verbal forms have been described as
formal categories with a basic meaning apt to be modulated in the
light of contextual and pragmatic factors. It is also possible,
however, to change the perspective and to view verbal forms as
components of a larger whole, namely, the text. 1 Textual functions
and Tense-Aspect-Mood (TAM) functions have at times been
played off against one another. Scholars have .argued that the
Hebrew verbal forms do not express tense, aspect or mood, but
discourse functions such as foregrounding. 2 It is more reasonable,
however, to suppose that the grammar does encode TAM functions
and that discourse functions reflect the exploitation of these TAM
functions in a textual perspective. 3 Nevertheless, these textual
dynamics do not flow directly from the more basic TAM functions
and deserve to be described in their own right.
Some of the tenets of text linguistics, such as the necessity of
distinguishing narrative from discursive texts, have already been
employed in the preceding chapters. In the present chapter, a few
other concepts elaborated in discourse linguistics will briefly be

The text-linguistic or discourse-linguistic approach to the Hebrew verbal

system was inaugurated by Robert Longacre and Alviero Niccacci in the
1980s and has had a very large following. See the bibliographical surveys in
C. H. J. van der Merwe, "An Overview of Hebrew Narrative Syntax" and
"A Critical Analysis of Narrative Syntactic Approaches" in E. van Wolde, ed.,
Narrative Syntax and the Hebrew Bible, Biblical Interpretation Series 29
(Leiden 1997), 1-20 and 133-156.
2 In general linguistics this was argued extensively, but unpersuasively, by
Weinrich, Tempus. In regard to biblical Hebrew, see, e.g., Niccacci, Syntax of
the Verb, and Longacre, Joseph.
3 See Joosten, "Indicative System," 51-57.
1

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

350

presented. First, however, some preliminary reflections on clause

structure and word order will be offered.

Word order in verbal clauses in biblical Hebrew

In order to function within a text, verbal forms first need to be
incorporated in a clause or sentence. The building blocks of texts
are not individual verbal forms, but clauses. This means that the
interest in discourse factors necessarily entails close attention to
clause structure. Within the clause, the verbal form will often be
the most important element-occasionally indeed the only one.
Nevertheless, the interaction between the verb and the other
constituents of the clause is of paramount importance in textual
perspective.
The reverse is not true to the same extent: discourse factors
determine Hebrew word order only in part. The question of word
order in biblical Hebrew is very complicated. Many different
factors, not all of them well understood, come into play. In what
follows, some of the main parameters will be briefly presented.

The formal structure of the verbal clause in classical prose

Gross, SatzteilJolge (1996).

Verbal clauses in biblical Hebrew exhibit a great variety of shapes.

Minimally, the clause can consist of a single word:
Num 17:27
"Weare lost!"

Even such one-word clauses have inner complexity. The verbal form
joins a subject, expressed by the pronominal affix, to a predicate,
expressed by the root and the stem, and adds a verbal meaning
~,~"~>c'~~'-~"'~~~'~Qeffi1oo1i11effils' of tense, 'aspecrmrd""-mootl:4 'Inregard to "word"
order, however, the verbal form is fixed. The order of its component
parts cannot be changed.5
The verbal nucleus-the sole obligatory component of the
verbal clause-can be extended in various ways:

See the insightful study of Goldenberg, "Verbal Structure."

the participle, the order of subject and predicate is not fixed; see Chapter VII.

5 With

Chapter 10

351

a negation, or an interrogative or affirmative particle may

precede it;6
the particle ~j or a personal suffix designating the object may
follow;
an infinitive absolute may come either before or after the
conjugated form.7

To the verbal nucleus, extended or not, other constituents may be

added:
- an explicit nominal or pronominal subject;8
- direct or indirect objects {or-object clauses), according to the
valency of the verb;
- a prepositional phrase designating the agent (in passive clauses);
- adverbial phrases of different kinds. 9
These other elements may precede or follow the verbal nucleus
according to rules that are only partly understood. In prose, it is
rare to find two different constituents preceding the verbal nucleus,
and exceedingly rare to find more than two.
Finally, the verbal clause as a whole can be linked to the
context by one or more conjunctions or sentence adverbs such as "
,~, ilrll7, t~~, ~:J~, t~~, .,~. These conjunctions come at the head of
the clause and do not seem to have any direct effect on its inner
structure.
In the light of what has been said thus far, the Hebrew verbal
sentence in main clauses can schematic all y be represented as
follows: 10

When a negation does not immediately precede the verbal form, it usually
negates only the element it precedes, not the entire clause.
7 For the precise syntactic status of such an infinitive, see J. Joosten, "Three
Remarks on Infinitival Paronomasia in Biblical Hebrew" in D. Sivan,
D. Talshir, C. Cohen (eds.), Zaphenath-Paneah: Linguistic Studies Presented
to Elisha Qimron on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday (Beer Sheva
2009), *99-*113.
8 Such an explicit subject stands in apposition to the pronominal subject
contained in the finite verb.
9 For the distinction between necessary and accessory components, see Gross,
10 SatzteilJolge, 26-27 (Syntagmen) and 38-39 (Circumstanten).
See Gross, SatzteilJolge, 139.
6

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

352

Conjunction(s) Constituent 1

Constituent 2

Nucleus

Post-verbal
constituents ll

~abagnuP

We
Catta
we
we/gam
wetatta
we

lhaga
Cfrag
hamibbaZCage Yhwh
hera
hanniS'arfm
c
kol-ha am hazzeh cal_meqomo

danannf
napn
yaCaleh 15
yiilag
ciilU
nasa 18
yabo~
1O~- psar

~ano/sf

~elohfm13

~elohfm/se/sarf >14

el16
Cal-hammaqom
hazzehlthas/:zifj17
~ ei-mel;zaya

besalOm 19
bereblmibbeisiil
2O
Cag- C olam

haster J asnr panay/bayyom

haha '21

NB. This presentation is not complete. Some clauses have more than two
preverbal constituents. A vocative may figure at the head of the clause,
apparently without being considered as a preverbal constituent. Clauses with
a casus pendens form a separate category. Moreover, the scheme does not take
account of subordinate clauses or clause-clause relations (see Chapter IV).

Many different factors determine the precise form a verbal clause

will take in biblical Hebrew. Some functional aspects of word
order will be discussed presently.

11

For post-verbal constituents, see L. Lode, "Postverbal Word Order in

24-39; Gross,

"~~~"~"~~-~-'"~llcarPfose:~Sfrucfure anttf-illlfctlon~"""Semttics"-~(1984),

SatzteilJolge, 206-404.
"We are lost" (Num 17:27).
13 "God has judged me" (Gen 30:6).
14 "God has given me my hire" (Gen 30:18).
15 "Judah shall go up" (Jud 1:2).
16 "And lrad begat Mehujael" (KJV, Gen 4:18).
17 "Moreover, is it without the LORD that I have come up against this place to
destroy it?" (2 Kgs 18:25).
18 "And the rest fled to the hill country" (Gen 14:10).
19 "And all these people will go to their home in peace" (Ex 18:23).
20 "Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house" (2 Sam 12:10).
21 "On that day I will surely hide my face" (Deut 31:18).

12

Chapter 10

353

Word order and TAM functions

Peckham, "Tense and Mood" (1997); DeCaen, Placement (1995); Cook,
"Semantics" (2003).
In some recent writing on Hebrew grammar, the idea has been
expressed that tense and mood are sensitive to verb movement.
The same verbal form is held to express different TAM functions
according to whether it occurs at the head or in the body of its
clause. 22 The hypothesis is revolutionary but essentially wrongheaded.A brief argument against it allows us to revisit some
important principles of word order." "
Clause-initial volitives versus clause-internal YIQTOL
As was pointed out in Chapters VIII and IX, YIQTOL tends to occur
in a non-initial position in the clause, while the volitive formscohortative, jussive and imperative-tend to head their clauses.
With indifferent forms, word order is therefore diagnostic. Word
order helps in deciding whether the prefixed form represents
YIQTOL or a volitive:
Gen 16:5

'9"~."~1 .,~.,~

i'T'V';

tQe~:

May the LORD judge [jussive] between you and me.

Ps 82: 1

oe~: O"H~~ ::l'lR~ ~~-n,~~ ::l~ O"H~~

God has taken his place in the divine council; in the

midst of the gods he holds judgment [YIQTOL].

This does not mean, however, that the function of the form is
determined by its position in the clause. YIQTOL and the volitives
are distinct forms, even where they are superficially identical:
while the form in the second example goes back to the *yaqtulu
form, in the first example it goes back to *yaqtul (short form).
What happens is not that position in the clause modifies the
semantics of the prefix conjugation, but that position in the clause
helps to distinguish the long form (YIQTOL) from the short form
Gussive) of the prefix conjugation. Similarly, position in the clause
helps in distinguishing first person YIQTOL from cohortative forms
when they are superficially identical, as in the case of third weak
verbs.
22

The first author to propose this idea was Peckham, ''Tense and Mood." He
was followed by DeCaen, who developed this idea further; see DeCaen,
Placement, 277-302.

Verl?al Forms in Textual Perspective

354

The placement rules of YIQTOL and the volitives are not obligatory
and unqualified. A few times, YIQTOL does occur in first position
(see Chapter VIII, pp. 265-266). The volitives are found in second
position in about five percent of the cases (see Chapter IX, pp. 315316). These exceptions too show that what lends these forms their
modal nuance is not their position in the clause.
The position of QATAL
Holmstedt, Relative Clause (2002),138-139; Cook, "Semantics" (2004), 265.

The idea that verb movement affects TAM functions has been
invoked also to explain the modal meaning of WEQATAL. Now,
23
WEQATAL is indeed always clause-initia1. But it is doubtful that
its modal meaning is connected to its position in the clause. As
was established in Chapter VIII, WEQATAL expresses practically
the same modal nuance as clause-internal YIQTOL:
j:lI;1~1:Jr;1-n~ ~~Q1$1 'TFrl~cn~ l1'~1:1 c., ~~ tC~l
For six years you shall sow your land and gather in its yield.

Ex 23: 10

Deut 31:29

11n1)~tI nlj~iJ-"~ "I:1i~ "lO~

"f:1 SrI;

.,~

C:?,I;1~ "I:1"1:? ,~~ 1l'iJ-l~ Ctl1Q1

For I know that after my death you will surely act
corruptly, turning aside from the way that I have
commanded you.

,-~-----~--

In these examples, WEQATAL and YIQTOL have identical TAM

functions although they do. not occupy the same position in the
clause. The alternation between these two verbal forms is
a mechanical one: in clause-initial position WEQATAL is used, but
when the first position is occupied by a different element
(a temporal clause, an infinitive absolute), YIQTOL is used instead.
This mechanism makes it doubtful that the modal function of
wEQATALSIiould fie QUe to its poSition iirnreuclaiise~
This conclusion can be argued also from the other end.
QATAL, without waw, occurs in clause-initial position with its
normal indicative meaning. In direct speech, clause-initial QATAL
is regular in its normal, indicative function:
Gen 31: 1

Chapter 10

355

See also: 24 Gen 27:35; 30:6, 18, 20; 38:24; 39:17; 42:28, 30; 45:9,
16; Lev 15:3; Num 14:9; 22:14; Deut 13:15; 15:9;22:27; 25:7; Jos
7:11; 10:17; Jud 7:14; 16:2,24; 21:6; 1 Sam 4:7,17,21,22; 6:21;
10:2; 13:4; 14:29; 15:12, 28; 18:7; 21:12; 23:7; 26:8; 29:5; 2 Sam
3:23; 5:20; 6:12; 12:18; 13:30; 15:10, 13; 16:8; 19:3; 1 Kgs 16:16;
21:13, 14; 2 Kgs 2:15; 8:7, 13; 9:13, 18; 22:9; Jer 24:1; 42:19;
Amos 4:2; 5:2; 7:3, 6.
In narrative, clause-initial QATAL is less usual but not unattested.
Notably, it is used in authorial comments (see Chapter VI).25 It is
also found a number of times where its. function appears to be
close to that of W AYYIQTOL, although admittedly some of the
examples are philologically uncertain (see Chapter VI).26
If position in the clause were a factor in determining the
meaning of QATAL, one would expect it to fulfil a modal function
in all these examples.
QATAL, without waw,'occasionally expresses a modal meaning
(see Chapter VI). But again, this phenomenon does not appear to
be linked to position in the clause. In CBH prose, this usage is
found only in questions or with certain particles, precluding the
use of clause-initial QATAL. But even in poetry, where the usage
occurs more freely, it is in no way linked to first position in the
clause.
The sequences of the participle and its subject
The one instance where word order does affect TAM functions, and
more precisely the aspectual nuance of the clause, is that of the
participial sequences. As was argued in Chapter II and Chapter VII,
the sequence subject-participle has a progressive-imperfective
meaning while the opposite sequence expresses the perfective
aspect.
The sequence of a participle and its subject is not entirely
analogous to the sequence of YIQTOL or QATAL and other
constituents (see Chapter VII). Subject-participle is comparable to
the prefix conjugation (yi-qtol) , participle-subject to the suffix
conjugation (qatal-ta). This difference accounts for the peculiar

1j"~~~ '~~-~f n~ :J~~: MR7

Jacob has taken all that was our father's.

23

For apparent exceptions, see Chapter VIII, note 7.

24 The list contains only examples with an explicit nominal subject.

25 Examples with an explicit nominal subject are rare: Gen 18: 11; 1 Sam 5: 11.
26 With an explicit subject: Num 11:8; 2 Kgs 15:19.

356

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

dynamics of word order in participial clauses in biblical Hebrew

(see Chapter VII).
Conclusion
Except in the case of the participle, word order in biblical Hebrew
does not affect temporal-aspectual-modal functions. Nevertheless,
it appears that some constraints on word order are linked to the
TAM system. Notably, the tendency of the volitives to head their
clause is at least partly due to reasons of linguistic economy-i.e., the
necessity to distinguish forms that were formally homonymous-and
not to discourse factors.
The default word order in classical Hebrew prose
Muraoka, Emphatic Words and Structures (1985), 1-46; Gross, SatzteilJolge
(1996); Buth, "Word Order" (1987); Holmstedt, "Word Order" (2005).

Much effort has been invested in determining whether there is

a neutral or default order in verbal clauses. Most grammarians
suppose that this is indeed the case: all other things being equal,
the constituents of a verbal clause will follow a basic sequence.
Divergences from the basic sequence imply some specific
function, marked by the word order. To determine the default
order is not easy, however, and expert opinions differ. The
discussion has centred mostly on the relative order of the verb and
the grammatical subject. The explicit nominal or pronominal subject
is not an obligatory element in the verbal clause, but when it is
present it plays an important part. Moreover, its position is
relatively free. The verbal nucleus and the subject usually follow
one another. Other elements will come between the verb and the
subject only in specific circumstances. 27 Two main sequences are
~~__._~.__._. .~~s1ed~and_rleciding_~ch_llD~~js ..JllQnL.~~nQnn.al" is not selfevident. While a majority of grammarians hold the basic template

Chapter 10

to be Verb-Subject (v-s), 28 a vocal minority insist that it is SUbjectVerb (S_V).29

Statistics
In deciding whether V-S or S-V is the normal sequence, grammarians
have taken into account statistical data. When one counts clauses
with an explicit nominal or pronominal subject in the classical prose
corpus, V-S clauses tum out to outnumber S-V ones by about five to
one. 30 These global statistics mask important differences, however.
The lion's share of V-S clausesiu'biblical prose have WAYYIQTOL
as verbal nucleus.

A different approach is to count not individual clauses but clause

types. 31 Here too, the V-S sequence comes out on top, although less
clearly so. WAYYIQTOL clauses allow only the sequence V-So
Clauses with a volitive as verbal nucleus also show a strong
predominance of the V-S sequence. Purpose clauses subordinated
with particles like 117~" or "~17~ and relative clauses introduced by
,rzj~ also prefer the V-S word order. In clauses with a predicative
participle, the sequence S-V dominates. More precisely, in
narrative only the sequence Subject-Participle is found, while in
reported speech Subject-Participle is about four times as frequent
as the reverse. In clauses with other verbal forms the two
sequences are more evenly distributed.
Numbers would lead one to recognize V-S as the basic sequence in
classical prose. However, the diversity of the data does allow some
leeway. By selecting one type of clause as being in some way
basic, or by excluding one or more types of clauses, the statistics
can be altered dramatically. A common procedure applied by those
who argue for a default S-V sequence is to exclude W AYYIQTOL
See, e.g., Ewald, Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch, 306; GKC 142; Lambert, Traite,
1277; Muraoka, Emphatic Words and Structures, 30; JM 155k; Waltke and
O'Connor, Introduction 129; Jongeling, ''vso Character"; Moshavi, "Discourse
Functions"; Buth, "Word Order."
29 See, notably, Jotion, Grammaire 155k; Gross, SatzteilJolge, 165; DeCaen,
Placement; Holmstedt, "Word Order."
30 In Gen 6-9, the v-s word order is attested 76 times, the s-v order 15 times
(these statistics include clauses where a short element comes between the
two). In this same corpus, there are 118 verbal clauses without explicit subject.
31 This method is followed by Goldfajn, Word Order.
28

27

Prosodic factors playa big role in this regard: a short pronoun or adverb may
come between the verb and its subject. See, in more detail, Gross, SatzteiJfolge.

357

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

358

Chapter 10

359

clauses on the grounds that this verbal form allows only the V-S
sequence. The premise is correct, but whether it warrants the
corollary may be doubted. It seems hazardous to disregard a large
proportion of the data. Moreover, to say that the use of
WAYYIQTOL brings about the v-s sequence is hardly accurate. It
is, rather, the other way around: in narration, the option for the V-S
sequence normally leads to the use ofWAYYIQTOL. 32

the verb (s-v-O ~ O-V-s). Such "triggered inversion" is found in

several other languages. 35
Since the existence of "triggered inversion" in biblical Hebrew
is a mere postulate that cannot be proven, the argument does
nothing for establishing s-v as the default word order. Nonetheless,
it weakens the typological argument taken from clauses like the one
in Deut 10:15 quoted above.

Typological arguments

The functions of S- V clauses

Moshavi, "Discourse Functions" (2006).
In deciding which type of clause is the neutral one, functional
considerations weigh more heavily in the scales than statistics or
linguistic typology. Scholars arguing for v-s as the basic sequence
have been able to suggest good reasons for the existence of the
reverse sequence. The reason why the subject was preposed is
not always easy to determine, but a number of cases are well
understood. When an explicit subject figures before the finite verb,
it often functions either as focus, providing salient new information,
or as topic, picking up on the preceding context. 36 The s-V sequence
also characterizes the circumstantial clause, in which the subject is
neither focused nor topicalized.

A different argument in favour of the basic V-S template is the

observation that the pre-positioning of elements that are focused or
highlighted does not usually lead to the sequence x-s-v, as might
be expected in an SVo language. 33 When a focused or highlighted
element is put at the head of the clause, the subject normally
follows the verb (x-v-S):
Deut 10: 15

0I;liN ;,~t7~~

;''1!'; p~O '9"p!:l~~ pj

Yet the LORD set his heart in love on your ancestors alone.

Although YHWH is the God of the universe, he attached himself

especially to the ancestors of Israel. The implicit contrast between
"your fathers" and all the other nations is what caused the prepositional
object to be put in :first position in the clause. 34 The clause looks as if it
were derived from a more basic v-s-o sequence by moving the
focused element to the head of the clause (v-S-o ~ o-v-S).
Perhaps this argument is too simple, however. No native
speakers are available to confirm that the basic clause type from
which the x-v-s structure was developed is indeed v-So The
dynamics of word order are complex. Several scholars have argued
that the preposing of a given element may itself cause further
changes in the structure of the clause. Perhaps the basic clause
v'-'.~o""u
4pustred" the subject after

Focalization of the subject

The subject is regularly put before the verb to mark it as the new
and salient information. The procedure has been called focalization:
. the preposed element is the focus of attention in the clause. The
function is particularly clear in question-and-answer schemes. When
the Israelites ask who will go up first to take possession of the land,
the answer is:

Jud 1:2

'-'.I.'-'.l.Jl.l.'-'.I."'.

Another way to eliminate WAYYIQTOL from the discussion is to postulate that

some amorphous element comes between the waw and the verbal form, and
that clauses with WAYYIQTOL are therefore not really verb-initial.
33 Only with the participle are clauses of the type x-s-v regular: Gen 37:16;
Deut 9:4, and many other examples. With QATAL, the only example in prose
may be 2 Kgs 5:13. The word order s-x-v is more usual: see, e.g., Gen 48:5;
Lev 17:11; 1 Kgs 6:7; Isa 10:7.
34 Other examples: Deut 4:14, 20; 7:20; 14:2; Jud 1:21; 2 Kgs 9:10; 21:16; see
Gross, SatzteilJolge, 178-180, 195-196.
32

Judah shall go

Up.37

See Gross, Satzteiljolge, 141; Holmstedt, "Word Order," 151.

The concepts of focalization and topicalization are able to account for a large
proportion of clauses where an object or an adverbial phrase figures before
the verb. All authorities agree that the verbal nucleus in the Hebrew verbal
clause normally precedes all constituents other than the subject. When
a direct or indirect object or an adverbial phrase precedes the verbal form,
the word order is marked. See Gross, Satzteiljolge, 138-142; Moshavi,
"Discourse Functions."
37 See also: Gen 3:11-12; Jud 6:29; 1 Sam 26:6; 2 Sam 11:21; 1 Kgs 22:20-21.
35

36

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

360

The subject comes here in answer to an explicit question and

clearly provides the crucial information contained in the clause.
The focalization of the subject accounts for the S-V word order.
Similarly, in the following sentence, the subject of the last clause
is highlighted by dint of the opposition to the other possibilities
mentioned earlier:
Jud 8:23

O~::l "j::l
'o'

' :

'

'o'

O~;-: z,rz.;O~
... T

:.

Topicalization
Where the subject represents a topic related to the foregoing
context, it may be marked as such by being positioned before the
verb:

n:~ iZ, 1~"J ;,~~~ liO~ :lP~~l

But Jacob journeyed to Succoth, and built himself a house.

After the dramatic exchange between Esau and Jacob, Esau goes
his own way (verse 16). The next verse then goes on to the subject
of the other brother: "Now as to Jacob, he journeyed to Succoth ... "39

rz.;N,

o;,"'n~

;,~~O l":;,11 "T[~"~ n"~~ ;'~"~1

"T[~1rzj; Niil rt,vlt l":;,11 "T[~lt 1":;,11

:lp.,v

lioj

O"'~O iT~;"

As Pharaoh drew near, the Israeli~e~-:l~ok'~d b~~k, a~d

there were the Egyptians advancing on them .

T:

What is at issue in this clause is who will rule over the Israelites:
Gideon, his son, and YHWH are considered as alternatives. This
information structure has led to the preposing of the subject in the
last clause.

Gen 3: 15

0v"~".p.-n~ Z,~1o/:-"~,~ 1~o/~j :l"jp;:-r iT17l~1

Ex 14: 10

"n'il"

I will not rule over you, and my son will not rule over
you; the LORD will rule over yoU. 38

Gen 33: 17

361

Circumstantial clause
The S-V word order also characterizes circumstantial clauses. No
special emphasis falls on the subject, but the whole clause is
subordinate to the preceding or the following clause:

O~::l "j~ Z,rz.;O~-NZ,

Z,rz.;O"-NZ"
:

Chapter 10

1~~1rzjr;'1 iltl~l

I will put enmity between you and the woman, and

~~"~"_~_""_7X~~""_"'"~"_',_ _ _ _ltetween xour offsl!ringl!!Mlll"~I,i-h~J:Yi1l7~1:rike your ,head,
and you will strike his heel. 40

The pronouns detail what the enmity between the woman's

descendants and the serpent will consist of indicating the role each
antagonist will play.

See also: Gen 41:16; Jud 7:2.

See similarly 1 Sam 19:10; 24:8,
40 See also: Gen 4:2; 13:1~; 18:33; 29:17; 31:47; 45:14; Ex 9:20; 20:21; 1 Sam

Pharaoh is mentioned in the preceding verse and his name does not
provide new information, norishe introduced as the topic of what
follows. The subject seems to be neither focused nor topicalized.
But the whole clause depicts the situation in which the Israelites
lifted up their eyes. A very precise, though overly literal, translation
would be: "Pharaoh having drawn near, the Israelites lifted up their
eyes ... " For other examples, see Chapter IV.

***
It is not always easy to tell whether the S-V word order is due to
focussing, to topicalizing or to the use of a circumstantial clause.
Nor is it certain that these three are the only factors that bring
about the S-V word order. 41 But they account for a sufficient
proportion of cases to make it feasible to argue that the S-V word
order is marked in biblical Hebrew prose.
Is the v-s sequence marked?
In the S-V approach, an explanation must be given of V-S clauses.
Even ifwAYYIQTOL, WEQATAL and volitive clauses are dismissed
as special cases, a number of instances remain to be explained.
Many indicative main clauses with QATAL exhibit V-S word order:
1 Sam 13: 14
The

LORD

i:l~7:P rzj"~ iZ, ;'4iT; rz.;~~

has sought out a man after his own heart. 42

If S-V is the default order, the present clause would be marked. But
what special function does it express? It has been argued that the

38

39

15:34; 20:39; 23:18; 26:25.

See Muraoka, Emphatic Words and Structures, 32-37, where eight factors are
taken into consideration.
42 For other examples, see above at note 24, p. 355.
41

362

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

V-S word order implies that the initial verbal form is highlighted. 43
In most of the examples, however, it is very hard to perceive any
meaningful degree of emphasis or insistence on the clause-initial
verb. Another approach is to suppose that the V-S sequence in
some way highlights the ~ubject. 44 This idea, too, remains an
empty postulate that cannot be verified in the examples.
Thus the existence of V -s clauses that do not fall in any of the
categories where that word order is obligatory (with WAYYIQTOL
or WEQATAL) or strongly preferred (with volitives) constitutes an
argument against the S-V approach.

Conclusions
In the light of all these considerations, the present work will proceed

on the supposition that the neutral word order in biblical Hebrew

prose has the verb in first position in the sense defined above, i.e.,
not taking conjunctions into account. Verbal clauses with preverbal
constituents (other than conjunctions) are syntactically marked. The
default position of an explicit subject is after the verb.
Concluding remarks on word order

Several forces operate on biblical Hebrew word order: the choice of

the verbal form, the information structure, the status of the clause
and the flow of the discourse. The text-linguistic approach needs to
take account of this complexity. Simplistic dichotomies, such as
opposing V-x clauses (with the verb in first position) to x-V clauses
(with a constituent preceding the verb), are unhelpful, as are blanket
assumptions. Although x-V clauses always call for an explanation,
there are many other phenomena that need to be explained as well.
Moreover, the explanations will vary from case to case.

~"="~~"~""-~,~""""~~""""~"""-"""--~~au888-aAd-Aa~atwe-~e*ty~e"
Benveniste, "Niveaux" (1996);. Weinrich, Tempus (1964; 19773); Niccacci,
Syntax of the Verb (1990); Longacre, Joseph (1989); Eskhult, Studies (1990).

Narration is the dominant literary genre in the corpus of classical

biblical prose (Genesis - 2 Kings). In fact, the entire corpus can be

43
44

See, e.g., Gross, SatzteilJolge, 157.

Holmstedt, Relative Clause, 219.

Chapter 10

363

looked upon as a single uninterrupted narration. All discursive

texts, and all poetry, are literarily integrated into this narrative.
More than a temporal relation, narrative implies a basic stance
of the speaker or writer. Narrative implies the creation, or recreation,
of events and circumstances that do not belong to the visible world
of the speaker/writer and his audience. It transports the audience to
a time and a place that is not here and now. Although narrative can
be suspenseful at will, it in principle leaves the audience in a relaxed
state: however much they identify with the heroes of the story, the
audience remain conscious that what happens does not touch them
directly. When Nathan tells" DavId: "You are the man" (2 Sam 12:7)
he transforms his narration of the rich and the poor into a direct
accusation, completely changing the stance of his audience and the
status of the discourse.
Foreground and background
Reinhart, "Principles" (1984); Hopper, "Aspect and Foregrounding" (1979).

Beyond the basic stance, there is of course a temporal dimension

to narrative as well. The defining characteristic of narrative texts is
that they relate events in the order in which they occurred, whether
in historical reality or in the fictional world of the story they tell.
All narratives have as their backbone a basic storyline telling
events in their "natural" order. In biblical Hebrew, this basic
storyline is typically occupied by W AYYIQTOL forms. "Fleshing
out" the backbone of successive events are processes that do not
form a link in the chain of eyents: states, circumstances, repeated
actions and facts that are related out of the chronological orderprospects or retrospects. These processes are expressed by a variety
of verbal forms.
The basic line of successive events has often been' defined as
foreground, the non-successive processes as background. They
relate to one another as figure and ground in Gestalt psychology.
This does not mean that the background material is of secondary
importance. Without background, the foreground cannot be fully
understood. Moreover, in certain passages the crucial information
may be related in the background material.
Since W AYYIQTOL is always clause-initial, the foreground/
background distinction is largely coextensive with the opposition
between verb-initial and non verb-initial clauses. The correlation is

364

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

not complete, however. Non verb-initial clauses may occur in

foregrounded passages, as will be shown below. Conversely,
background clauses may have the verbal form in first positionfor instance, iterative clauses with WEQATAL. Occasionally, even
WAYYIQTOL may occur in "off-the-line" material.
The explanatory power of the foregroundlbackground model,
as well as some complications that it raises, may briefly be
illustrated by the story told by one of the prostitutes who come to
demand justice from king Solomon (1 Kgs 3:17-21). Main-line
WAYYIQTOL clauses are set out on the right, with background
material in the left-hand column; some problematic clauses are
indented: 45
Background

inN n"::l:!l
T. . . - ;

n!:lrz?~
n~,til
:
-

Foreground

ilr8Nil'

'':IN
.-:

TOT:

n":!l:!l ~~l) i"N'

"Mi"" "rz?""~; -Ci!l; '''il"i' .
, :.: n~til' ;'~Nil--cn ',SM'
T

TOT

..... -

"n" 1:Jn:JN'
T

--:-

n:~~ 1:JI!1~ 'r1"~

n":!l:!l 1:Jn:JN-C"Mrz? "n"1t

T -

--:

-:

il~;~iJ lin:p cRI!1j

,,~~~~ "~:p-n~ nRI:1j
~R"lj:P 1il~"::P~{:1j

"P"lj=?

il~"::P~iJ n~iJ ~~:p-n~l

"~:p-n~
'R!;l~ cR~1
n~-il~il'

'R!;l~ '''~~ P.i~~~1

"Mi"" ,rdN ":J::l il"il-~" il~il'

: T T

... -:

TT

'.

The mainline of the story is made up of the WAYYIQTOL clauses

figuring in the right margin: one woman gives birth, then the other;

45

This is a somewhat untypical narrative because it uses the first person, but the
distinction of fore- and background functions in the same way as in other
narrative sections.
.

Chapter 10

365

the son of the second one dies; his mother gets up at night and
takes the live son of the other woman, and lays him in her own
bosom; the first woman gets up in the morning, and she takes
a sharp look at the child that is lying in her lap.
The material in the left hand column clearly provides the background to the storyline:
- The two women live in the same house (Su-Ptcp).
- When the fatal incident happened, no-one else was in the house
(nominal clauses).
- The boy died because~ his-~motherlay upon him in her sleep
(retrospective QATAL in relative clause).
- When the woman took the boy from her housemate, the latter
was sleeping (circumstantial clause).
The background material consists of permanent and temporary
states, but it also includes an event: the lying of the woman upon
her child.
The indented clauses are more difficult to classify:
- The "il'" clause prepares the next clause: the verb "it happened"
refers to what is related next, namely that the other woman too
gave birth (see Chapter v).
- The X-QATAL clause referring to the laying of the dead child in
the bosom of the first mother is due to topicalization of the direct
object. After the account of what the second mother did to the live
child, the question naturally arises: what happened to the dead
child? Because of this, the object is positioned before the verb,
making the use of WAYYIQTOL impossible. The syntax does not
reveal in what order the boys were displaced. But the following
WAYYIQTOL clause. presupposes the full exchange.
- The two il:Jil clauses at the end represent the point of view of the
first mother: she woke up and saw at once that the child was dead,
and then that it was not her son.
This brief analysis shows that while the foreground/background
dichotomy is helpful, not all clauses can easily be related to either
category. WAYYIQTOL forms may occur in backgrounded clauses,
and non-WAYYIQTOL clauses may express foregrounded events.
Foreground
There is no point in illustrating the way WAYYIQTOL forms express
foreground action in Hebrew narrative. The examples are exceedingly

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

366

frequent and can easily be identified. As was shown in Chapter V,

WAYYIQTOL is not always strictly sequential in the sense that
successive WAYYIQTOL forms do not necessarily express successive
events. Even when they do not, however, they usually express the
main phases in the story line.
But the numerical dominance of WAYYIQTOL clauses should
not obscure the fact that the storyline may also be continued by
other types of clause.
Main clauses with preposed elements
As was pointed out in Chapter II and again in Chapter VI, QATAL
mechanically replaces WAYYIQTOL when any element comes before
the verb. In narrative main clauses, this happens with the negation, a
temporal clause, and a topicalized or focused constituent. There are
no a priori reasons to relegate such X-QATAL clauses to the
background. Clauses of these types may express events that are at
once sequential and highly relevant to the story line:
- In narrative, the non-occurrence of an event may be as well
integrated into the sequence of events as is the occurrence of an
event:

Jud 8:20

O~;~ lip 01P ;,;::l:P 'P:.~ '~N"j

;~l/j '.ii~iJ ~~~-Nt"

So he said to Jether his firstborn, "Go kill them!" But

the boy did not draw his sword.

Jether's failure to comply with his father's express command is a

crucial link in the chain of events. Because his son does not find it
in himself to slay the captives, Gideon has to do so himself.
- Clauses introduced by temporal expressions may move the
story forward, in a way that differs little from WAYYIQTOL
Jud 1:8-9

... 0~~1'''~ iT'1iT"-"j:l 1on~'"

,-nN;

,iTiT :l~;" "jl1j~~ on~iT~ iT;1iT" T"j~ 1""

Then the peoTple ~f J~d~h- fo~ght: ag;in~t jerus~le~.~:
Aft~rward the people of Judah went down to fight
agaInst the Canaanites who lived in the hill country.

The temporal adverb expressly indicates the temporal sequence of

the events. There is no reason to qualify the content of verse 9 as
being off the story line.

367

Chapter 10

_ The transition from one topic to a related one may be marked

by the use of coordinated sentences, the first one with
WAYYIQTOL, the second with X-QATAL:

iT~;~ N1R .,rgn~, 0;" ,;~~ O"Ht,~ ~1i?~j

God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

Gen 1:5

In this construction (see also 1 Kgs 3:20 in the story of the

prostitutes, quoted above), it is hard to say that the second clause is
less fore grounded than the first. A better solution would be to say
that the two clauses together make up one complex segment
belonging to the foreground.
Although in many cases this type of syntax is hard to interpret
in terms of temporal ordering, in some instances it clearly implies
sequential action:
Gen 12:15-16

iTl1l~ n"~ iT'~O n~(1j

rt'1:l11~
T
-:- :l"eo.,it
0':lNt,1
T:-:

And the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house. And for
her sake he dealt well with Abram.

In sum, where QATAL functions as a narrative preterite, it would be

a mistake to assign it to the background simply because
WAYYIQTOL is not used. Only a close study of the context can tell
whether the process expressed by it belongs to the main storyline
or not.
Narrative ~ + QATAL
In Chapter VI, a number of instances were enumerated where, in
narrative, the "perfect conjunctive" we+QATAL, expresses a function
approaching that of WAYYIQTOL (see Chapter VI). There seems
to be no difference between the two forms in regard to the
foregroundlbackground distinction.
Clauses introduced by iTjiT
A frequent technique in Hebrew narrative is to use the particle iTjiT,
"behold," in order to present events or circumstances as they were
perceived by the characters. A nice example is found in the story
of the prostitutes, in 1 Kgs 3:21: "When I rose in the morning to
give my child suck, behold, it was dead" (KJV). The verbal form
may be the participle or QATAL:

368

Ex 14:10

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

Chapter 10

Oi1".:I"lrnN "N,rz.,"-".:I::l 1NrZl"1

Oi1",nN 170) C"'~'" i1~i1'

Background
The background of Hebrew narrative is often drawn by means of
nominal clauses, which fall outside the scope of the present work.
Where verbal forms are used in backgrounded material, they are
often embedded in subordinate clauses. Iterative expressions, too,
are frequently employed in expository passages.

":

...

..

T:'

. :

.-

The Israelites looked back, and th~r~-~er-e"the Egypti~~~

advancing on them. 46

Oen 8: 13

N'"1 i1::lMi1 i10~~-nN n) '0"'

i1~'Ni1 ".:I~ 1:l,n i1~i1'
,--

T -

, .

.:

T'"

And Noah removed the covering of ;h~-' ~rk~ 'and i~ok~d:

and saw that the face of the ground had dried.47

In these examples, the clause introduced by i1.:1i1 reformulates

information mentioned in the preceding context. In other cases,
however, the information contained in the i1.:1i1clause is new, and
highly relevant:
Jud 11 :34

in":!l-"N i1~~~i1 nM~" N::l"'

inN1p~T nN~; ,~;. i1~~1

Then J ephthah came to his home at Mizpah; and behold

his daughter was coming out to meet him.

Clauses of this type are rarely sequential. They express simultaneous processes (with the participle) or antecedent states (with
QATAL). Nevertheless, they can hardly be classified as background.
They often express information that is crucial within the narrative
context. If anything, they should be regarded as salient foreground.
Much more rarely, i1.:1i1 followed by QATAL simply expresses
one event in a narrative chain (Chapter VI). The usage may reflect
oral narrative, although it does occur once or twice in the words of
the anonymous narrator of the biblical story. 48
Expressions of simultaneity
As was shown in Chapter IV, biblical Hebrew can express
simultaneity syntactically by a combination of clauses constructed
~-"~~~~~""~~~~~-tlS-e.ir~~tia:l:-ehtttses:-SttehconstI uctiuns'-oftenoccur at dramatic
points in the story and should not be regarded as backgrounded
(see Chapter IV).49

For other examples, see Chapter VII (historic present).

NRSV " ... was drying." Other examples: Gen 6:12; 19:28; 22:13; Ex 4:7;
16:10; 34:30; 39:43; Lev 10:16; Num 17:7, 12, 23; Deut 9:16; Jos 8:20; Jud
6:28; 20:40; 1 Sam 14:20; Jer 13:7.
48 In character's speech: 2 Sam 1 :6; 14:7; 1 Kgs 20:39; in narrator's speech:
1 Kgs 13:1,4; 20:13; Ruth 2:3-4.
49 See also: Gen 19:23-24.
46
47

369

Circumstantial clauses
The most typical unit of background material in narrative is the
circumstantial clause (see Chapter IV). Circumstantial clauses are
never sequential. The information they contain is not essential for
moving the action forward. This does not mean th<;lt they are
necessarily of secondary importance. A skilled narrator may
exploit the circumstantial clause to communicate information that
is highly relevant to the story. A famous example is the following:

2 Sam 11: 1

O"~N"~i1 nN~ n17" i1.:1rSi1 n::l1itfn" "i1",

. i~~ ;"'::l~-n~' ::lNTi~--nN -,,-:y' n,,~~i

li~~ ,,~.~~r,~ ~nr:t~~j "~1~:~~f--n~1

O"itf1''':!l :ltD,., "" i1:!l'-"17 1'~"'

In the spring of the year~ Tthe time"whe~ kings -go -out t~

battle, David sent J oab with his officers and all Israel
with him; they ravaged the Ammonites and besieged
Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem.

The chain of W A YYIQTOL forms would lead the reader to believe

that the story is about J oab and the Israelite army waging war
against the Ammonites. But in fact, the story develops from what
is told in the circumstantial clause appended to the W AYYIQTOL
clauses: David stayed in Jerusalem.
Other subordinate clauses
Other types of subordinate clauses are also often used in describing
the background to the story, in particular relative clauses introduced
by ,itfN and causal clauses introduced by ,,~. The verbal forms used
in these clauses are mostly the participle for contemporaneous
processes, and QATAL for antecedent processes. There are also a few
cases of YIQTOL in prospective clauses.
Expressions of iterativity
In narrative, YIQTOL and WEQATAL are used rather frequently for
the expression of repeated processes (Chapter VIII). Where iterative

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

370

clauses are tightly integrated into the sequence of events, they do

not necessarily belong to the background:
/1'/1" "~":l:J rJ~ ~:li"~
0: 0:. rJ"'~/1::l
.: - : "/1",
.:-

1 Kgs 18:4

.:

0~"~~:1 o"~~~ /1~~ i/1:i:;lD nR~j

0";'"

on~ C":l:)"~' /1'li~::l iO"~ o"re;"n

What is clear in any case is that the quick succession of

W AYYIQTOL forms does not by itself indicate an increase in
narrative pace. Alongside the number of WAYYIQTOL forms, the

meaning of the verbs in question plays a part and the context an

even bigger one:
,k;" ,k;"::l 1~~li!!' 1~'!!'
But the Israelites ~~re fr~itful a~d
and grew exceedingly strong.

When Jezebel was kiIli~g ~if the' p~~ph;~s: ~f the L~~~:

Obadiah took a hundred prophets, hid them fifty to a cave,
and provided them [continually] with bread and water.

In the vast majority of cases, however, iterative clauses serve to

describe the situation in which the story came to pass.
Continuative WAYYIQTOL
Subordinate clauses and iterative passages can be continued by
WAYYIQTOL (see Chapter v). The usage is exceptional, but it
shows that the main function of WAYYIQTOL is not to express
foreground events. As a preterite, WA YYIQTOL was particularly apt
for expressing sequential action, but it may occasionally take on
other functions as well.

Narrative pace
Another concept of narrative analysis that has some relevance to
verbal usage is that of narrative pace. A rapid succession of
WAYYIQTOL forms may create the impression of swift action:
Gen 3:6

~~~~~

y.v.O

:l;~ .,~ /1~~O ~J(1j

~":P~ij~ y.v.O '~~~1 o:~".v.~ ~i/1-/11~rJ "~1

"~N!!j i1~l; i1~"~~-0~ ItJl:'lj "~NF1j ;"1~~ n~l:'lj

__

,,_~~~_,~_~~w~

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food,
and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree
was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit

,~w

___
'
_',

aDd

Dte; BDd she also ga;y;e,some~o~her-husband"whowas

Ex 1:7

1~'rD!!1 i'S ~~,~: "~.~i

proiifi.~; th~y m';itipli~d

In this verse, the density of W AYYIQTOL forms does not affect

narrative pace but underlines the great proliferation of the Israelite
people.

Overture and closure

Eskhult, Studies (1990),45-57.

Although biblical narratives can, and do, begin in medias res,

attacking the chain of events straightaway, many stories require
a depiction of the scene before setting the action in motion.
Similarly, a story may simply end with the last event recounted,
but it is more usual at the end to ponder some of the consequences
or changes the unravelling of the action has brought. For these
reasons, non-sequential, backgrounded clauses often cluster at the
beginning and at the end of the narrative.
Overture
It is not uncommon in the Bible to start a narrative with a burst of
action and to fill in necessary details later. The story of the
altercation between Amaziah the priest and Amos falls from the
blue sky in the middle of a prophetic discourse. It starts without
even the most elementary preparation:
Amos 7:10

with her, and he ate.

The first WAYYIQTOL form in this verse is followed by three

subordinate nominal clauses, suggesting that the woman was
taking a prolonged look at the tree and its fruit. Once she takes of
the fruit, however, the pace quickens, and before one could say
"knowledge of good and evil" both she and her husband have
eaten of it. This device is used frequently in Hebrew narrative, but
its grammatical dimension has been insufficiently explored.

371

Chapter 10

~~-rJ"~ F:r!D /1:~~~ n'~:j

... 'b~~ ~~1~:-17~ O~l:-~~

Then Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, sent to King

Jeroboam of Israel, saying ... 5o

The reader has to figure out where the characters are, and why
they are acting the way they do, from the dialogue that makes up
the greater part of the story.

50

Other examples: 2 Kgs 2:19-22; 6:1-6; 8:7-15.

372

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

Such abrupt beginnings employ the W A YYIQTOL form, but the use
of this form does not mean that the main chain of events sets in.
W A YYIQTOL introducing a narrative section may very well be
expository and backgrounded. Narrative ";:'1;1 is used rather ofte~ at
the beginning of a story. But even where ";:'1;1 is to be considered a
full verb, it sometimes merely serves to set the stage for the events
that follow:

0"'10~ 0"'~11 no~ ii~~ rJ~Y-S~ ";:'1;1

Gen 11: 1

Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.

Other verbs, too, can be used to designate the state obtaining at the
beginning of the narrative:

iirtO~~ 1"~ o"~rf rJJSrf 1:l~:1

1 Kgs 22: 1

S~l~: 1"~1 0l~ 1"~

For three years, Aram and Israel continued without war.

More commonly, the initial exposition is marked as such by taking

a form other than that of a WAYYIQTOL clause. Minimally, the
exposition consists of a single X-QATAL clause:

2 Kgs 13: 14

But in other cases, the closure is marked by the use of verbal forms
other than W A YYIQTOL:
Gen 18:33

The preposing of the subject in the last clause may be explained as

topicalization. At the same time, the reversal of the usual word
order closes off the narrative.

Narration and authorial comments

While notions of foregroundlbackground, pace, and overture/closure
belong strictly to the analysis of narrative technique, the reader of
biblical texts should also be aware of passages where the narrator
steps out of his role, so to speak, and addresses the reader directly. In
the corpus of CBH, Genesis - 2 Kings, the narrators are anonymous
and very discreet. Once in a while, however, they do append a
comment betraying their own point of view:

n10" ,rJJN ;"Sn-nN iiSn 17rD"t,N'

,"~~-S~ 1~~1 S~l~:-:"1T?~ .~~;~ ;"7~ 11;1'

Gen 32:33(32)

Now when Elisha had fallen sick with the illness of which
he was to die, King J oash of Israel went down to him,
and wept before him. 51

Like the beginning of the story, the end may remain unmarked in the
verbal syntax, ending simply on a sequential W AYYIQTOL clause:
Gen 4:16

11~-n~1p i;rrJ~f :JW~j

ii,i; "~.~~~ n~ N~~j

Then Cain went away from the presence of the LORD, and
settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. 53

Another example: Gen 4:1.

On this last text, see Joosten, "Workshop."
53 See also: Gen 12:20; 13:18; 21:21; 24:67.

S~l~:-"~.~ 1S~N"-NS 1:P.-S~

"1'1~iJ ~~-S~ 'W~

iiWiJ i"~-n~
iiiii Oi"ii- i17.:-

Therefore to this day the Israelites do not eat the thigh

muscle that is on the hip socket.

This is not a background clause sketching the circumstances of the

main events of the story. What is told here does not belong to the
time of the narrated events at all. The clause represents an aside of
the author to the readers informing them of a small detail in their
own lives that finds an explanation from the story just told. As
in the present case, the comment is often-but not alwaysappended at the end of the story.
In authorial remarks of this type, the verbal forms are
grounded in the time of the author, not the event-time of the story.
The YIQTOL form in Gen 32:33 is not prospective in a past tense

context, but expresses the general present. 55 QATAL In

comment s

51

52

OYl~~-S~ ,~,~ ii~:P 'W~~ iijii; "1?~j

iOp~~ :l~ Cvl~~1

And the LORD went his way, when he had finished speaking
to Abraham. And Abraham returned to his place. 54

;~

But the exposition can also consist of a combination of clause typescircumstantial clauses, WEQATAL and YIQTOL clauses expressing
repeated action, continuative W AYYIQTOL clauses-and can extend
over several verses, though hardly ever more than a handful (for
particularly long expositions, see, e.g., Job 1: 1-5; 1 Sam 1: 1_752).

373

Chapter 10

54

55

See also: Gen 19:38; Jud 6:40; 20:48.

See also: Gen 10:9; Num 21:14,27; Jud 10:4; 1 Sam 5:5; 19:24; 2 Sam 5:8.

Verbal Forms in Textual Perspective

374

may refer to what has come about once and for all and is still valid
in the time of the author:
Jos 14: 14

"'~~iPiJ iT~.~;-l~ ::l~~~ l;'~O-iTt1;y p~-t,.p

iTiiT O;~iT ,11 iTt,njt,

So Hebron became the inheritance ~f Caleb - so~ -: ~f .
Jephunneh the Kenizzite to this day.56

Or it may refer to what happened, or used to happen, once upon

a time in the remote past (see Chapter VI).
Distinguishing authorial comments from narrative clauses is
not always easy to do and some cases are ambiguous, particularly
when they occur within the narrative:
Gen 35: 18

"~;N-l~ ;~~

Nli?I:1j

iTt1~ .,~ Hrf~~ MN~f

"0;j

As her soul was departing (for she died), she named him
Ben-oni.

In narrative, QATAL in subordinate clauses is usually retrospective.

If iTt1~ .,~ were part of the narrative, it should therefore be
translated "for she had died," which cannot be the meaning
intended. It is better, therefore, to take these words as a rapid aside
by the author informing the reader that this was when Rachel died.
The parenthetical status of the clause has been well captured by
the NRSV (see already the KJV).

Verbs, clauses and the organization of

discursive texts

~=-~~~-~"~'

NN_ _

The textual functions of verbal syntax in discourse are less well

understood than in narrative. While Hebrew narrative has a leading
clause type, whose functions are reasonably well understood and
to which other clause forms can more or less easily be related,
~-ctiscllrstveteXts are nOt organ:ize~equally-tfanspateht manner.
On the formal level, the ostensible counterpart of WAYYIQTOL is
WEQATAL. But this form is much less prominent in discourse than
WAYYIQTOL is in narrative. Discursive texts also use a larger array
of verbal forms than does narrative. All the forms used in narrative
occur in discourse as well, and to these are added the volitives and

Chapter 10

the sequence participle-subject, two categories that are scarcely

found in narrative. 57
On a more substantial level, while narration is founded upon the
principle of temporal sequence, one is hard pressed to find an
analogous concept for discursive texts. Discourse develops several
registers that remain relatively unexploited in narration. For instance,
while narrative propositions mostly intend to inform, discursive texts
use a much wider spectrum of speech acts: clauses may be
informative, commissive, expressive, directive, or declarative. Then
there is epistemic modality: while narrative clauses are usually true
(in terms of the world created by the story), discourse distinguishes
many degrees of truth. A proposition may be affirmed, claimed,
hypothesized, estimated, inquired after or merely wished for.
Although the relevance of these registers may vary from passage to
passage, there is no reason to exclude any of them from the analysis
of discursive texts. Nor is it defendable to select one category and to
declare that it is more basic than the others, or that it has a stronger
impact on discourse structure. To find a "higher principle"
encompassing all categories in a single concept is also unhelpful.
Word order shows much variation in discursive texts: clauses that
are not verb-initial are relatively more frequent, and clauses with two
preverbal constituents much more frequent than in narrative. Some
dynamics are relatively well understood, notably the ones referred
to above: focalization, topicalization, and the structure of the
circumstantial clause. In some passages, discursive texts approach
poetry, which may lead to unusual clause structures. 58 Other
dynamics are less well understood.
What is sufficiently clear, however, is that the discourse value
of word order is relatively restricted in direct speech. While word
order is the guiding principle to the flow of the text in narration,
discursive texts make much wider use of conjunctions and adverbs
for this purpose. Expressions such as iTMl1, iTMl11, 1~t" 1~ t,11, lit,
t,::lN, l~N are never found in narrative, but are rather frequent in
discursive texts.

The only occurrence of the sequence Ptcp-Su in narrative is in Jud 8:4, but the
text may be out of order.
58 On word order in poetry, see, e.g., N.P. Lunn, Word-Order Variation in Biblical
Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics (Bletchley 2006).

57

56

Other examples: Gen 11':9; 16:14; 1 Sam 10:12.

375

CHAPTER XI
DEVELOPMENTS IN LATE BIBLICAL HEBREW
There are good reasons to think that the literature contained in
the Hebrew Bible was composed over a period covering many
centuries. 1 Since languages change over time, the question arises
whether one can identify chronological stages in the biblical
Hebrew corpus. From the days of Wilhelm Gesenius, this question
has generally been given a positive answer.2 Two main phases of
biblical Hebrew are commonly distinguished, the former, classical
biblical Hebrew (CBH), representing roughly the period of the
monarchy (tenth to sixth century BCE), the latter, late biblical
Hebrew (LBH), corresponding to the post-exilic period (sixth to
second century BCE). Alongside these two, other phases may be
recognized or suspected: the emergence of the classical language
must have been preceded by an "archaic" variety of Hebrew that
appears to be preserved in a number of old poems (e.g., Ex 15,
Deut 32, Jud 5); between classical and late, a transitional period
appears to have produced diverse works that are neither purely
"classical" in their language nor entirely "late" (e.g., Ezekiel, Job,
Haggai and Zechariah). Moreover, each phase shows inner
diversity.
The distinction between CBH and LBH is a scholarly construct,
which has been questioned in some recent publications. 3 It remains
the most efficient hypothesis, however, accounting in an economical
way for the linguistic facts.4 The evidence that will be adduced in
See, e.g., K. Schmid, Literaturgeschichte des Alten Testaments: Eine EinfUhrung
(Darmstadt 2008).
2 Gesenius, Geschichte.
3 See, e.g., Young and Rezetko, Linguistic Dating.
4 See, e.g., A. Hurvitz, "The Recent Debate on Late Biblical Hebrew: Solid
Data, Experts' Opinions, and Inconclusive Arguments," Hebrew Studies 47
(2006), 191-210.
1

378

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

the present chapter, some of it well-known and some of it new,

lends strong confirmation to the diachronic approach.
Chapters II to X of the present work have dealt mostly with the
classical phase. A number of internal developments have been
noted, as well as the way those developments typically continue
into late and post-biblical Hebrew. In some cases, it has been
noted that the later syntax appears to affect the textual
transmission of the CBH texts. 5
In the present chapter, the development of the verbal system
will be approached in its own right. The objective is not to
describe the LBH system in detail, but to point out a number of
salient differences compared to the CBH system. The corpus taken
into account in this chapter consists mainly of the prose of the
following books: Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles, Esther, Daniel and
Ecclesiastes.

Methodological considerations
is defined in relation to CBH not only because of our scholarly
methods but also, in a more substantial sense, because later authors
modelled their literary creations on texts written in CBH.

LBH

The unity of Classical Biblical Hebrew

Joosten, "Distinction" (2005); Blum, "Verbalsystem" (2008).

In historical perspective, the verbal system of the prose passages

of the Pentateuch and Former Prophets, described in the present
work, is surprisingly unified. Although the modal subsystem is
somewhat baroque, the overall working of the entire scheme is
remarkably constant. There are, of course, a number of areas
.~.~. ~~. ~~_"~__~_~~ different verbal forms !pay b~~s~~L!Q_.~~p!ess more or less
the same meaning (see Chapter II); this happens in every language.
Moreover, some late usages crop up here and there as harbingers
of things to come. But the books of Genesis - 2 Kings contain
hardly any literary units using verbal forms systematically in ways
that would look out of place in other passages. 6 The classical

Chapter 11

corpus as defined in Chapter I satisfies the exigency of a synchronic

approach in grammatical studies.
The question may be raised as to what explains this uniformity
of the classical corpus. An answer that has frequently been
advanced is that CBH was created as a literary idiom early in the
monarchical period and that it remained stable for three or four
centuries due to the firmness of the scribal tradition. 7 Another
possibility would be to suppose that, although the texts come from
an extended period, earlier texts have been thoroughly revised and
rewritten in a later period. The syntax of the texts would reflect the
Hebrew of the revisers and not that of the original authors. More
recently, a different solution has been envisaged by several scholars:
CBH may reflect a relatively short period of literary activity, situated
between the end of the eighth and the beginning of the sixth century
BCE. 8 Linguistic data do not allow one to decide between these
different models.
What the data do allow one to affirm is that CBH, and its verbal
system in particular, is very close to the language used in Judean
inscriptions of the monarchical period. Verbal usage in CBH finds
ample and precise analogy in the inscriptions. Moreover, the
inscriptions exhibit several usages that are typical of CBH but tend to
disappear in later Hebrew:
- The performative use of QATAL (see Chapter VI) occurs several
times in the inscriptions, e.g., 111:l':l, "I hereby bless you" Arad
16:2-3.9 In LBH, this usage is found only occasionally, and only in
stereotyped expressions (see below, pp. 389-390).
- The WEQATAL form continuing imperatives (see Chapter IX) is
also found in several inscriptions, e.g.: l1np~' ... ~:l, "go in ... and

5
6

See, e.g., Chapter VIII, Appendix.

The only possible exceptions are the chains of we + QATAL in 2 Kgs 18:4; 21:6;
23:4-14; 25:29 (Chapter VI, Appendix). These chains do not occur in typical
narrative, however, and they may perhaps express a function subtly different

379

from that of W AYYIQTOL. In that case, they may reflect the specific literary
genre of archival lists rather than a later stage of Hebrew. See below, note 24.
See, e.g., H. Rabin, "The Emergence of Classical Hebrew" in A. Malamat,
(ed.), The Age of the Monarchies, II: Culture and Society, The World History
of the Jewish People, first series v (Jerusalem 1979), 71-78.
See, e.g., W.M. Schniedewind, How the Bible Became a Book: The
Textualization of Ancient Israel (Cambridge 2003).
See Eskhult, "Verbal Syntax," 86. As is indicated by Eskhult, a few instances
of performative QATAL can be found in LBH (1 Chr 21:23; 29:3; 2 Chr 2:9) but
the usage seems to be largely formulaic. In 2 Chr 1:12, a different construction is
used where the parallel, 1 Kgs 3:12, has a performative QATALsee below p. 390.

380

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

take" Arad 17:1-4.10 In LBH, this type of syntax is rare (see below,
note 57, p. 402).
Since the corpus of epigraphic Hebrew from the monarchical
period is very small, the fact that such "isoglosses" with CBH exist
is significant. 11 They show that a language nearly identical to CBH
was in use during the pre-exilic period. They do not tell us,
however, when it disappeared. The "cut-off' point for texts written
in CBH lies somewhere beyond the beginning of the sixth century.
Several authorities have set it around the year 500, but this is no
more than an informed guess. 12
Innovation and continuity in LBH
The LBH corpus came into being over a prolonged period of time.
The earliest texts may go back to the middle of the fifth century
BCE, while the date of the latest texts descends into the Hellenistic
period. In fact, Qumran Hebrew, reflecting for the most part
Hebrew writing of the first century BCE, is typologically close to
LBH. It is abundantly clear that when the LBH corpus was created,
CBH texts had been in existence for a long time and had acquired
religious and cultural authority. LBH writings like Ezra-Nehemiah,
Chronicles and Daniel refer to earlier writings explicitly. On the
linguistic level, several indications show that the later authors
wished to stay as close as possible to the style of the earlier works.

Factors of change
In research on the history of biblical Hebrew, three main factors of
change are generally held to influence developments in LBH.
Aramaic influence
Hurvitz, "~Aramaisms' in Linguistic Reserch", (2003), pp.24-37.

The most visible changes in the Hebrew language result from the
massive borrowing of Aramaic elements during the exilic and
post-exilic periods, when Aramaic was the language of official

10 See Eskhult, "Verbal Syntax," 87. The usage is found in Hag 1:8 and five
times in the LBH corpus (1 Chr 14:14; 15:12 [non-parallel]; 17:4; 21:10;
2 Chr 18:33 [contrast 1 Kgs 22:34]). In CBH it is vastly more common,
however (around 200 examples).
11 For more examples, see Joosten, "Distinction."
12 See, e.g., Steiner, "Ancient Hebrew," 146; Hurvitz, "Recent Debate" (above,
note 4),207-208.

Chapter 11

381

administration. Aramaic loans can be found in CBH texts as well,

but they are incomparably more prominent in LBH. Via Aramaic,
some Babylonian and Persian words also penetrated into Hebrew.
In regard to the verbal system, the influence of Aramaic is not
easy to determine. Aramaic is, of course, a Semitic dialect group
closely related to Hebrew, and the verbal systems of the two
groups are in some respects very similar. It is sometimes suspected
that the disappearance of WAYYIQTOL and WEQATAL, which
happened between late biblical and mishnaic Hebrew, is due in
part to influence from Aramaic. It is hard to determine, however,
whether there is a development on this point in biblical Hebrew.
Even if there is a development, it is difficult to attribute it with
assurance to Aramaic influence. It may just as well reflect innerHebrew levelling.
Influence from spoken dialects
F. Polak, "Sociolinguistics and the Judean Speech Community in the Achaemenid
Empire," in M. Oeming, and O. Lipschitz (eds.), Judah and the Judeans in the
Persian Period (Winona Lake 2006), 589-628.

After the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE, the literate elite of

Judah were exiled to Babylonia. The land of Israel was not left
empty, however. Among the population that remained, Hebrew
continued to be spoken. After the return, the Hebrew spoken by
the exiles mixed with local idioms in ways that are difficult to
fathom. Elements turning up in LBH that are neither CBH nor
Aramaic may reflect various Hebrew dialects. A possible example
from the realm of verbal syntax is the negation of a participle
clause with a pronominal subject. In CBH, such clauses take the
form :Jen + pronominal suffix + participle. The same syntagm is
usual also in LBH, but once we find instead :Jen + separate pronoun
+ participle:
Neh 4:17(31)
We never took off our clothes.

This type of clause is hardly to be regarded as an organic

development from the CBH syntax. Since the construction with the
separate pronoun is found also in mishnaic Hebrew, it may
perhaps be considered an alternative syntagm that was used in
some dialectal strain of Hebrew.

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

382

Beyond such morpho-syntactic details, estimating the influence of

spoken dialects on verbal usage in LBH is even harder than in the
case of Aramaic.
Natural developments
Kurylowicz, Apophonie (1962); Cohen, Phrase nominale (1975); Bybee et aI.,

Evolution of Grammar (1994).

Languages tend to evolve in specific ways. Powerful factors of

change are the force of analogy and the search for expressivity.
The evolution of verbal systems has been much studied, and
linguists have identified types of changes that are relatively likely
to happen. A nice illustration is the way the predicative participle
replaces YIQTOL in the following parallel passages:

1 Kgs 22: 8

ink~ jqj!;-n~ rzj,!~ 'Q~-rzj"~ ,il1

:Ji~ "~11
.,~. .
'''n~Jtzi
-T N::ljn"-Nt,
-1
. . : "J~'
.-:-

2 Chr 18:7

ink~ j!1j!;-n~ rzji'!~ 'Q~-rzj"~ ,il1

j!:Ji~~ "~11 ~::ljn~ 1~j"~-"~ 1j!"n~~w "~~j

There is still one o~he~ by wh~~ we .~.~y inquire ~f the
LORD, but I hate him, for he never prophesies anything
favourable about me.
T

The tendency of forms expressing a "progressive" function to

supplant older present-future forms is attested in many languages
(see Chapter n). The substitution of the participle for YIQTOL in the
present case conforms to expectations. Admittedly, a single instance
like this does not suffice in syntactic studies. It remains to be shown
below that the participle does indeed systematically extend its
functions at the expense of YIQTOL (see below pp. 390-396).
Organic developments normally come about in speech before
the~ affi1Qt the literary. langqag~.,:,~~Ih~~<;:Q1}1!!lJli!!g evolution of
biblical Hebrew along typologically expected ways shows that,
even in the Persian and Hellenistic periods, it was not merely
a written language but was actually spoken at least among certain
groups.

The tendency to classicize

Joosten, "Pseudo-classicisms" (1999).

The pressure towards change was tempered strongly, in the written

Hebrew of the Seconq Temple period, by the tendency to follow
the linguistic model of earlier texts. This tendency is present in all

Chapter 11

383

LBH literature, although to different degrees and in different forms.

The authors of the late biblical books may be supposed to have
had an intimate knowledge of CBH writings-albeit perhaps not
the exact set of CBH writings contained in the Hebrew Bible today.
They exhibit various degrees of openness toward new forms
of expression, however. For instance, "Nehemiah's memoirs"
are relatively more conservative, linguistically, than the book of
Ecclesiastes.
Of course, not all continuity between LBH and CBH is to be
attributed to conservatism or .to the desire to conform to earlier
models. Languages change slowly. Measuring the exact degree to
which a given LBH text reflects the more or less artificial tendency
to classicize is therefore difficult. It is often submitted, for
instance, that the use of the "consecutive" tenses, W AYYIQTOL and
WEQATAL, in LBH is partly due to the influence of CBH. If it were
not for the desire of Second Temple authors to write "classical
Hebrew," they would have used we + QATAL instead of
W AYYIQTOL and we' + YIQTOL instead of WEQATAL-or so it is
thought. Demonstrating this is difficult, however, as will be shown
below. The continued use of W AYYIQTOL and WEQATAL may just
as well reflect the fact that these forms were alive and well during
the post-exilic period up to the first century, as witnessed also by
the Qumran scrolls.
Nevertheless, it is possible to show that some form of
conscious classicizing underlies the LBH texts. On occasion, late
authors use CBH expressions in a way that shows they did not take
them from the living language, but knew them only from the
reading of texts. Although materially identical to its CBH
counterpart, the LBH usage diverges from it semantically or
formally, not because of natural development of the language but
due to faulty interpretation of ancient texts. Such "pseudoclassicisms" show up the nature of LBH.
Most pseudo-classicisms come from the area of phraseology.
Several idiomatic expressions are used in the LBH texts with
a meaning that does not reflect a correct understanding of CBH but
a reanalysis of the component partS.13 A possible example from the
verbal system is the use of the lengthened imperative. In CBH, this
form expresses a specific function, namely, it defines the process

13 Examples in Joosten, "Pseudo-classicism."

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

384

as being directed in some way toward the speaker: 1~ means "go

away" (e.g., Gen 26:16) or "go from A to B" (e.g., Gen 12:1), but
it~~ means "come here" (e.g., 1 Sam 17:44).14 In LBH, the
lengthened imperative is used a number of times where the
classical function is apt, or possible,15 but it occurs also in passages
where CBH would presumably not have allowed it:
Neh6:14

it~N '''fzi,U~~ ~~:JjOt,1 it":J;~t, "iit,N itj~t

Remember Tohiah": ~nd TS-~~ball~~:

to these things that they did. 16

0 my" God,

~c~~rdi~g

Here, the lengthened imperative does not imply direction toward the
17
speaker. Similar examples are encountered in Qumran Hebrew. If
the LBH authors no longer knew the meaning of this form, why did
they continue to use it? The answer to this question is, probably,
that they adopted it from CBH texts.

Changes in the verbal syntax of LBH

According to Ferdinand de Saussure, language is a system in
which everything holds together. This is certainly true of the
verbal system. The smallest alteration in the function of one
component automatically leads to changes in other components as
well. If, for instance, the participle extends its functions, this
happens at the expense of YIQTOL and WEQATAL, and, if
WEQATAL becomes more stereotyped, its former minority usages
must be expressed by other forms.
The systemic nature of developments in verbal syntax is
exciting to observe. It is also a major argument in favour of the
diachronic approach as sketched above: although some typical
differences between CBH and LBH may seem unrelated, and as
~~~_~~~.~~,"~~, . l1ch might b.t?w,exJ2lained as dialectal ()r stylistic "ariants, a more
penetrating analysis will often show-tha~rihey-coheie with changes
in other parts of the system. The sea change that occurred between
classical and late biblical Hebrew shows that one is indeed dealing
with two chronological phases, and that some time must have
passed allowing the one to develop into the other.
14 See Chapter III, p. 123.
15 See, e.g., Ecc12:1; Neh 6:2, 7; 1 Chr 21:22; 2 Chr 25:18.
16 See also: Neh 13:29; 2 Ghr 6:42; 25:19 (note the parallel, 2 Kgs 14:10, where
the non-lengthened form is used).
17 See, e.g., 4Q88 x 7-8.

Chapter 11

385

On the practical level, it is nevertheless preferable to set out from the

use of single forms. This procedure will allow us to stay close to the
facts. At the same time it provides a simple organizational principle.
Obvious and less obvious connections between changes in the use of
different forms will of course be pointed out.
WAVVIQTOL

As was discussed in Chapter II, WAYYIQTOL preserves in a

"closed syntagm" the old Canaanite preterite *yaqtul which has
practically disappeared from Hebrew otherwise. 18 WAYYIQTOL is,
in the words of Hans Bauer, a linguistic fossil. In addition,
typological studies have shown that narrative tenses, such as
WAYYIQTOL, tend to be supplanted by forms expressing the
perfect (see Chapter II, pp. 72-76). For both. these reasons, one
would expect WAYYIQTQL to die out in the later history of the
language. This is indeed what happens, for, in mishnaic Hebrew,
WAYYIQTOL is no longer in use. In LBH, however, WAYYIQTOL
appears still to be doing rather well. It is used hundreds of times,
not only in narrative but in direct speech as well. A recent
examination of all the material found no difference in the use of
WAYYIQTOL in LBH.19 Even Qumran Hebrew uses WAYYIQTOL
more or less where one would expect it. 20
Only one late book of the Bible shows the expected disappearance of WAYYIQTOL. In Ecclesiastes, the form is found only three
times (1: 17; 4: 1, 7). Even narrative sections in this book tend to
get by without WAYYIQTOL:
~lJ~ i-l~ O"~~~j it~~i?

EccI9:14-15

'''3;

itI;lN :1:;91 t,;, 1~~ ;;r"~~CN~1

: o"t,.,~ O"';~~ it"t,,U iT):11
.:

.:

.: T

TT

o~O 1~9~ rC"~ i-l~ N~Q1

;n~~n~ ''',Uit-nN N1it-~~~1

: N1itij

1~9TP~: ~~~;;r-n~ ,~t Nt, Oi~1

There was a httle city with few people in it. A great king
came against it and besieged it, building great siegeworks
against it. Now there was found in it a poor wise man,

18 See, however, Chapter XII.

19 See O. Cohen, Verbal System.
20 See Smith, Origins and Development. The narrative genre is not very well
represented, however, among the new Hebrew texts discovered at Qumran.

386

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

and he by his wisdom delivered the city. 21 Yet no one
remembered that poor man.

Here we + QATAL has effectively replaced WAYYIQTOL in its

narrative function, exactly as in mishnaic Hebrew. ,
Since Ecclesiastes cannot be much later than the other late
biblical books, the fact that it uses WAYYIQTOL so infrequently
raises several questions. Could it be that, in this respect,
Ecclesiastes represents the living, spoken Hebrew of the late
Persian period, while contemporary books such as Chronicles or
Esther reflect the literary tendency to write in classical Hebrew? It
is impossible to prove this, and other explanations are equally
feasible: Ecclesiastes may reflect a different dialect, or a different
literary tradition. Narrative passages are very few in this book,22
and their testimony is too weak to support grand theories.
The mirror image of receding WAYYIQTOL is the extended use
of QATAL in narrative.
QATAL

Unlike WAYYIQTOL, QATAL remains in use in post-biblical Hebrew

with functions roughly comparable to the ones observed in CBH.
Nevertheless, a few slight changes characterize LBH usage, both in
narrative and in direct speech.

Chapter 11

i1,i1" ~~"i1-nN O"j~i1 1'r;:,",

.T. O"~;~~ O~ji1:;'~ ~,.,~;;i
When the builders laid the foundatio~" ~f th~ t~mpl~ -~f

Ezra 3: 10

the LORD, the priests in their vestments were stationed ...

See also: Ezra 8:36; Neh 13:1; Dan 8:4, 11; Prov 7:13, and many
cases in Ecclesiastes.

It is to be noted, however, that similar cases of preterite we +

QATAL are also found occasionally in the CBH corpus (see Chapter
VI, Appendix). In 2 Kings, one even finds a few passages with
short strings of we + QATAL (see in particular 2 Kgs 18:4; 21:6;
23:4-14; 25:29).24 Preterite we + QATAL is hardly a distinctive
characteristic of LBH. 25
A more conclusive set of facts emerges in connection with the
sequential use of QATAL clauses with a fronted subject. In CBH
narrative, QATAL clauses with a fronted subject fall basically into
two categories: circumstantial clauses (Chapter IV) and clauses
with a marked topic (Chapter x). Admittedly, the syntax of
fronting in biblical Hebrew is not entirely understood, and some
cases are hard to classify. Nevertheless, in CBH narrative, clauses
of the type subject--QATAL do not normally represent sequential
action. This changes in LBH:
Esther 7:6-8

Sequential QATAL in narrative

Givon, "Drift" (1977); Eskhult, Studies (1990), 116-117.
If there is truth in the suggestion that WAYYIQTOL recedes in LBH,
the main form taking over its previous functions should be QATAL.
In the preceding section, a short narrative in Ecclesiastes was
quoted where we + QATAL has supplanted WAYYIQTOL entirely.
-~~~~=,+hi8~a88ag@ 8~t9-9~~,ia~l~ibliGal~H~brew. 23 Elsewhere,
what one finds is that single we + QATAL forms occur in narrative
passages, instead of expected WAYYIQTOL:
21 It has been argued that ~~~1 is to be considered WEQATAL and translated "he
might have saved"; see Isaksson, Studies, 97. This interpretation fits the
c?n~ext .well, yet one e wonders how Qoheleth's audience were supposed to
dIstmgUIsh between w + QATAL and WEQATAL in this pericope.
22 The "autobiographical thread" of the book generally uses we + QATAL, yet this
23 may be explicable from its literary genre; see Isaksson, Studies, 39-68.
See, however, Ps 135:rO-12. The absence of WAYYIQTOL in the Psalm is
remarkable.

387

i1tiJ li10
!

1~0 :l~4Nl ,~ ~,,~ 'tlO~-'~~r-lj

i1~~~iJl1~~iJ "~.~~~ ri~~~ 1901

1~"~iJ n~~-~~ 1::iJ i1tl~~~ 4n~o~ OR 1~~ij1

i1~~~iJ 'tlt?~~ 4rv~~-~.l1 ~p.~~ '~.v 1901
! 1~~iJ n~~ i1;'10 '''~~ i1~~~-"~ i1~1 "~
1::iJ i1tl~~ n"il-~~ 1~"~iJ n~~~ :l~ '~~ij1
O"~;' 'tlt?~ 'W~ i1~~iJ-~ol1 ~~~ 1~0'

Esther said, "A foe and enemy, this wicked Haman!';

Then Haman was terrified before the king and the queen.
The king rose from the feast in wrath and went into the
palace garden, but Haman stayed to beg his life from
Queen Esther, for he saw that the king had determined
to destroy him. When the king returned from the palace
garden to the banquet hall, Haman had thrown himself
on the couch where Esther was reclining.

24 These passages do not narrate successive events; they are more like lists
25 cataloguing diverse actions undertaken in the same period of time, above n. 6.
See also: Ezek 37:1-10 (see Bartelmus, "Ez 37,1-14").

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

388

This short passage contains four QATAL clauses with a fronted

subject, all of which express successive events in the story. The
clauses may be classified as exhibiting marked topics: Haman did
this, the king did that. They are nevertheless unlike occurrences of
subject-QATAL clauses in CBH in that they further the storyline.
Admittedly, the syntax of this passage is striking even in LBH. The
normal way to represent successive processes in the book of Esther
is with WAYYIQTOL. The use of sequential subject-QATAL clauses
has been explained as being due to stylistic factors: at the climax
of the story, the author slows down the action, so to speak, in order
to heighten the suspense. 26 This analysis is attractive. Nevertheless,
the fact remains that there are no passages similar to Esther 7 :6-7
in CBH.27 Moreover, in LBH sequential subject-QATAL clauses are
not limited to passages that represent a peak in the storyline:
Esther 7:10

"~j1~~ r~ij-'~~ r.v.o-~~ j~O-l"l~ 1~~~j

il~~~ i?~ij M~Oj

So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had

prepared for Mordecai. Then the anger of the king abated.

In CBH, the final words would naturally be interpreted as a circumstantial clause leading to the impossible meaning: "They hanged
Haman ... the anger of the king having abated."
2 Chr 25: 12

'17Ril~ C~~1 l1~'P,ij-tzjN'~ C1~"~~~j

They threw them down from the top of Sela, and all of
them were dashed to pieces.

Perhaps the fronting of the subject here intends to emphasize that all
of the prisoners died. But the use of the sequence we-subject-QATAL
in a clause that is both temporally successive and logically dependent
on the preceding one is unattested in CBH. 28

Chapter 11

389

See also: Esther 1:12; 3:15; 8:1, 14-15; Ezra 1:6; 3:13;29 Neh
13:12; 1 Chr 12:22; 2 Chr 22:6; 30 30:15; and Jona 1:4b.
It appears, then, that the author of Esther exploited in 7:6-7
a syntactic possibility that existed in LBH, but not in CBH.
In LBH, the default form in narrative clauses, presenting past events in
temporal sequence, continues to be WAYYIQTOL. However, one short
narrative passage in Ecclesiastes using only we + QATAL, and a number
of QATAL clauses with a fronted subject expressing sequentiality,
suggest that the ostensible uniformity in the use of WAYYIQTOL may
be due to classicizing. If the LBH writers had not been following
classical models, they might have used WAYYIQTOL rather less, and
QATAL rather more, in narrative clauses.
Performative QATAL
Eskhult, "Verbal Syntax" (1990), 86.

To the extent that QATAL takes over functions ofWAYYIQTOL, one

would expect it to lose some of its functions that are oriented
toward the present time frame. Such loss is not easy to document,
however. In LBH, QATAL functions as a present perfect with fientic
verbs and as a present with stative verbs more or less the way it
does in CBH.
In one "present-tense" function only is it possible to indicate a
real change for QATAL. In CBH, QATAL is used systematically in
"performative" expressions, in which the process expressed by the
verb comes about by pronouncing the statement (Chapter VI). In
LBH, possible instances of this usage are very rare and limited to
the verb jl"lJ:
1 Chr 29:3

il~l1~~ "ii~~Cl"l"::l~ "FlMj

tzji~~ n"i~ '~I:1iJ"~Q-~~~

I give it to the house of my God, over and above all that

I have prepared for the holy house.

26 See Buth, Word Order in Aramaic, 66: " ... an author manipulates a device
which normally signals a pause in the fore grounded story-line in order to
'suspend' the flow of the narrative at the/a peak."
27 The expressions of contiguity studied in Chapter IV are somewhat comparable
and may constitute the kernel out of which the LBHstructures grew.
28 Contrast the following examples with circumstantial clauses: 2 Sam 4: 1;
2 Kgs 25:5. In 2 Sam 18:4, the use of the sequence subject-QATAL may be
due to contrastive topicalization.

See also: 1 Chr 21:23 cf. 2 Sam 24:23; 2 Chr 2:9.

Since this verb is attested very often in performative
expressions in CBH, one may perhaps suppose that "r:lIJ~, "I hereby
29 Perhaps in this verse, the QATAL form .t1~~~ should be corrected to the
participle (.t1't~~).
30 Contrast the parallel in 2 Kgs 9:16. In 2 Kgs 8:29, the syntax is the same as in
2 Chr 22:6; this may indicate that 2 Kgs 8:28-29 is a late addition on the
basis of Chronicles.

390

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

give," was apprehended as a formula by the Chronicler. Therefore,

the three possible attestations of performative QATAL cannot be taken
to show that the usage is alive in LBH. Apart from the formulaic use,
performative QATAL appears to have become obsolete. Several other
phenomena confmn this conclusion. In one parallel passage in
Chronicles, the rewriting of the text led to the replacement of
performative QATAL with a different expression:

1 Kgs 3: 12

'9~ "t10~ n~.iJ '9"1~1~ "tl.,~.v n~.iJ

1;:l~1 c~lj :l~

I now do according to your word. Indeed I give you a wise

and discerning mind.

1~ 11n~ 111iPijl ni?=?ljij

1~-1~~ i;:l~l O"Q~~1 'W171

2 Chr 1: 12

Wisdom and knowledge are granted to you. I will also

give you riches, possessions and honour.

We also find one instance in Chronicles of the Ptcp-Su construction

which will become normal in performative expressions in postbiblical Hebrew: 31
1 Chr 29: 13

1~ u,,~~ C"ii~ 1j"H~~ n~.pl

And now, our God, we give thanks to you.

In CBH, one would have expected QATAL to be used in this

passage:
Ps 75:2
We give thanks to you, 0 God.

Although the material is scant, the available evidence indicates

that performative QATAL could no longer, in LBH, be formed freely
from any verb whenever the need arose.
The predicative participle

Two types of development can be observed when one compares the

use of the predicative participle in CBH and in LBH. On the formal
level, the participle moves away from its nominal origins and
acquires a more markedly verbal status. On the semantic level, it
extends its functions, notably in narrative texts, and takes over
usages that are normally expressed by WEQATAL or YIQTOL in CBH.

Chapter 11

The "verbalization" of the predicative participle

As has repeatedly been pointed out in other chapters, the participle
is originally a verbal adjective. Its morphology is nominal. In order
to interact with the finite tenses, the participle needs to combine
with an explicit nominal or pronominal subject. On the morphosyntactical level, clauses with a predicative participle present
themselves as nominal clauses. What forces one to consider them
to be verbal is that such clauses are part of the' verbal paradigm,
expressing tense-aspect-mood functions that cannot be expressed
by the other forms.
The presence of nominal elements within a verbal paradigm is
attested in many different languages. Typically, however, such
nominal elements will, in time, shed something of their nominal
nature and acquire verbal characteristics. Three distinct criteria of
verbal status have been identified in general linguistic studies: 32
a) the marking of the predicative function;
b) the morphological connection between the subject and the
predicative base;
c) the integration into the system of TAM oppositions.
To these, syntactic subtleties such as typical forms of the negation
or verbal government may be added.
In CBH, only the third criterion unequivocally lends the predicative participle a verbal status. The marking of the predicative
function (a) is effected by simple juxtaposition of subject and predicate,
as in nominal' clauses. And there is little morphological connection
between the subject and the predicative base (b). 33 A glance at the
Syriac verbal system shows what may happen with respect to these
latter criteria. In Syriac, the mere presence of a participle indicates
predication: the non-verbal uses of the form have fallen into disuse.
The participle is marked as a predicative form (a). Moreover,
participle and personal pronouns have amalgamated into what is in
effect a new conjugation: yiihb-at, "you give," yiiheb-nii:, "I give"
(b). The bare participle suffices to express the third person: yiiheb,
"he gives," yiihbfn, "they give." The Syriac participle has been fully
"verbalized. "

32
31

See Rogland, Non-Past Uses, 129-130.

391

33

See D. Cohen, "Phrase nominal et verbalisation."

Note, however, the remarkable il~lrI;1~ in Num 11:15.

392

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

Chapter 11

In L~H, the process of verbalization has not yet run its full course,
but .1t has pro~r~ssed further than in CBH. Notably, in LBH, the
subJectless part1c1ple suffices to express the third person:
i!ntli-N~ O:~1 ~:>N-N~ on~

Ezra 10:6

M~;niJ ~.i1~-~11- ~~Nno "~;

He did not eat bread or drink wat~r, for he w~s ~o~~ing

over the faithlessness of the exiles.

lJ~irz1 ;~;P~-~~l tli~~iJ N~1 tli~~iJ njti

Eccl1:5 .

The sun rIses and the sun goes down, and hurrie~ to it~
place.

See also: E~c11:6; 10:19 (impersonal); Neh 4:12; 6:10 (impersonal);

9:3,37,37 (1mpersonal); 13:16; 2 ehr 9:7,28; 13:11; 30:21.34

393

Solomon was sovereign over all the kingdoms from the

Euphrates to the land of the Philistines, even to the
border of Egypt; they brought tribute and served Solomon
all the days of his life.

This verse, too, is missing in the Old Greek, although it has

a parallel in the "miscellany" following 3 Kgds 2:46. Together
with the preceding verse, 1 Kgs 4:20, it may be a very late addition
idealizing the importance of Solomon in world history.
. One ostensible instance of a participle expressing the third
person pronoun is so bizarrely formulated that it has often been
suspected as a scribal mistake:
Jud 13: 19

i!O~~iJ-n~l

O",tllO "j~-n~ lj;J~ n~~J

nift; 11Z, NZ,!)01 i!'i!"~ '1~i!-~11 ~11!l'
-:-

In other passages,

a third p~r~on pronoun,35 showing that the process by which the

mere part1c1ple. comes to express the third person subject is still
under way. This process has, however, progressed significantly
beyond what one finds in CBH.
In CB~, the examples of bare participles expressing a third
person subject are extremely rare. 36 Moreover, some of the passages
where the phenomenon does occur may be relatively late additions
to CBH texts:

;,711 ~'~1~:-n~T =r10~ ~i

o:1~~ ~1:l~ '.i11 O"r:l~~~ rj~ 'O~iJ-l~

-:

tiT:

._

39

34
See als,o: Prov 4:18; 5:21; 6:12-14; 7:8, 22; 31:27 (this type of syntax is not
35 found In Prov 10-29).
Examples: Eccl 1:5, 7; 3:21(x2); Esther 2:14(x2); Ezra 1:4' Neh 3:35' 6'2'
"
.,
GKC 116s-t; Driver, Treatise, 171-172.

36 7:3; 1 Chr 5:8',2 Chr 20'11'

. , 22'6
..

--

,tQ

1(l~J

TT

T .. -:

.. :

37 See Moore Judges.

38 In Gen 32:7, the particle mi'J may have dropped out before the participle, as is

'''~lj .,~;-~!) i!jj~~-n~ 0"'::111, i!nJ~ o"rz.; ao

T

The chief jailer committed to Joseph's care all the prisoners

who were in prison, and whatever was done there, he was
the one who did it.

This verse is part of a long passage missing in the Old Greek and
_. '_~~_____w_may ~~ect~~ re~ativelx late rew2!!911&.,QfJl!1J~grlier_narrative.

n;:>~~;PiJ-~~~ ~~;~ i!~' i!jj~~1

'i!~n n":l~ '~N o,"oNn-~!) nN

nfcl1 n"n- N1n" O~ c~:ft;l1 ,tzi~T_~!)T n~i

The IsraelItes said, "Have you seen this man who 'has
come up?" Surely he is coming up to defy Israel.

1 Kgs 5: 1(4:21)

=,~;.,-,:~ 'iJ~iJ-n"~

Gen 39:22

i!;,iJ i!~l1n T~"'Ni! on"~'n

On the basis of the LXX A (Kat avitveYKev nt 't1tV n'tpav 'tOO Kupioo)
'tiP eauJ.1aO''ta noto'Uv'tt, the phrase can plausibly be emended to
n'rzil1~ N"~El~i!, "the one who acts wondrously.,,37 In other cases, too,
the text may not be in order. 38
Indubitable instances in bona fide CBH texts are extremely rare
and limited to impersonal expressions: 39

~N'fc" tli"N '~N:!'

1 Sam 17:25

-:-

So Manoah took the kid with the grain offering, and

offered it on the rock to the LORD, and he was acting
wondrously [?].

LBH does combine the predicative participle with

indicated by the Septuagint. Following mi'J, the omission of the third person
pronoun is normal. In Lev 18:28, i1~R should be accented on the penultimate
and read as a QATAL form. In 1 Sam 6:3, the pronoun c~~ appears to have
dropped out, as is again indicated by the Septuagint.
Relative clauses whose antecedent immediately precedes the relative particle
and is the subject of the following participle have been excluded: Gen 7:8;
Num 21:34; 1 Kgs 5:13; 2 Kgs 7:17; Isa 11:10; 49:7; Jer 38:16; Ezek 9:2;
13:3; 43:1; similarly in a kf clause preceded by the virtual subject of the
participle: 1 Sam 20:1; cf. Isa 33:5; Ezek 21:12. In such clauses, the third
person subject is regularly omitted, probably because a third person pronoun
was felt to be redundant.

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

394

Ex 5:16

~rcp, 1j~ c"i9N C"~~71 '9"1~P'~ 1l;1~ 1"~ 1~~

No straw is given to your servants, yet they say to us,

"Make bricks!"

The classical construction of the circumstantial clause, with

a participle expressing concomitant action, is still attested in the
LBH corpus:
c1~~ o"~O!!lij 1Pl~~j nQ~ij 1~O~~1
c"co"rzt ~o c!I,t,n,
They slaughtered the Passover lamb, and the priests
dashed the blood that they received from them, while the
Levites did the skinning.

2 Chr 35: 11

NB. The bare participle expressing a third person subject is also found about ten
times in Ezekiel:
Ezek 24:14

i"I~il ~r;l,,!~'

i"lln;

~~~

I the LORD have spoken; it is coming. 40

See also: Ezek 1:7, 13; 8:12; 13:7; 16:16; 21:15 (?), 18 (?); 32:30; 36:13; 41:6.
Compare Jer 23:17.
These examples seem to indicate that the syntactic change discussed in the
present section, like many other features distinguishing LBH from CBH, set in
during the exilic period.

In CBH, the predicative participle appears to be a relative novelty,

designed in particular to express the "progressive" meaning characterizing the real present and circumstantial clauses (Chapter II). In
historical perspective, one expects a form expressing the progressive
meaning to extend its functions so as to express the general present,
habituality and iterativity, the imminent future, etc. The process has
already started in CBH, but LBH clearly manifests a further stage of
development. 41
A famous case was quoted above in which a Chronicles passage
uses the participle for the habitual present where the parallel in
Kings has YIQTOL (2 Chr 18:7 and 1 Kgs 22:8). Such examples
remain somewhat anecdotal, however. More systematic differences
in usage come from narrative passages. In CBH narrative, the
predicative participle is almost wholly limited to subordinate
42 Outside
these well-defined syntagms, the predicative participle is rare in
CBH narrative. In LBH, the picture changes significantly.

See also Ezek 16:16, where the plural form clearly indicates that the participle
is meant.
41 In mishnaic Hebrew, the participle serves to express all types of present-tense
and future-tense statements and becomes perhaps the most frequent form of
the verbal system. In mishnaic Hebrew the participle (without the verb i"I~i"I) is
not usual in past-tense contexts, however.
42 It is used also as an "historic present," introduced by mii.
40

.- :

As in CBH, clauses of the type we-Su-Ptcp are to be regarded as

subordinate in LBH, at least on the notional level:

it,~~ n:;~i" t,~tiij' 1~~ij ,,~ '~N!lj

Neh 2:6

::l1rvl;1 "!j~1 '9~~O~ l"!:.J:i: "!j~-'~

The king said to me (the queen also was sitting beside him),
"How long will you be gone, and when will you return?"

The participle expressing durative or iterative processes in past

Joosten, "Disappearance" (2006).

395

Chapter 11

See also: Esther 2:19,21; 5:1; 7:8; Ezra 9:4; Neh 6:2; 2 Chr 20:13;
35: 11.43
In other clauses, however, the participle does not refer to
concomitant action or attendant circumstances but to processes that
are more generally contemporary with the event time. The process
may be durative:
Dan 10:13

ci"

'Q~1 c"i~S; "'~~7 '~11 Oj~ n1~7~ '~1

But the prince of the kingdom of Persia opposed me

twenty-one days.

See also: Esther 9:3-4; Dan 8:3; 9:21; Ezra 3:12-13; Neh 8:7, 11;
2 Chr30:16.
Rather more often, the participle refers to habitual or iterative
processes in the past:
Esther 3:2

1~~ij ,~~~-,~~ 1~~ij ",~~-t,~1

1~o7 c"'om~~1 C"lll!!l

And all the king's servants who were at the king's gate
bowed down and did obeisance [Le., they used to bow down
and do obeisance] to Haman.

See also: Esther 2:11, 14; 4:3; 8:17; 9:19; Neh 4:10, 11, 12, 15;
5:2-4; 6:9,17; 9:3; 12:47; 1 Chr 12:40-41; 15:24; 16:5; 23:5; 2 Chr
3:11-12; 4:3; 9:14, 24, 28; 17:11; 30:21; 32:23; 33:17.

43

Thus also in relative clauses: Esther 4:3; 8:17.

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

396

Even where these durative and iterative clauses take the form we-SuPtcp, there is little reason to suppose that they were regarded as
subordinate. Unless subordination is expressly indicated by particles,
the participle clause is to be considered a main clause.
In CBH, the use of the participle in main clauses expressing
duration or iteration in narrative is very rare (see Chapter VII).
Some occurrences of this usage may come in late additions.44 In
CBH, habitual and iterative processes are normally expressed by
YIQTOL and WEQATAL.
Finally, it is worthy of note that participle clauses in a pasttense context may be negated in LBH:
Esther 2:20

n~.l7-n~l ~r;'l'l~i~ n1~~ i~9tt

l.,tt

,,~~,~
n"~17
n1~
,rz.;~~
T T: : T
T
": T
T
... -: -

N ow Esther did not reveal her kindred or her people, as

Mordecai had charged her.

See also: Neh 4:17; 13:24.

In CBH, such clauses are unexpected, since clauses expressing
attendant circumstances do not usually take a negative form. In actual
fact, the only case of a negated predicative participle in a past-tense
context in the CBH corpus is Deut 4:12, quoted in Chapter VII (p. 245).45
This aberrant instance may indicate that Deut 4 is a relatively late
chapter, as historical-critical investigations tend to confrrm.
YIQTOL

The differences between CBH and LBH in regard to the use of

YIQTOL do not concern the semantics of the form as much as its
status within the verbal paradigm. The rich diversity of functions
of YIQTOL in CBH is found more or less in the same way in LBH as
:,' -~~~~~~~,~-,-,~~",--,~~1l But the ~a~;YIQI:OL.intel:acts-wi~Qthe];~fQnnsand syntagms
lil':,'1
changes decisively.
The most visible innovation in LBH is the use of YIQTOL with
'.III!:'

lIt

prefixed we. While the CBH instances of we+ (non-volitive) YIQTOL

I(il'[

~:",'

'1:11

397

Chapter 11

are practically all doubtful for one reason or another (see Chapter
VIII, Appendix), in LBH the syntagm comes into its own. This
development implies that the tight correspondence between
YIQTOL and WEQATAL discussed in Chapter VIII is loosened.
Whereas in CBH, YIQTOL and WEQATAL are functionally well-nigh
equivalent, in LBH this equivalence no longer obtains. The proliferation of we + YIQTOL also indicates that YIQTOL is no longer, as in
46
CBH, tied to the non-initial position in the clause.
The latter tendency contributes to a second realignment of
YIQTOL within the verbal paradigm. While YIQTOL and the
volitive forms are kept apart in CBH, notably by means of word
order, in LBH this distinction begins to blur. Syntactically and
semantically, YIQTOL, the cohortative and the jussive are turning
into allomorphs of one and the same verbal category.
Non-volitive ~ + YIQTOL
Joosten, "Disappearance" (2006).

In CBH, clause-internal YIQTOL makes up a suppletive paradigm with

clause-initial WEQATAL. The interaction between the two forms can
be observed in numerous predictive or procedural passages in the
CBH corpus. Instances where we + YIQTOL tum up instead of expected
WEQATAL are few in number and often problematic for different
reasons (Chapter VIII, Appendix).
The classical syntax in which YIQTOL and WEQATAL alternate
to express non-volitive modality is still attested in LBH:
2 Chr 12:7

n~"t,~~ ~17~~ ont, "1='1n~' cn"nrz.;~ N~

I will not destroy the~:,' bu~ :i wiil ~~r:t' the~ ;ome

deliverance.
T

Ecc15:5(6)

'9~ip-~.l7 O";:it,~V "~i?: n~~

'9",; n~~~-n~ t,~r:t,

Why should God be angry at your words, and destroy the

work of your hands?

See also: Ecc13:13; 5:16; 12:1,2,3; Dan 8:24; 9:27; 11:33; 12:1;
Ezra 9:12; Neh 5:8; 6:3; 10:39; 1 Chr 4:10; 2 Chr 32:4.

I;,

!,

I,'

'I'ill

iIi!:

:,.,.:

II,

!:

TI

'::,,1.

':,':','::

, I

',

'."
1

:' II
i:,,:.,,'.,!"'.

'"1 ,1,:,',,,:,

.' I:

i!i
"

'\'1"

'i i,i

44 In several instances, the participle clause expressing duration or iteration is

missing in the Septuagint: Jos 2:15; 1 Sam 17:15; 1 Kgs 5:1.

45 See also Jer 32:33. Some ostensible cases have been excluded on different
grounds: (a) cases with an indefinite subject, whose syntactic structure is
ambiguous; (b) cases of the historic present (Ex 3:2; Jud 3:25; 12:3); (c) Deut
1:32, where the participle clause refers to the present.

46 Without the waw, YIQTOL in first position is rare, however, in LBH: Dan 12:4,
10; 11:12Q; Neh 2:18 (see vs. 20); 2 Chr 10:14 (contrast the parallel in 1 Kgs
12:14); 14:6.

398

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

Chapter 11

Alongside the classical syntax, however, one encounters LBH passages

where clause-internal YIQTOL alternates with we + YIQTOL:
Dan 11 :22

n"':::l ''''J 0"

In LBH, we + YIQTOL in predictive, procedural or hypothetical

passages is much more frequent than in CBH. It occurs several times
in Chronicles where the Kings parallel has a different syntax:
2 Chr 2: 15

In the time of their suffering they would cry out to you,

and you would hear them from heaven and give them
saviours according to your great mercies, and they would
save them from the hands of their enemies.

1'~':1 ,.,~~~~ 1~tp': =,~~iJ n;lii~1

Armies shall be utterly swept away and brok~n b~for~

him, and the prince of the covenant as well.

'9fl~-"~:P 1;J:t~iJ-1~ o"~.v. ni~~ 1JT;1~~j

;!j; o~-,,-p n;'o~, '97 O~":;~i

See also: Neh 9:28; 2 Chr 24:11; and perhaps Neh 3:14-15; Eccl8:10.
Another innovation in LBH is the accumulation of successive
instances of we + YIQTOL. The most impressive example of this is
Dan 11, with 25 cases of we + YIQTOL. But this passage does not
stand alone. In Eccl 12:4-7 there are eight cases of we + YIQTOL.
Note also the following with six instances:
2 Chr 7:14

We will cut whatever timber you need from Lebanon,

and bring it to you as rafts by sea to Joppa.

1 Kgs 5:23(9)

0:~'iJ-1~ li~~~ "~~j

ifip; 1;J:t~iJ-1~ 1'j~ "1:t~

Oll:::l n;':li O~"fzJ~ "J~'

.,~~~ "r;1~'i?iJ ,~~ if'!iJ n:~iJ-n~l

.,~~ ,,-p~ 1"~~~

O"~liif-"~:::l ifJ"Jrz.;'" "rz.;~" 1~~F1~'

And this house which I h~~~ co~~ecr~~~d 'forT ~y n~~~

I will cast out of my sight, and will make it a proverb and
a byword among all peoples.

1 Kgs 9:7

.,~~~ "r;1~'i?iJ ,~~ n:~iJ-n~l

"JS "li~ n~rz.;~

O"~-Pif-"~:::l ifJ"Jrz.;'" "rz.;~~T ,,~-,.~., n.,-n-;

And the house that I ha;e c~n:sec;a~~d 'forT ~y n~~~ '1 ~ili
cast out of my sight; and Israel will become a proverb and
a taunt
all

Some striking cases occur in iterative passages. In the CBH corpus

this type of syntax is unattested: iterative passages use YIQTOL and
47
WEQATAL. In LBH, there are several passages with we + YIQTOL:
Neh 9:27

'9.,~~ 1P~~: 00l~ n.v.~1

li~rz.;M o"~iG~ ifM~'

o"~"tq;~ Ov7 1t1~ 'o~~,ij ~~~O,~~

Oif"'~ 'll~ Oi17"rz.;;",
...

47

See, however, Jos 19:29K.

-.

ov.,~~ "~~-~li?~ ,~~ "rp-p 117~~:1

o"~lO 0v":;)l'~ 1:l~:1 .,~~ 1rz.;i?:;"11"7~l;'I:l

o~'~-n~ ~!)'N' on~~n" n"ON'
If my people who are ~~iled',' byT ~y ~a~~' h~bi~

My servants shall bring it down t~- the 'sea fr~~ ~h~

Lebanon; I will make it into rafts to go by sea.

2 Chr 7:20

399

themselves, pray, seek my face, and turn from their

wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and forgive
their sin and heal their land.

While the CBH attestations of we + YIQTOL are spurious examples

that are hard to integrate into the verbal paradigm, in LBH they
represent normal syntax. In LBH, cases of we + YIQTOL mix with
WEQATALwithout obvious semantic or pragmatic implications
(see, e.g., EccI12:4-6 or Dan 11:7,10).
Altogether, there are 67 cases of non-volitive we + YIQTOL in
the LBH cOrpUS: 48 Eccl 8: 10; 12:4 (LF) , 4, 5 (x3), 6 (x2), 7 (SF);
Dan 8:12 (SF); 9:25, 25 (SF); 11:4 (SF), 5 (x2), 6,7 (x2), 10 (SF),
10, 11, 15 (x2), 16 (SF), 16, 17 (SF), 18 (SF), 19 (SF), 22, 25 (SF),
28 (SF), 30 (SF), 36 (x2), 40, 42, 45; 12:4 (LF), 10 (x2), 12 (LF), 13
(LF) , 13~ Neh 3: 14 (LF), 15 (x2); 6: 13; 8: 15; 9:27, 28; 2 Chr. 2: 15;
7:14 (x7), 20; 12:8; 20:9 (x3); 24:11 (x3); 34:25.

The collapse of the modal subsystem

In CBH, the modal subsystem is made up of two separate categories,
YIQTOL and WEQATAL expressing non-volitive modality (Chapter
VIII), and the cohortative-imperative-jussive set expressing volitive
modality (Chapter IX) and "light subordination" (Chapter IV). Even

48

The list includes indifferent forms, marked short forms (SF), and marked
YIQTOL forms (LF), all of which are used promiscuously.

400

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

in CBH, these two categories bleed into one another to a certain

degree. 49 Nevertheless, there is rarely any doubt as to which
category is intended. Morphology, syntax, and semantics work
together: marked volitives are almost entirely limited to expressions
of the speaker's will; the volitives tend to occur in first position,
while YIQTOL is restricted to non-initial position; the semantics of
the two categories, although close, almost always remains distinct.
In LBH, the subtle and complex interplay between the two
modal categories breaks down:
- As will be documented below in the section on the volitives,
the jussive form is used frequently in passages that imply neither
volition of the speaker nor light subordination.
- The placement rules of CBH are no longer valid: imperatives
and jussives occur rather often in second position and even
occasionally in third position in the clause; conversely, YIQTOL
occurs regularly in first position, as was seen in the preceding
section on we + YIQTOL.
- The promiscuous use of the jussive, YIQTOL and WEQATAL
shows that the semantics of these forms have become indistinct.
YIQTOL, WEQATAL, cohortative and jussive can all be used to
express the entire range of modal nuances. Only the imperative
stands apart from this tendency.
In the present section, sporadic cases will be identified where
marked YIQTOL forms take over functions that are the preserve of
volitive forms in CBH.
YIQTOL expressing volition of the speaker
In CBH, YIQTOL may express polite wishes and it may continue
volitive expressions (Chapter VIII). It is unusual, however, in
expressions of the speaker's will, where CBH uses volitives con-

"but in some
passages one finds YIQTOL with a volitive function. Note the
following parallel:
2 Chr 23: 14

M1";

n"~ ;:r1n"~~ Nt, liJ~ij ,~~ .,~

For the priest said, "Do not put her to death in the
house of the LORD. "50
See Chapter IV for YIQTOL in "light subordination," and Chapter IX for
forms used in volitive expressions.
50 In Chronicles, i;,~ is still normal in interdictions, but ~6 is found also in 2 Chr
28:13 ..

401

Chapter 11

M'Vi; n"~ n~u,-t,~ liJ~iJ ,~~ .,~

2 Kgs 11: 15

For the priest said, "Let her not be killed in the house of
the LORD."

Note also the following examples where an analogous phrase is

formulated with YIQTOL in LBH but with the jussive in CBH:

j'f~": C~il1~ l~~iJ l~~~ '~k~

Neh 2:3

I said to the king, "May the king live forever!"

1 Kgs 1:31
C~l1~ i'.":j l~~iJ .,~,~ .,,,~ '~~Mj
She said, "May my.J:,0RD King David live forever!"
The example in Neh 2:3 also illustrates the fact that forms
expressing volition are not restricted to first or second position. 51
The syntactic pattern of the clause appears to be Aramaic:
Dan 2:4

o king, live forever. 52

":Q 1"~~1l~ ~:p~~

In other passages, the volitive interpretation makes good sense,

although a non-volitive reading cannot be excluded:
Ezra 10:3

1j"ij~~~ n"i~-n1~~ MI;1lJ1

"j'~ n~l1::l CM~ i~i~M' c"rzjj-~~ ~"~iM~

T nfz1 ;.,-' n'iM~' 1jT"ij~~ nl~T~~ TC"iltJiJ',

So now let us make ; .. ~~ve~an~' with ~ur God to se:nd

away all these wives and their children, according to the
counsel of my LORD and of those who tremble at the
commandment of our God; and let it be done according to
the law.

In the LXX, as in most modern versions, the YIQTOL forms are

rendered with forms expressing volition (ota8rof.1e8a, yev1l8TI1:ro).
But perhaps the forms could be given a predictive-commissive
meaning. See also: Esther 9:25; Neh 4:14; 5:13; 6:10; 2 Chr 24:5.
Second person YIQTOL expressing light subordination
Joosten, "Distinction" (2005).

As was shown in Chapter IV, in CBH the imperative is used

systematically in clauses expressing light subordination, following

49

YIQTOL

51
52

See further below.

See also: Dan 3:9~ 5:10~ 6:7, 22 (always with the imperative).

402

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

other volitives or questions. 53 This use of the imperative is still

attested in LBH, but alongside it we also find YIQTOL where light
subordination involves a second person form:
2 Chr 20:20

'.:J~NM' C:;,"iit,N i11i1"::l 1.l"~Ni1

~n,,~~'~1 :;"N"T:l.l; 1.l,,~Nn
T

Believe in the LORD your God and you' ~ili b~ e~i~blish~:d~

believe his prophets and you will prosper.

While the second clause is constructed as in CBH, the first clause

uses we + YIQTOL where CBH would have used the imperative.
Dan 12:13 r~~ij

rp7 '97ll 7 'b~lj11j1.:Jtl1 rf.~ 1~ i10~1

But you, go your way, and rest; you shall rise for your
reward at the end of the days.

This second example is textually somewhat uncertain. 54 Moreover,

the we + YIQTOL clauses may be predictive. But it is certainly
possible to make them depend on the initial imperative: "Go ... so'
that you may rest, and rise ... at the end of days."55
WEQATAL

While the CBH corpus has well over 3000 cases of WEQATAL, the
corpus counts no more than about 207. 56 Even taking into
account that the LBH corpus is only about one third the size of the
CBH corpus, these statistics must be significant. And indeed, as
was already noted above, the former functions of WEQATAL are
being taken over by other verbal forms. The syntagm has to
compete with forms whose meaning-while distinct in CBHoverlaps with its own in LBH.
From a purely semantic point of view, WEQATAL keeps most
of its CBH functions in LBH. Several usages are very poorly
represented; however~ s;z enty-tlre"-'prel1tctive~'aJla hypothetical
LBH

53 A doubtful exception is Num 17 :25(1 0), where the text may not be in order
(see BHS).

54 See BHS.
55 See also: Ps 144:5-6.
56

In the LBH corpus, the WEQATAL forms have been counted one by one. For the
CBH corpus, the number .is an estimate based on the 3494 instances of we +
"perfect" retrieved by Accordance; some of these are we + QATAL.
57 Notably, there are very few cases of imperative WEQATAL; see above note 10.

Chapter 11

403

usages are somewhat frequent. The form develops no new

functions. Thus, WEQATAL presents the image of a verbal category
that is dying out. Structurally, it has no raison d'etre: in all its
usages, it could probably be replaced by other verbal forms
without changing the meaning. Statistically it is infrequent. In
mishnaic Hebrew, WEQATAL will indeed entirely disappear.
Nevertheless, the attestations of WEQATAL in LBH are too
numerous, and too well distributed over the entire corpus, to
suspect that the verbal form was used simply as an archaism. In
the literary type of Hebrew one . encounters in the late biblical
books, it is still an active morphological category that can be used
as one option among several to express certain modal nuances.
The disappearance of iterative WEQATAL
Joosten, "Disappearance" (2006).

One function of WEQATAL seems to have fallen by the wayside in

the evolution from CBH to LBH. In CBH, the expression of habitual
or repeated action in a past-tense 'context is well-attested for
WEQATAL, alongside YIQTOL (see Chapter VIII). But an unbiased
investigation will show that it does not occur in LBH.
In LBH, there are 10 cases where the conjunction 1 followed by
QATAL refers, at least possibly, to repeated processes in a past
time-frame:
2 Chr 15:5-6

N~~1 N~i!l~ Cit,~ r~ CiJO C"r:1S;~1

ni~'Ni1 ":lrzji"-t,~
t,l) ni::l' nb1i1~ ,,~
u:
T -: T

:.

1Mrl~'

'''l)::l '''l)1 "il::l-"il

i1'~-~:;'::l' O~~;; C"iit,N:"~~

T T

T:

T -:

.. :

In those times it was not safe for anyone to go or come,

for great disturbances afflicted all the inhabitants of the
lands. They were broken in pieces, nation against nation
and city against city, for God troubled them with every
sort of distress.

See also: Dan 8:4, 11; Ezra 8:36; 1 Chr 9:26-27; 23:32; 2 Chr
12:11; 13:9; 24:11; 33:6.
In a CBH text, the verbal form at the beginning of 2 Chr 15:6
would unhesitatingly be analyzed as WEQATAL expressing iterativity.
In LBH, however, the reasonable inference is that this is a case of
we + QATAL expressing the preterite. The reason for this difference
in interpretation is the relative frequency of verbal usages. In CBH,
there are more than 160 cases of iterative WEQATAL, and only about

404

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

60 cases of we + QATAL expressing the preterite in narrative contexts.

In LBH, there are 10 possible cases of iterative WEQATAL but around
115 cases of we + QATAL. Since preterites may refer to repeated
processes, although without expressing the iterative nuance, it is
logical to read the 10 cases in the light of the majority use. 58 The
translation of the NRSV in 2 Chr 15:6 is therefore correct in rendering
the verbal form with the simple past. A translation as a marked
iterative (e.g., "they would be broken" or "they were broken time
and again") would not be faithful to the Hebrew.
Supporting evidence for the disappearance of iterative WEQATAL
from LBH is the use of the participle and of we + YIQTOL to express
the iterative function in the clause-initial slot.

The volitives
The collapse of the modal subsystem compnsIng YIQTOL and
WEQATAL on the one hand, and the cohortative-imperative-jussive
set on the other hand, affects the latter as much as the former. The
most important changes have already been announced in the
preceding sections: the jussive form is used rather often with
a non-volitive meaning, and the tendency of volitive forms to take
the first position in the clause is much weaker than in CBH.

Non-volitive

w + jussive

Qimron, "Consecutive and Conjunctive Imperfect" (1987); Joosten, "PseudoClassicisms" (1999).

In the LBH corpus, the jussive may be used to express volition of

the speaker: following ~N, 59 or preceding NJ,60 or otherwise:
1 Chr 12: 18(17)

"e~::l con ~~::l .,,~~ "JniW,~-oN'

- -:

TT

: -T: . -"ii~N
.-

"::

Ni~

.....

my
LJ.J.'-/U.~.J.J. my hands have done no wrong, then may the God
of our ancestors see and give judgment. 61

The jussive is also used to express light subordination: Esther 5:6;

7:2; 9:12.

See in Chapter V on WAYYIQTOL expressing repeated action.

60 See Ecd 7:16; 10:4; 11:6;. Esther 6:10; Neh 3:37; 13:14; 2 Chr 6:42.
See Dan 9:16; Neh 1:6, 11; 1 Chr 21:17; 2 Chr 18:12.
61 See also: Esther 2:3; Ezra 1:3; 1 Chr 16:31; 21:3.

405

Chapter 11

In addition to these cases conforming to CBH syntax, however,

prose also has twelve instances of marked jussive forms

which do not express volition:

LBH

Dan 11:4'

in1~~o ':lrSM ii0l1~1

o:~~ij nin~' V~Ti~~

r001

And while still rising in power, his kingdom shall be

broken and divided toward the four winds of heaven.

See also: Eccl 12:7; Dan 8:12; 9:25; 11:10, 16 (fzi~:l), 17, 18, 19,
25, 28, 30.62
All these instances are with prefixed " The syntagm has a
function similar-or identical-to that of WEQATAL, with which it
co-occurs in several passages (see Eccl 12 and Dan 11). Similar
cases occur in Qumran Hebrew: 63
11 QTemple LVI 8
piT:l rD 17'" 110rD" N'~ ,rvN rD"Ni1'
And the man that will not listen but acts presumptuously ...

It is perhaps possible to explain this usage of the jussive as an

organic development from CBH. The meaning of the jussive would

have "bleached," shedding the volitive nuance so as to take on
a generic modal meaning overlapping that of WEQATAL and
YIQTOL. Still, such an explanation does not account for the fact
that all occurrences are with prefixed " It is perhaps better,
therefore, to attribute the phenomenon to the efforts of later
authors to write "classical" Hebrew. Their intimate familiarity
with the classical texts led them to observe that, when the
conjunction , immediately preceded a form of the prefix
conjugation, the form would be short whenever the morphology
allowed it. What escaped their sagacity, however, was that those
instances of we + short form are, at least in CBH prose, practically
always jussives expressing either volition or light subordination .
To these late authors, the semantic distinction between the jussive
and YIQTOL had become blurred. They decided, therefore, that it
was fine to use the prefix conjugation following " in any modal
function, if only the form was shortened wherever possible. They
were not entirely consistent in their syntax, however, since a few

58
59

62
63

Perhaps also Ecd 5: 14.

See Qimron, "New Approach."

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

406

normal we + YIQTOL forms are found interspersed among the

jussives in Daniel and Ecclesiastes. 64
Whether organic or artificial, the LBH system also affected the
textual transmission of the other biblical books:
Ex 19:3

Chapter 11

Eccl 9:8

Here the prepositional phrase may also be governed by the

preceding noun: "Do not let oil-on-your-head be lacking."

... t,~l~: .,~.~~ '''~.~11 :J~~~ n"~~ '~~n jj!;j

Volitives in third position in the clause

Joosten, "Volitive Verbal Forms in Qoheleth" (2007).

In CBH, word order helps to tell the two modal categories apart:
while YIQTOL is almost always clause-internal, the volitive forms
show a strong tendency to head their clause. Only in about 5% of
cases does a topicalized or focalized element precede a volitive
verbal form (Chapter IX). InCBH prose, there are no attestations of
a volitive preceded by two constituents. 65
In LBH, the placement rules of CBH have fallen into disuse, as
was already shown above in the section on we + YIQTOL. Position
in the sentence no longer helps to define a verbal form as volitive
or not. In the light of this, it is not surprising that there are several
instances of volitives in third position in the LBH corpus. The
clearest cases occur in Ecclesiastes: 66
Eccl10:20
Do not curse the king, even in your

thOUQ'Jlts.

See EcclI2:4; Dan 12:4, 12, 13; also Neh 3:14.

Deut 5:31 involves a vocative, which is not to be considered a constituent of the
clause. Jer 9:3; Ezek 20:7, 39 involve an idiomatic phrase with rz;"~, "each,"
that may have been considered a single constituent; see Muraoka, Emphatic
Words and Structures, 34-35. There are few cases of volitives in third position
in poetry: see Ps 7:8; 69:24; 72:1; 90:12; 119:144 and Jer 18:23.
66 See also: Neh 3:37(4:5) no~n-r,~ '9"~~~~ OI;l~~lJ1, but this is practically a quote
from Jer 18:23.

'9t:l~-t,~ '9~~,-t,.p 1~~1

Do not let oil be lacking on your head.

Ecc19:10

Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob and tell the
Israelites ...

As the consonantal orthography shows, the verbal form in the last

clause was originally intended as YIQTOL, wetaggfd. The vocalization
of the form as a jussive is anomalous, because no volitive meaning
is intended, and because the second person volitive should in any
case, in CBH, be expressed by the imperative. It appears therefore
that the vocalization reflects the rules of LBH and QH, anachronistically applied to this CBH passage.

407

jj~~ '90~~ ni~~~

'91; N~~r:'I ,~~ t,!;j

Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might. 67

Clauses like these should, of course, be analysed from a discourselinguistic perspective. The analysis might show why the two
constituents precede the verb. Such considerations, however, do
not alter the fact that clauses with a volitive form in third position
are completely unattested in the large CBH corpus. This is hardly
a mere question of style. Since the tendency of volitives to occur at
the head of the clause has functional implications in CBH, there are
good reasons to suspect that a clause like Eccl 10:20 would not
have been considered well-formed in CBH.
The phenomenon cannot be attributed to the wisdom genre, for
the book of Proverbs conforms, roughly, to the classical rules.
In Proverbs, volitives are never preceded by two constituentsexcluding conjunctions and vocatives. The phenomenon finds
parallels, however, in early post-biblical Hebrew. 68

Conclusions
The investigations in the present chapter demonstrate the necessity
to distinguish the late biblical corpus from the classical one. If
grammatical analysis is to preserve some explanatory power, it
must be applied to texts representing, at least roughly, a single etat
de langue. Otherwise the description will simply dissolve into an
enumeration of linguistic facts, without system. While the forms
making up the verbal system in CBH still exist in LBH, and keep
most of their earlier functions, the relation between them has
shifted. Moreover, some of the forms develop new functions more

64
65

This is the analysis reflected in the Septuagint, Vulgate and Targum and many
modern translations. The Masoretic accents, however, suggest another
interpretation: "Whatever your hand finds to do with your might, do."
68 See Sir 36:3(33:4) [o:J] i:J::>n ':J":J"11r, 1::> ,:J:J on":J"l1r, r1tl.'ip:J ,tl.'~::> "As you have
used us to show your holiness to them, so use them to. show your glory to
us"; Tob 4:5 (4Q200 I 3) ,::>[r n]"n o"nr,~r, 'l::l n::>"7-'' r,,::>, "And all your days
(my son) remember God."
67

408

Developments In Late Biblical Hebrew

or less unattested in CBH. The workings of the LBH verbal system

remain, to a large extent, to be described in detail. For the present,
all that was required was to show that there are differences.
The distinguishing of just two phases might create the
impression that linguistic developments happened all at once,
during a dark period separating the two: the "early" Hebrew of the
classical corpus all of a sudden became "late". Our case studies
provide an important corrective on this point. Several developments
were already well on their way in the classical phase (e.g.,
narrative we + QATAL; the participle expressing durative or iterative
processes in the past), or appear to set in during the exilic period
(e.g., the use of the bare participle as a verbal form). In other
cases, however, the new type of syntax is unattested before the
LBH books (e.g., the non-volitive usage of the jussive). Some
developments are incipient in LBH (e.g., the disappearance of
WAYYIQTOL). Similarly, LBH may in some respects be regarded as
a transitional phase between CBH and post-biblical Hebrew (e.g.,
the disappearance of the opposition between volitive and nonvolitive modality), but in other respects it appears rather as a dead
end (e.g., the use of the participle in narrative clauses). Language
evolution is an ongoing process.
An interesting by-product of our explorations is the underscoring
of the relative unity of the LBH phase of the language. Most of the
phenomena investigated tum up in several LBH books. Disparities in
this regard are probably to be attributed to differences of literary
genre rather than grammar. Esther has no indications of the collapse
/ii
of the modal subsystem: the CBH placement rules and the distinction
between WEQATAL and we + jussive are always correctly observed. 69
i,i,
This may simply be because Esther contains few modal statements.
~t:"~~.~".~.~.~~"~~~.~"-.~~~:r~. th.e .book . shol.vs.~p~.seera1 . typica1 .. LBH
I,ll,
innovations (e.g., use of QATAL in sequential clauses; the participle
(I '
expressing duration or iteration). Conversely, there are no sequential
,ii,l
subject-QATAL clauses in Daniel, perhaps because the narrative
i.,l
element is not very prominent in the Hebrew sections of this book
(except in Dan 1).
i

I"

I,

69

The one exception is Esth~r 9:25 where the long form ::l1~~ appears to be used
with a volitive funCtion (and in first position in the clause). This verse does
not belong to the original and authentic part of the book, however.

Chapter 11

409

The LBH verbal system manifests innovations also in the use of the
infinitives construct and absolute. 70 Since the infinitives play no
central role in the CBH paradigm, those innovations have not been
presented here. A full description of the LBH system for its own
sake is still a desideratum.

70

See O. Cohen, Verbal System.

CHAPTER XII
VERBAL USAGE IN POETRY
What typifies poetry, according to an inspired suggestion by
Roman Jacobson, is the principle by which a unit of verbal
communication, a message, refers back to itself. Poetry is a type of
discourse that focuses the attention on its form, its content, and the
way those two interact. At a more practical level, poetry is also
a literary genre. In the Hebrew Bible, it is characterized by
parallelism and metaphoric language-two procedures based on
similarity and difference. 1
The poetic quality comes in different degrees: there is a continuum going from the very prosaic to the very poetic with many
nuances in between. The Pentateuch and Former Prophets consist
mostly of narrative prose, but they contain a few poems as wellthe blessing of Jacob in Gen 49, the Song of the Sea in Ex 15, the
Song of Deborah in Jud 5, and many others. Moreover, a whiff of
poetry can be found in many legal passages and in characters'
speech. Outside the CBH corpus, poetic texts abound, although they
come in different varieties: the Psalms are more poetic than the
Latter Prophets, and the Song of Songs is the most poetic of all. In
regard to quantity, poetry of some form makes up almost half of the
Hebrew Bible.
Although poetic texts have come within the horizon of the
present investigation, as many references and occasional remarks will
show, no effort has been made to treat poetic usage in a systematic
way. Nor will this chapter pretend to provide such a treatment-this
would require a new monograph. The objective is merely to present
some principal differences between verbal usage in poetry and in
1

Adele Berlin, "On Reading Biblical Poetry: The Role of Metaphor";

J. A. Emerton (ed.), Congress Volume: Cambridge 1995, Supplements to
Vetus Testamentum 66 (Leiden 1997),25-35.

412

Verbal Usage in Poetry

prose, and to explore some of the factors that created these

differences.

Preliminary considerations
Warren, Modality (1998); Niccacci, "Poetry" (2006).

As will be illustrated in the present chapter-and as anyone with

experience in reading the Hebrew Bible knows-poetic texts
exhibit several verbal usages that are wholly or largely unattested
in prose texts. Thus, the verbal system in poetry would seem to be
an attractive field of research. Before entering into this field,
however, the grammarian should ponder some of the difficulties
involved in treating poetic material. Poetry poses special problems,
in any language and certainly in biblical Hebrew. To begin with,
poetry will allow the use of a much wider range of constructions
than are common in prose.2 In addition, the principle of poetic
licence opens the door to usages that are truly unique. Poetry is
also typically more difficult to understand than prose. One way of
attracting attention to the message is to hide it; some poetic
expressions are like riddles. To read and appreciate poetry in
a foreign language is a challenge, all the more so in a dead
language like biblical Hebrew. And this is valid not only for the
present-day researcher, but for ancient scribes and tradents as well:
the difficulty of biblical poetry has occasioned a textual basis that
is not always well assured. To crown it all, biblical poems are
often hard to date, even more so than works in prose.
,Iii

The grammar of poetry and the grammar of prose

i
!'.I
,I

II

. .. . .

In the light of these difficulties, grammarians should arm them-

*~~ ~._ ~~._.~ ~.~=sclY~hJlQth courage aIld res!raint..LeLu~J'!k~restraint first.

':,1

:~

The special difficulties arising in the study of poetry advise against

selecting a poetic corpus as a first step towards describiug the

(I

Chapter 12

413

biblical Hebrew verbal system. 3 Although poetry shows a fuller

rang~ . of verbal us~g~, biblical poems do not provide good
~ondIt~ons f~r detenrumng verbal functions. The subjective element
In the InvestIgation is likely to predominate to such an extent that it
makes the results unacceptable. In the same vein, one should avoid
playing off poetry against prose in discussions on the Hebrew verb
as is done in many grammars. If, for instance, a verbal form lik~
WAYYIQTOL always (or nearly always) implies a preterite reading in
prose. texts, it is poor methodology to ascribe to it an omnitemporal
meanIng only because in some poetic passages it seems to refer to
present or future events.4 One should rather ask how a form that
systematically functions as a preterite in prose texts came to be used
in clauses with different temporal implications in poetry. As will be
sho.wn presently, many usages in poetic texts are secondary or
denved; they are contextual exploitations of the basic function. The
value of a Hebrew verbal form cannot simply be abstracted from the
sum total of its prosaic and poetic uses.
But courage is called for as well. The grammar of poetry
should not be abandoned under the pretext that it is a lawless area.
Many Bible translations notoriously appear to capitulate in their
approach to poetry, translating any and all verbal forms with bland
presents. Such faint-heartedness cannot be recommended. Biblical
poets did not select their verbal forms at random. And in spite of
all the difficulties, it should be possible to make some sense out of
verbal usage in poetic texts-even if, in the end, we should admit
that many subtleties continue to escape us.
The point of departure adopted in the present chapter is that
verbal meanings in poetry are basically the same as in prose. The
exception would be the case of poetic texts written in a different
Hebrew dialect-that of the author, or, in the case of "codeswitching," that of the characters. Writing in a different dialect
may account for some of the syntactic anomalies of the poetry of
Hosea, 5 while code-switching may explain certain irregularities in
the poetry of the book of Job. For the most part, however, the

1:\

iii
iii

I:

:1'

!II

III

iii

'II

I.

iii

i'l

For unique constructions in Hebrew poetry, see, e.g., A. Bloch, Vers und
Sprache im Altarabischen: Metrische und syntaktische Untersuchungen (Basel
1946); R. Sappan, The Typical Features of the Syntax of Biblical Poetry
(Jerusalem 1981); N. P. Lunn, Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew
Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics (Bletchley 2006).

Diethelm Mich~l based his theory of the Hebrew tenses on an analysis of the
Psalms; see MIchel, Tempora. The results of his study have not found wide
acceptance, however.
4 See, e.g., GKC 111.
5 See Notarius, System.
3

414

Verbal Usage in Poetry

writers of the poetic texts of the Bible must have belonged to the
same circles that produced biblical narrative and discursive texts.
Had they used a different verbal system, they could not have
6
hoped to be understood by their contemporaries.
What sets poetry apart from prose is a greater flexibility in the
use of language, a predilection for archaisms, and a stronger
presence of the writer's subjectivity.

!
i

if

i:

il

H
II

!:\

',ii

Ii
I
i

li[\

ji:i

i,ll
1::\
I

i"

!'I'I
!I I
i ', I
;\'! i,
I!j

I: Ii

Iii,

Syntactic flexibility
Poems are not, like prose texts, governed by notions of temporal or
logical sequence. They typically are guided to a large extent by
mood, feeling, and intuition. This implies that the context does not
provide the same type of guidance as in prose texts: while
narrative texts will usually observe continuity of reference time,
and expressly mark any digressions from it, poetry may jump from
past to present or future, and vice versa, in seemingly anarchic
fashion. Similarly, whereas discursive texts will often develop
a progression from what is given to what is desired, poems may
mix the factual and the imaginary in very different ways.
Concretely, this means that one half of a poetic verse may refer to
the past while the other half refers to the future; one half may
express epistemic modality, the other deontic. Any combination of
verbal functions may be envisaged.
With respect to syntax, poems show a large variety of
constructions unusual in prose. The word order is much freer.
While in prose (at least in CBH prose) a finite verb will almost
always occupy the first or second position in the clause, in poetry
clauses with the verbal form in third position are common. In
poetry, word ~rder does not reflect information struct~ in the

r-~~~----~=;l:,l:~Sc:!~~:~:;;l;~~~~
'i'.1

,Ii '\
"i:

I,

:: 'II

and asyndetic modes of subordination alternate freely, for instance

in relative clauses, or in similes.
The greater syntactic freedom of poetry also affects the use of
verbal forms, notably with regard to the placement rules governing
the use of YIQTOL and the volitives (see below).

II,:

il!:!

,'J Ii

'Ii

The same basic attitude is taken by Warren, Modality; Niccacci, "Poetry."

415

Archaism
An important aspect of poetry is its intertextual nature. Poets
allude to other texts belonging to the literary tradition of which
they are part, exploiting them in their own work as they see fit.
A component of intertextuality that has attracted much interest in
the study of biblical poetry is archaism: by way of "quotation"
from ancient works, biblical poets use archaic vocabulary and
morphology hardly attested in prose texts. Famous examples from
the realm of morphology are the waw compaginis, the third person
suffix '~-, and enclitic me.m. With regard to vocabulary, one may
think of the noun O~~ "people," the verbs i1r1~ "to come" and on~
"to eat," and the relative pronoun ~i.7 Such elements, which are
practically limited to poetry, link up with a very old literary
tradition which has only fragmentarily been preserved in the Bible.
Although some of them have become rather common in poetic
, diction, others may actively have evoked passages from old
poems. 8
With regard to verbal syntax, archaism has already been
invoked to explain the poetic use of QATAL to express present
states without implication of anteriority (Chapter VI). Another
likely case is the use of the prefix conjugation (YIQTOL or the
jussive) to express single events in the past, as will be discussed
below.
The subjectivity of the poet
There is certainly a degree of conventionality in biblical poetry.
The Psalms, for instance, generall y refrain from mentioning
circumstances that are too specific, showing that they were
composed so as to. allow any person to say them. In spite of this
conventional aspect, however, biblical poetry like all poetry is
essentially characterized by a drive to say what has never been
said before, or to say anew what has been said many times.
A crucial procedure allowing the poet to innovate is the "trope,"
by which a word or phrase is "turned" or "skewed" from its
normal use so as to mean something else. Tropes come in many

For a fuller list of morphological and lexical items representative of archaic

and archaizing poetry, see Saenz-Badillos, History, 56-62.
8 E.g., ~I:1'l:;';; 1nJ.!.1 in Isa 43:21 may be a poetic reference to I;1~~R 1n::J.!.1 in the Song
of the Sea (Ex 15:16).

II

'.!!'I

!:,II'I

Chapter 12

416

Verbal Usage in Poetry

varieties: metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, irony, sarcasm,

antonomasia, catachresis, hyperbole, litotes, and many others.
Decoding the tropes of a poem is an important step in
understanding and appreciating it.
Although tropes are usually held to operate on words or
expressions, it is widely recognized that they can do so on
grammatical forms as well. When Amos says "Come to Bethel,
and transgress; at Gilgal multiply transgression" (Amos 4:4), his
irony, or sarcasm, is as much in the form of the imperative as in
the words. The perfect of confidence, too, may be regarded as
a trope by which a process regarded as certain is presented as if it
had already occurred. While these instances are relatively clear,
other metaphorical uses of the verbal forms may still be hidden
within some poetic passages.
These reflections may show that linguistic differences between
poetry and prose belong for the most part to the domain of style,
not grammar-parole, not langue. It is important to realize,
however, that poetical style is governed in part by convention.
Stylistic analysis may legitimately search for regularities. Not all
the special effects of poetry are the reflection of the author's
unique genius.
Diachronic considerations
Akin to the question of dialect discussed above is the diachronic
question. The problem involved in dating biblical poetry is a
particularly thorny one, but it cannot be eluded in the present
context. Since our point of departure is the idea that the verbal
system functions in poetry more or less as in prose, it is necessary
As the
preceding chapter shows, it makes a big difference whether one
reads a text in the light of the CBH verbal system, or in the light of
the LBH one. To anticipate one difficult question that will be
discussed below, poetic instances of ostensible non-volitive we +
YIQTOL require an explanation if one relates them to the CBH
system (where this syntagm is rare and irregular), but will be
considered normal if one approaches them on the basis of the LBH
system (where it is normal).
A few reflections ~ay help, if not to solve the problem, at
least to give clarity to the debate.

Chapter 12

417

Archaic biblical poetry

Notarius, System (2007).

An opinion widely shared among linguists is that CBH was preceded

by a more archaic state of the language, which is .attested in a
handful of poetic texts: the Blessing of Jacob (Gen 49), the Song of
the Sea (Ex 15), the Oracles of Balaam (Num 23-24), the Song
of Moses (Deut 32), the Blessing of Moses (Deut 33), the Song of
Deborah (Jud 5), and perhaps some early Psalms. In these texts,
archaic morphology, vocabulary and syntax are attested with such
density that it seems impossible to explain them as occasional
"archaisms" used for stylistic reasons. 9
The nature of these texts may be illustrated by a closer look at
Deut 32. This poem has a narrative section covering several
verses, thus allowing some interesting observations on its verbal
system. In Chapter I, it was already pointed out that the poem uses
the short form of the prefix conjugation as a preterite:
vs. 8b

cl~ "~f i''''l=?iJf c:i~ li"~~ SIJ~iJf

SNifli" "J:::l ieo~S C"~li riS:l~ :l~"

When the Most High appo~~io~~d th~' ~atio;s~ wh~n h~

divided humankind~ he fixed the boundaries of the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel.

This form is not restricted with regard to position in the clause, as

is shown clearly in one instance:
vs. 18

1~~h~ S~ n~~l:1j .,~tl11~; i1~

You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you; you

forgot the God who gave you birth.l

This is a striking usage, justifiable on language-historical grounds,

but unparalleled in Hebrew prose texts. Other prefixed preterites
occur in verses 10, lIb (x2), 13, 18 and probably, although the
forms are indifferent, in verses lIb, 16 (x2), 17. They have the same
temporal-aspectual value as the WAYYIQTOL forms in verses 6, 13
(x2), 15 (x4) , 18, 19 (x3). In fact, the poem illustrates a state of

9
10

See Saenz Badillos, History, 56-62.

The morphology of the form '~r;l is somewhat unexpected. However, in the
light of '~~r:Jj (3 fem.sg.) in Jer 3:6 and 'r,~r;l-~~ (2 m.sg.) in Jer 18:23, it is
legitimate to take '~r;l as a short form (2 m.sg.). See Bloch, "Prefixed
Perfective," 60, n. 108.

Verbal Usage in Poetry

418

language where W AYYIQTOL is not yet a "syntactic fossil," as in

CBH, but simply the preterite with the conjunction.
In a system where the preterite is free with regard to word
order, and free of the waw, one expects QATAL to be a mere
perfect without preterite functions. QATAL would not have to
replace WAYYIQTOL if the latter form could be broken up without
loss of meaning. This is indeed the situation one finds in Deut 32.
Verse 18 quoted above illustrates that QATAL was not needed as
a stand-in for the preterite. Conversely, an inspection of all QATAL
forms in the poem shows that it is used as a present perfect: verses
5, 15 (x3), 21 (x2), 22, 26, 27 (x2), 36; and expressing anteriority
in subordinate clauses in verses 6 (x2) , 15, 17 (x3), 18, 37. 11 The
semantic contrast between the preterite and QATAL is clear in the
following verse where both forms are used:
vs. 15
n"~f I;1"~.i1 I!l~~~ ~.i1~~j 11'~; l~~~j
Jeshurun grew fat, and kicked; you grew fat, bloated and
gorged.

While the third-person narrative uses the preterite (wAYYIQTOL), the

apostrophe to the people in the second person-showing that what is
being told concerns the audience directly-uses QATAL.12
The long form of the prefix conjugation is used for the general
present in vss. lla, 39 and in modal statements in vss. 3, 6, 21 (x2),
23 (x2), 24, 25, 30 (x2), 35, 36 (x2), 40, 41 (x2), 42 (x2), 43 (2x)uses that one finds also in CBH. 13 In the narrative passage, however, it
expresses attendant circumstance, see vs. 10 (3x). In CBH prose,
this function is unattested for YIQTOL, the predicative participle being
used instead. It is to be noted, too, that YIQTOL is freely used in first
position in the clause (vs. 10), and following waw:
I kill and I make alive. 14

This leads one to expect that WEQATAL had not yet entered the
verbal system. Although the poem is too short to attain certainty in

Chapter 12

this matter, it can at least be observed that no cases of WEQATAL

are attested in it. 15
Thus, Deut 32 appears to have a full-blown verbal system that
can fairly qualify as a precursor of the CBH system, with a *yaqtul
preterite, a QATAL perfect, and a *yaqtulu present-future, to which
also a volitive category is to be added (see vss. 7, 38b). This
system will evolve into the CBH system in the following ways: the
*yaqtul preterite falls from use except after the conjunction;
QATAL takes over the functions that *yaqtul has shed; *yaqtulu
loses its present-imperfective functions to the participle and turns
into a modal form. Although the material is scant, this analysis
strongly confirms the archaic quality of the poem. While single
usages, notably the use of the short form of the prefix conjugation
as a preterite, might be the result of archaising, it is hard to
imagine that a CBH author could successfully imitate an entire
system.
It is legitimate, then, to regard Deut 32 and similar texts as
inherited literature known to the authors of the CBH corpus. The
archaizing element in many psalms did not fall from the blue sky,
but was suggested by a literary tradition that went back to the premonarchic era. 16

Late biblical poetry

A. Hurvitz, J7rtJ77 J7rtJ7]':1 (1972).

In a classic contribution to the study of biblical Hebrew in diachronic

perspective, Avi Hurvitz has shown that a small number of psalms

show up a relatively high concentration of words and expressions
otherwise known only from LBH. On the basis of these linguistic
indications, Hurvitz concludes that the texts were composed in the
post-exilic period. The psalms in question are'ps 103, 117, 119, 124,
125, 133, and 144.17 Most of the evidence evaluated is lexical, but
Hurvitz also draws attention to the following verbal usage:
15 Notarius, System, has argued that there is no

Perhaps QATAL is used as irrealis in vs. 30 (2x).

Compare also vs. 16 (preterite) with vs. 21 (QATAL).
13 Note also its use to express iterative-habitual process in the past in vss. 12, 14.
14 See also verse 41.

11

12

419

WEQATAL in archaic poetry,

except in the Balaam texts (Num 24:18, 19,24).
16 See, e.g., Y. Avishur, "Common Stylistic Patterns and Language in the ~Song of
Moses' (Deut. 32) and in Ugaritic Literature", in idem, Comparative Studies in
Biblical and Ugaritic Languages and Literatures (Tel Aviv 2007), pp. 182-209.
17 To these a number of psalms are to be added for which the linguistic evidence
is not entirely conclusive but suggests a late date nonetheless: Ps 19b, 28, 33,
40, 45, 63, 75, 104, 106, 107, 109, 111, 112, 113, 116, 126, 128, 135, 137, 143,

Verbal Usage in Poetry

420

~,jr:t~~ '~.v-":P '1~! 1,j'.~: li'1: ~1il-":P

For he knows how we were made; he remembers that we
are dust.

Ps 103: 14

The use of the passive participle of the verb ,~t with an active sense
is attested in mishnaic Hebrew and seems to be due to influence
from Aramaic. An interesting aspect not mentioned by Hurvitz is
that this participle by itself expresses the third person subject. As
was shown in Chapter XI, pp. 391-394 this is a late feature.
Another interesting usage is that of second person YIQTOL
forms continuing an imperative:
Ps 144:5

'"1t1i '9"~~-~ij il1il~

Bow your heavens~ 0 LORD~ and come down.

This type of syntax, too, typifies late biblical texts, as was shown
in Chapter XI (p. 402).
The list of late psalms identified on the basis of linguistic indications
is probably not exhaustive. Nevertheless, the fact that it proves
possible to establish the post-exilic date of some Psalms on the basis
of their language suggests that Psalms whose language gives no
indication of lateness may be considered to be relatively earlier.
The poetry contained in the late biblical books and in postexilic prophets may be considered late as well,18 even though little
research has been done on the language of these texts in diachronic
perspective. 19

Other poetic texts

Although the contours of the poetical corpora remain fluid, it
appears that most texts are to be situated somewhere between
archaic and late biblical poetry. A natural corollary of this is that
suppose,
therefore, that the language of many biblical poets was classical

Chapter 12

421

Hebrew. Verbal usage in poetry-excluding the obviously archaic

and late texts-is to be measured against CBH usage.
This conclusion is easily verified for some poetic texts. The
book of Amos, for instance, hardly contains any verbal uses that go
beyond what one finds in CBH prose texts. 20 The poetry of Jeremiah
1-6, too, remains relatively regular, as does Proverbs 10-29. In other
books, however, the data are more recalcitrant. The book of Hosea
and the poetry of Isaiah 1-39 differ in many particulars from prose
usage. Many passages in Psalms and Job are even more difficult to
reconcile with CBH.

Poetic usage: A survey

As in the preceding chapter, the point of departure will be the use
of the single forms. No attempt will be made to be exhaustive, the
intention being merely to show the type of divergences one may
expect in poetic texts. In some instances, Psalms will serve as
a handy corpus of reference.
WAVVIQTOL
Gross, Verbform (1976).

The functions of W A YYIQTOL attested in prose texts are found

regularly in poetry as well. Thus, chains of W A YYIQTOL forms
recounting a sequence of events occur in the historical Psalms 78,
105 and 106. The form is also very common following QATAL in
reference to single events belonging to the distant or proximate
past.
Where W A YYIQTOL follows a clause oriented towards the
present or future time frame, it usually implies a temporal shift,
exactly as in prose:
~,j~ 'N'" il';''' ~N

Ps 118:27

The LORD is God~ and he has given us light)l

Ps 52:9(7)

... ,..

..

;'t1li~ C"ii~N c"tli" ~~ '::l~il il~il

T

.. :

...... -

i'rzlli ::li:::l MtQ::ll!,

146, 147, 148. The doxologies in Ps 41:14; 72:18-20; 106:47-48, too, are
considered late.
18 Linguistic indications suggest that Prov 1-9 and 30-31 may also be considered
relatively late.
19 See, e.g., Andrew E. Hill, "Dating the Book of Malachi: A Linguistic
Reexamination" in C. L. Meyers and M. O'Connor (eds.), The Word of the
Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration
of His Sixtieth Birthday (Winona Lake 1983), 77-89.

See the one who will not take refuge in G~d: but' tru~ied
in his abundant riches. 22

20
21

The instances of "gnomic" QATAL in Amos 5:8 and WAYYIQTOL in Amos 5:8;
6:2-4; 9:5, are an exception.
See also: Ps 118:14.

422

Verbal Usage in Poetry

Such shifts are more frequent in poetry than they are in prose.
They are also, at times, more abrupt. There are several cases of
W AYYIQTOL following a volitive verbal form:
Jer 2:25

rzJ~iJ "i~~r-lj ;,~~~~ l~.i'~1 ='Jlj~~l~~j "S;~~

Keep your feet from going unshod and your throat from
thirst. But you said, "It is hopeless."

no reason to think that speech time equals reference time in these

passages. It is preferable to suppose that the poet, in his mind, has
projected himself into a future point of view from' which what is
to come can be described as having occurred. "In the description
of future events (wAYYIQTOL) is used upon exactly the same principle
as the perfect, i. e., it represents them as simple matters ofhistory."25

See also: Ps 50:5-6; 23 55:18; 77:7.

It is to be noted, however, that the combination of YIQTOL and

does not necessarily imply a temporal shift. As was
indicated in Chapter V, the gnomic use of WAYYIQTOL is more
prominent in poetry than in prose. In some passages, this omnitemporal use of W AYYIQTOL combines with a YIQTOL form
expressing the general present:

Jer 4: 16

Oi"-t,~~ o,pt t,~l P"'~ to~irzJ O";:it,~

V~.~i::l;11j1 ir-lrfR rDito7: i:!ll1J :l1rzJ: ~t,-O~

God is a righteous judge, and a God who has indignation

every day; if one does not repent, he will whet his sword;
he bends his bow and aims it.

In describing the typical actions of God in judgment, the Psalmist

intermingles general present YIQTOL, and gnomic W AYYIQTOL
(and QATAL).
It is also to be noted that YIQTOL itself can refer to the past in
poetry (see below). A verse containing YIQTOL and WAYYIQTOL
may be entirely oriented toward the past time-frame. 24
Over and above these uses, grammars of Hebrew list poetic
passages where W AYYIQTOL is said to refer to future events. Some
of these passages are difficult to understand, and there is almost
always a margin of doubt as to their temporal implications. Even
where it can be determlneu that the events expressed by the
W AYYIQTOL form are really situated after the speech time, there is
___~_

C'~~~"~~~~"'~~""WC_""~_~,w~_w,"'c""""'w~~~

__
- __ " ,_~~,_,""_ _~_ _ _ ~"'_"'""_"'_'~_"'_'""~'_' ____ "_"""_

22 The NRSV renders this: "See the one who would not take refuge ... " taking the
temporal frame of the YIQTOL form from the second part of the verse with
WAYYIQTOL. This is equally possible. See also Ps 3:5; 42:6; 49:15; 55:6;

ot,rzj1'''-t,,!1 1,!1"~rzj;, ;,~;, O"i~t, 1,.,~t;,

.- T

...

:-

PQ1~ij r'l~~ o"~f O"i~j

O~ip ;'11;'; "'1.v-t,Jl 1j~:1

W AYYIQTOL

Ps 7: 12-13

423

Chapter 12

Tell the nations, "Here they are!" Proclaim against Jerusalem,

"Besiegers come from a distant land; they shouted against the
cities of Judah."

The discourse that is to be addressed to Jerusalem changes its temporal

perspective in mid-course: fIrst the coming of "besiegers" (?) is
announced as an imminent event, then their presence is taken as
a given and their actions are described as belonging to the past. See
also: Isa 5:16; Jer 51:28-30; Ezek 28:16.
Even this usage fInds a possible analogue in a prose text (see Jer
38:9, Chapter V, pp. 188-189). The way it is exploited in biblical texts
may be hard to grasp and impossible to render into modem
languages. On the theoretical level, however, it does not vitiate the
approach developed in the present work. A grammatical preterite may
be used, especially in poetry, in reference to omni-temporal situations,
or to processes that objectively still lie in the future.
QATAL

The functions attested for QATAL in prose are frequent in poetry as

well. In Psalms, the form occurs both in discursive passages
related to the present of the speaker and in narrative passages.
In Chapter VI it was already pointed out that the use'of QATAL
in reference to present states without any notion of anteriority is
limited to poetic passages (pp. 201-202). The usage may perhaps
be considered an archaism: it does not reflect the actual use of
Hebrew in the period the poems were written, but imitates earlier
texts. 26

109:28, and many other examples.

23 Instead of WAYYIQTOL, the ancient versions read we + jussive in Ps 50:6 (see

text, but is hardly necessary.
24 BHS). This makes for a smoother
.
See Ps 18:8, 19 ; 44:3; 78:15, 26, 45; 80:9; 95:10; 106:17, 19; 59:16; 90:3.
See also note 22 above.

25 Driver, Treatise, 92.

26 Genuinely archaic use of the stative forms may perhaps be found in Gen
49:15.


424

Verbal Usage in Poetry

Si~ilru:ly,

the precative function of QATAL without particles, if it

eXIsts, IS found only in poetry. The possible examples of this usage
have been listed in Chapter VI (pp. 211-212).

Participle
The principal uses of the predicative participle as they have been
described in Chapter vn are found in poetry as well: the sequence
Su-Ptcp expresses the real present (e.g., Ps 19:2; 59:8), and contem~oraneity i? a circ~mstantial clause (Ps 35:6). The sequence Ptcp-Su
IS used WIth statIve verbs (Ps 34:8) and with verbs describing
activities of the inner person (Ps 1:6; 119:162; 149:4). Nevertheless,
a gr~at difference exists between the use of the participle in prose
and 1~ poetry. While the participle is frequent in poetical texts, it
functions as a verb only rarely. Even where the participle is the
predicate of the clause, it often preserves its nominal nature:
"rQ;J~ .,;>~o~ "j',~ 'It, ,r17 O"iit,N i1~i1
But surely, God is my h~lper, 'th~ L~R~ i~ th~ upholder ~f
my life.

Ps 54:6

In prose conversation, the first clause would be interpreted: "Look,

God is helping me." In the type of discourse one finds in Psalms
this reference to the real, ongoing, present is not expected. Th~
N~SV is probably right in taking the participle as a substantive
~lth the meaning "helper," as is confirmed by the parallel. Many
Instances are somewhat ambiguous:
Ps 37:28
For the LORD loves justice.

Even

i~

a case like this, one might consider translating: "For the

LORD IS a lover of justice." In fact, if one were to elaborate
~_"~~"_~~~_""~eaLY of the HebteUl lleJ;b-OR-t~basi~of"poetie-altexts alone
the participle would probably not be regarded as forming part of
the verbal system at all. 27

27

In the whole Psalter there are no more than 40 certain cases of the verbalized
participle: in the sequence Ptcp-Su: Ps 1:6; 19:2; 31:24; 34:8, 23; 37:18;
45:2; 87:2; 119:162; 145:14,20; 149:4; in the sequence Su-Ptcp: 7:12; 16:5;
19:2, 12; 21:8; 27:3; 29:9;- 33:16; 35:6; 44:22; 59:8; 68:36; 74:23; 81:14;
89:10,29; 90:11; 94:11; 111:3, 10; 119:67; 139:14; 145:15; 146:8,9.

425

Chapter 12
VIQTOL

is used frequently in poetic texts and with a wide range of

meanings. Most occurrences in poetry can be paralleled from prose
texts, but two usages need to be commented upon. First, in poetry,
instances of we + YIQTOL, and more generally of YIQTOL in first
position in the clause, are more widespread than in prose. Many of
these instances, however, can be explained in the light of a simple
syntactic rule. Second, YIQTOL appears to be used as a preterite in
poetry in a way that does not agree with prose usage. Preterite
YIQTOL may be regarded as an archaism.

YIQTOL

YIQTOL in first position and the figure of ellipsiS

Gross, Verbform (1976), 148; Niccacci, "Poetry" (2006), 258-261; Blum, "Verbal-

system" (2008), 111-112.

As was shown in Chapter vln, YIQTOL practically never occupies

the first position in the clause in CBH prose. A few exceptions to
this rule are found at the onset of direct discourse, where there is
little choice. Other exceptions, notably cases of non-volitive
YIQTOL immediately preceded by the conjunction " are generally
doubtful. Indeed, there is no place for the syntagm we + YIQTOL in
the CBH system, for the syntactic slot where it might occur is
occupied by WEQATAL. Prefixed forms in clause-initial position
are normally to be considered jussives in CBH prose. Only in LBH
does the use of we + YIQTOL become a regular feature of the verbal
system (see Chapter XI).
This somewhat complicated state of affairs becomes problematic
when poetic texts are included in the corpus investigated. In poetry,
the use of non-volitive (we +) YIQTOL in clause-initial position is
rather frequent. How is this to be explained? Should one submit that
the placement rules of CBH do not apply in poetry? Is there some
other logic to the poetical syntax? Or, alternatively, should we think
that all biblical poetry characterized by the use of initial (we +)
YIQTOL is late? Recent advances in Hebrew syntax have shed light on
this difficult question.
In a penetrating study of passages where W AYYIQTOL has been
interpreted as referring to the present, Walter Gross drew attention
to an interesting variation in the refrain of Ps 42-43:
Ps 42:12 (= 43:5)
Ps 42:6

Verbal Usage in Poetry

426

Why are you cast down, 0 my soul, and why are you
disquieted within me?

On the basis of the manifest equivalence of these two sentences,

Gross proposed to change the pointing in Ps 42:6 and to read the
W A YYIQTOL form as we + YIQTOL. To this he added the intriguing
comment that, if the change should be accepted, the latter syntagm .
might be taken syntactically as an instance of the sequence we_ xYIQTOL (Le., with YIQTOL in a non-initial position). Indeed, the
interrogative pronoun in the first half of the verse governs the
second verbal form as well, and is therefore to be regarded, in
absentia, as an element separating the conjunction from the verbal
form.
At first sight, Gross' explanation may seem far-fetched. He
provides no other examples of the phenomenon he postulates. 28 It
is possible, however, to give more substance to his seminal idea. 29
It is an undeniable fact that poetic lines of the type X-YIQTOL / XYIQTOL alternate with lines of the type X-YIQTOL / (X)-YIQTOL,
where the X does "double duty":

n,n"

T:

n:JM-i17
TT
-

'''r:Jt?t1

i1~~-i-P

n~:J
":Jn~rzjr-l
--:"T:-

Ps 13:2

.,~~~ '9"~.~-n~

characteristic of biblical poetry.32 What is striking in the present

case is that the absent adverb seems to bring about the use of
YIQTOL. In Ps 79:5b, YIQTOL stands virtually in second position.
What confirms this analysis is that it accounts for a large number
of instances in poetry where non-volitive YIQTOL prima facie
occupies the first position in the clause. The examples include cases
of we + YIQTOL as well as asyndetic clauses. The elided element may
be an adverb or a particle, as in the preceding examples:
Hab 1: 16

'9P.~~i? rc~~ci~~ ,.p;r:J n~~.~ ='~~r;J n~n; i19-'-P

How long, 0 LORD, will You he angry forever, [-] will

Your indignationhlaze like a fire? [JPS]31

ir-ll~=?~~ '~R"l i~10~ rJilr; l+'>-'-P

Therefore he sacrifices to his net and makes offerings to

his seine.

See also: Isa 1:29; 28:24; 35:6; 40:27; Jer 2:22; 3:18, 19; 14:10;
Mic 6:6; Hab 1:13, 16; 2:7; Ps 10:1; 44:25; 74:10; 88:15; 89:7,47,
49; 106:2; Prov 5:20; Lam 4:1.
But the element deleted in the second clause may also be
a noun phrase or a pronoun:
Ps 37:29

v.,~.v i.p~ 1:J~~:1 r1~-1rzjl"". C"R"1~

The righteous shall inherit the land, and live in it forever.

Ps 59: 17

'91t?rJ 'R~~ l~.'~j '9i~ ,.,~~ "~~j

But I will sing of your might, I will sing aloud of your

steadfast love in the morning.

How long, 0 LORD,30 will You ignore me forever? How

long will You hide Your face from me? [JPs]

Ps 79:5

427

Chapter 12

See also: Ps 52:7; 66:4; 69:36; 85:14; 97:3; 139:10; Prov 1:16.
The construction remains unchanged where the first clause does
not have YIQTOL but QATAL or a non-verbal predicate:

In the second example, the interrogative expression is not repeated,

but the meaning of the line is similar to that in the first example. In
other words, although the interrogative is absent in Ps 79:5b, it is
"virtually present." Some scholars prefer to describe this absence in
sp'eiikof
deletion or ellipsis. Whatever the terminology, the phenomenon is

Ps 73:6

i~~ o~O n"~-=,~~~ n1~~ i~I;1R~~ l~~

Therefore pride is their necklace; violence covers them

like a garment.

Ps 4:3

n~'~' "ii:l~ ji7~-'17 rc"N ":J~

~i~~ :liT~ 1~P~~ P~i 11~v~~

How long, you people, shall my honour suffer shame?

How long will you love vain words, and seek after lies?33

See also: Hab 1:2; Ps 2:1-2; 74:1; 80:13-14.

28 A few additional examples were given by Niccacci, "Poetry," 258-261 (who
does not quote Gross) and Blum, "Verbalsystem," 111-112 (who does).

29 A beginning was made by Niccacci and Blum, as quoted in the preceding note.
30 The vocative is not to be regarded as a constituent and may be disregarded in
31

the analysis of word order.

Compare also Ps 94:16 and 106:2.

32 See generally C.
33

L. Miller, "A Linguistic Approach to Ellipsis in Biblical

Poetry", Bulletin for Biblical Research 13.2 (2003), 251-270, and other
studies by Miller.
This example also illustrates that a third clause may follow, with the
x element doing "triple duty"; see also: Hab 1:13, 16; 2:7; Ps 88:15; Lam 4:1.

428

Verbal Usage in Poetry

In a few cases, the ostensibly initial prefixed form is pointed as

a jussive, even though no volitive meaning can be detected:

p~ 85:14

,.,'t.v~ '1'l1~ c~:1 '1~iJ; ,.,~~~ Pl~

RIghteousness will go before him, and will make a path

for his steps.34

Cases like this are probably to be explained as adaptations to the

grammar of LBH by later scribes. In LBH and QH, a strong tendency
exists to use the jussive form consistently in clause-initial position
even when the meaning is notjussive (see Chapter XI, pp. 404-406).
The mechanism analysed in the present section does not
account for all cases of we + YIQTOL in biblical poetry. Exactly how
many cases can be explained by it depends on the measure to which
one is prepared to extend its validity. It would seem reasonable to
apply the principle to cases involving successive verbal forms
governed by (or governing) a single preposed element:
Ps 31:4

Here the second YIQTOL form does not figure in a parallel clause.
Yet it seems acceptable that the particle governing both forms is,
so to speak, understood before the second one as well, and that this
allowed YIQTOL to be used. 36
There remain, however, a number of cases where ellipsis
appears to be impossible:

'TJ"~.~::J~-~.p ~~~;I;1:1 ,io ~~"i~~ 'TJrp.lr~.p

They lay crafty plans against your people; they consult

together against those you protect.

See also: Isa 5:29,30; 38:16; Jer 13:17; 42:12,17; 48:8; Mic 6:16;
7:19; Hab 1:15; 2:13; 3:5; Ps 49:19; 72:14; 91:16. 37 These cases
~~'~'~~~--~~'~~"~d-to-soi'Ve in Ottrpresent state~-of-knoWlectge.

See also: Mic 6:14.

0 ther examples: Isa 14:10; Amos 9:10; Ps 59:5; 65:5; 102:27; 119:74; Prov
13:5; 31:5.
36
In prose, however, WEQATAL would have been used here instead of we +
37 YIQTOL; see Num 15:40; Deut 4:1; 5:33; 6:18; 31:12.
To these examples a number of cases in Ezekiel may be added: Ezek 5:14;
6:6; 12:12,25,28; 13:15; 14:7; 26:11; 27:30; 40:42; 43:27; 47:9. The use of
we + YIQTOL instead of WEQATAL in Ezekiel, in poetic and non-poetic passages
'
aligns this corpus with LBH.
34
35

429

An unexpected gain of the explanation from poetic ellipsis accrues

to the analysis of some examples in prose that proved problematic
in Chapter VIII. After all philologically uncertain examples of nonvolitive we + YIQTOL were weeded out, six cases remained
(Chapter VIII, Appendix). Of these, no fewer than four occur in
passages that show poetic parallelism, all of them yielding to the
analysis proposed in the present section:
Ex 19:3

~~1~: .,~.~~ '''~.lj1 :Jp~~ l"1"~~ '~Nl"1 i1~

Thus you shall say to the house of Jacob, and tell the
Israelites.

Ex 23:8

C"R"1~ "'1~1 Il"j~Q"'. c.,r:tl?~ '9,!}; 'OWij ":p

For a bribe blinds the officials, and subverts the cause of

those who are in the right. 38

Ex 23: 12

'~.iJ1 'TJI;1't~rl~ ~~~:1 'TJ'lb01 'TJ1 ira !Ji:l; 1~~7

So that your ox and your donkey may have relief, and your
homeborn slave and the resident alien may be refreshed.

"~~O~t;11 "~IJ~t1 'TJ~~ 1.p~~

For your name's sake lead me and guide me.35

Ps 83:4

Chapter 12

To these, the one problematic case of asyndetic clause-initial YIQTOL

may be added. As was seen in Chapter VIII, this case is unique:
Gen 15: 15

Ci~~~ 'TJ"p!J~r~~

Ni:Jt;l i1~~1

i1~i~ i1~"~~ '~~r;l

As for yourself, you shall go to your ancestors in peace;
you shall be buried in a good old age.

All these sentences are of the type X-YIQTOL / (X)-YIQTOL

explored in the present section: the deleted element in the second
clause virtually pushes YIQTOL into second position. 39 The verses
illustrate that certain types of elevated speech may shade into
poetry, but they do not, after all, provide cases of clause-initial
YIQTOL.

Preterite YIQTOL
In CBH prose, YIQTOL regularly occurs in clauses whose time
frame is oriented toward the past. In such clauses, however,
YIQTOL usually keeps its basic modal meaning: it presents

38

39

See also the parallel in Deut 16:19.

Arguably, one of the remaining two cases, Ex 24:7, could be explained as
reflecting the structure X-YIQTOL / we-YIQTOL (see above). Note, however,
that Ex 24:7 manifests no signs of poetry. In prose it is regular in such cases
to use X-YIQTOL/-WEQATAL (see note 36).

Verbal Usage in Poetry

430

processes prospectively, or expresses habitual-iterative action. 4o

Instances where YIQTOL refers to single events located in the past
are rare and irregular (Chapter VIII, p. 287).41
In poetry, instances where a freestanding prefixed form refers
to a single event in the past are incomparably more frequent.
Preterite YIQTOL is a regular feature of biblical poetry. Since the
late eighteenth century, this situation has led many grammarians to
imagine a verbal function integrating both the modal functions
characterizing YIQTOL in prose (and which are very frequent in
poetry as well) and the preterite usage found in poetry (with
a handful of attestations in prose). In the present work, this road
has not been taken. YIQTOL is regarded as non-indicative, a
definition that accounts for most of its uses in prose. In no way,
however, can the non-indicative function be stretched to take in
the expression of single actions in a past context. A different
explanation is called for. The one adopted here is that of archaism.
The instances of preterite YIQTOL in poetry are not meant to
express the usual meaning of the form, but to recall ancient usage
and lend the texts an archaic ring.
Unmistakable cases of preterite YIQTOL are not easy to come
by. In many cases, there may be doubt as to the temporal interpretation of the passage in question. Some grammarians go so far
as to reject the preterite usage entirely.42 A good place to begin,
therefore, is with YIQTOL forms referring to known events in
Israel's past:

cn"nrCr-l' 17":y'!:)~1 C~~N!l' ::Ji17 Ci1~ n~rzj"

He sent among th~~: s-~a~~~ - ~f fli~s, ~hich (ie~ou~~d
them, and frogs, which destroyed them.

Ps 78:45

Since the reference here is to one of the plagues preceding the

situated,
objectively, in the past time-frame. Furthermore, the verse hardly
expresses a prospective or iterative nuance. Rather, the bare
YIQTOL form appears to have the same function as the WAYYIQTOL

~"~~"'""'~-~-~-~~'M'-"M-~~~tiB;=~tle-doubt-that'-~the~~event is'

The usages of YIQTOL in a past-tense context that are normal in prose occur in
poetry as well. Instances of prospective, past modal, and iterative YIQTOL are
included in the discussion of these usages in Chapter Vill.
41 In prose, YIQTOL regularly refers to single events in the past when it is
preceded by the adverb tN (see Chapter ill).
42 Thus Niccacci, "Poetry."

Chapter 12

431

forms in the surrounding verses, referring to other plagues. Similar

cases of YIQTOL referring unequivocally to known events in
Israel's history are found in Ps 78:15, 26 (short form), 47, 49, 50;
see also: Ps 47:5; 106:17, 19.
Cases like this may be explained from the use of the prefixed
preterite in archaic poems like Deut 32 (see ~bove). Old te~ts like
Deut 32 would have been known in later tImes, perhaps 1n oral
tradition. Later writers would have been aware of some of their
aberrant usages. In their own poetry, they adopted some of these
usages, especially when composing epic texts of the same genre as
the archaic texts. The archaizing syntax is artificial, however.
While, in Deut 32, the use of the short prefixed form as a preterite
is part of an organic system, in Ps 78 it is an isolated usage. The
clearest difference between the two texts is in the use of QATAL:
Deut 32 uses it only as a perfect, and never in narrative sequences,
but Ps 78 uses it throughout its narrative sections as an equivalent
of WAYYIQTOL-in the same way as in CBH prose (see verses 13,
21, 25, 31).43 We will not be far wrong if we attribute Ps 78 to
a CBH writer trying to imitate archaic poetry.
In Ps 78, the clearest instances of preterite YIQTOL occur in
clause-initial position. Clauses with YIQTOL in non-initial position
refer to the past in verses 29, 36, 58 and 72, but they might be
interpreted as circumstantial or iterative. In .other p.s~l~s, ho~~ver,
we find undeniable preterite YIQTOL forms 1n non-1n1tIal pos1tIon:
iJ.i;~r:Jj c:i~ rVj~t;1 .17"~~ c:j~~~ i~~
You brought a vine out of Egypt; you drove out the
nations and planted it.

Ps 80:9

Here, too, the reference is to a known event belonging to Israel's

past, but the long form is used and the verb is in third position in
the clause. Similar cases are found in Ps 104:7 (creation); 105:40
(bringing of the quails).
Apart from these cases, many other instances of preterite
YIQTOL should probably be recognized. 44 The usage was extended
from epic to other poetic genres. However much it diverged from

40

43 Note also the use of iterative WEQATAL in Ps 78:34 (the syntax is the same as

in Oen 38:9~ Num 21 :9~ Jud 6:3). This is a good CBH usage, but it is never
found in archaic poetry.
44 See, e.g., Ps 18 (passim)~ 35:11; 44:2, 10-15; 48:8; Job 4:12, 15, 16.

432

Verbal Usage in Poetry

normal Hebrew usage, it 'ended up being conventional in poetry.

Even very late texts continue to use it:
Ps 103:7

1"Mi~"~.v ~N'~" "J:h i1rzjb~ 1"~" .11",;"

He made known his ~ay~-~o

of Israel.

M~~~s;'his a~ts ~o th~ p;ople

In many instances, the use of a prefixed form as preterite involves

the short form. In historical perspective, this is what one would
expect: the short form is the, one used as a preterite in archaic
Hebrew poetry, and the short form is the one incorporated in
W A YYIQTOL. Nevertheless, there are also cases where a marked
long form is used in the same function. 45 In the light of the stylistic
nature of the usage, there seems to be little reason to distinguish
between the two forms when they are used as preterites in poetry. 46
WEQATAL

occurs in poetry with the same functions as in prose. Its

use in reference to the general present is found often in Proverbs and
in other wisdom texts, but hardly in CBH prose (see Chapter VIII). The
usage is easily explained from the basic meaning of the form.
Although WEQATAL is not particularly frequent in poetry, it is
not avoided where needed. 47 QATAL with the conjunction 1 is about
as frequent in the Psalter as WEQATAL (see Chapter VI, Appendix).
But the resulting homonymy seems to pose no problem for
understanding. Note that the two forms occur even within single
Psalms (see WEQATAL in Ps 37:6, 10, 11, and we + QATAL in Ps 37:14).
WEQATAL

Chapter 12

forms are capable. 48 Generally speaking, however, poetic usage

remains close to prose usage on the semantic level. The cohortative
and the jussive occur in a small number of passages where it is
difficult to give them their usual meaning. 49 But these instances do
not appear to document a different pattern of usage: they are just
hard cases.
Two divergences between poetry and prose should be pointed
out, however: the greater flexibility with regard to the placement
rules governing the volitives, and the occasional use of marked
YIQTOL forms where one expects a volitive.
The position of the volitives in the clause
In CBH, volitive forms tend to occupy the first position in the
clause. They may be preceded by a marked topic or focus, but this
happens rarely. There are no cases of volitives occurring in third
position in the clause. In LBH, these rules are loosened.
In poetry, volitives tend to occupy the first position in the
clause, as in CBH prose. But the rule is not observed as strictly as
in prose. Notably, a volitive may occur in third position:
'.t1~ij ,.,~~ 0V"~~~1 M;Ni~ 0v"~".v. i1~~rQr;-r~
Let their eyes he darkened so that they cannot see, and
make their loins tremble continually.

Ps 69:24

The position of the imperative can be attributed here to some form

of chiasmus. But this explanation does not always work:
Ps 72: 1

Warren, Modality (1998).

See also: Jer 18:23; Ps 7:6, 8; 90:12.

~"~-.~.~.-.,.~~.".".-~:;;'';;::::;=~~~~~4~~~~.,!!;~~~~~.,t,.J:!!.~~~"'!.J.,L.,J.~.\lY!L~,

of course,
subtle nuances of which the volitive

46

47

"I7~-1~~ '9~Rl~ll~ "I7~~ '9"t9~~~ O"ij~~

Give the king your justice, 0 God, and your righteousness

to a king's son.

Volitives

45

433

Perhaps this usage is historically valid. Greenstein, "Form and Functions,"

has argued extensively and persuasively that the long form of the prefix
conjugation was used as a narrative tense, a type of historic present, in
Ugaritic epic poetry. See also Rainey, "Yaqtul Preterite," 399.
In Ps 18, both long and short forms appear to be used in reference to single
events in the past: see the short form in verse 12 and the long form in verse
37. See also Bloch, "Prefixed Perfective."
S
ee, e.g., Ps 1:3; 7:15; 10:10; 17:14; 19:14; 23:6; 25:11; 28:1; 37:6, 10, 11;
41:6, 10; 49:9, 11; 50:23; 52:7; 64:11; 69:36; 71:14; 77:13; 78:34, 38; 89:5,
24,26,30,33; 90:6; 106:48; 109:10; 112:10; 137:9; 143:7, 12.

The use of YIQTOL in volitive clauses

As was noted in Chapter VIII, the separation between volitive and
non-volitive categories is not watertight. Notably, marked YIQTOL
forms occur a few times in clause-initial position with a volitive

48

49

Note the non-agentive imperative in Ps 2:10; 110:2; 128:6; addressed to God:

57:6.
Cohortative: Isa 38:10; Jer 4:21; 6:10; Ps 57:5; 66:6; Prov 7:7; jussive: Ps
11 :6, and many instances where it appears to express the pret~rite (see. above,
pp. 428-431). In Job, the jussive appears to be used accordmg to dlfferent
principles altogether; see Chapter IX, p. 335.

Verbal Usage in Poetry

434

meaning. 50 In the CBH corpus, the examples of this phenomenon

are so few, and so disparate, that it proved expedient to disregard
them. They might be slips of the pen or adaptations to later syntax.
Poetic texts add several examples of this phenomenon, however,
showing that perhaps the usage should be considered genuine:
Ps 68:2

'''~;'N i~i~; c"ij~~

Cip;

Let God rise up, let his enemies he scattered. 51

See also: Ps 7:17; 18:47; 54:7; 90:16; 110:6.

Poetic texts also add a new type of volitive clause with YIQTOL. In
CBH prose, the second person in the voliti ve paradigm is expressed
by the imperative. Second person YIQTOL is never used in directive
clauses with the verbal form in first position. In poetry, however,
there are several cases of this usage. These examples add their
weight to the ones enumerated so far:
Ps 51:9

i"~~~ l~~~i "~Q:P;>~ 'Qcp~1 :J,t~~ .,~~tplj~

Purge me with hyssop, and I shall he clean; wash me, and

I shall he whiter than snow.

See also: Isa 12:1; 38:16; Ps 7:10; 51:10.

Close consideration of all cases, in prose and in poetry, shows that
the clauses in question are always directed to God or to a human
person in authority: a father (Gen 27:31), a future or present king
(1 Sam 25:25; 2 Sam 14:17; 15:26), Pharaoh (Gen 41:34).52
In CBH, YIQTOL in non-initial position is used a few times to
express wishes in a polite way. The present usage seems to go one
step further: by putting the YIQTOL form in first position, the
clause is marked as volitive, yet the verbal form used is in
principle non-volitive. Perhaps this phenomenon is not due to
~~"~"-~"--"~""-~accidentat conftrsiurr;-bnr~realpossilillifyortIie language.
The clauses enumerated in the present section may express
a mitigated form of volition.

>"'"-"

..

See Gen 27:31; 1 Sam 25:25; Gen 41:34; 2 Sam 15:26; 2 Kgs 20:10; Ruth
1:8K; 2 Sam 14:17 and perhaps also Jos 1:17.
51 Compare Num 10:35 with the imperative.
52 Even in 2 Kgs 20: 10 and 'Ps 7: 17, the utterance is directed toward God
(although he is not mentioned expressly).
50

Bibliography
Andersen, F. I. The Hebrew Verbless Clause in the Pentateuch
(NashvillelNew York 1970).
- - The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew (The Hague 1974).
__ "Salience, Implicature, Ambiguity, and Redundancy in ClauseClause Relationships in Biblical Hebrew,"R.D.Bergen (ed.),
Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics (Winona Lake
1994), 99-116.
Andersen, T. D. "The Evolution of the Hebrew Verbal System,"
ZAH 13 (2000), 1-66.
Baayen, R. H. "The Pragmatics of the 'Tenses' in Biblical Hebrew,"
Studies in Language 21/2 (1997), 245-285.
Baden, J. S. "The weyiqtol and the Volitive Sequence," VT 58
(2008), 147-158.
Bartelmus, R. HYH. Bedeutung und Funktion eines hebriiischen
"Allerweltswortes" - zugleich ein Beitrag zur Frage des
hebriiischen Tempussystems (St. Ottilien 1982).
__ "Ez 37:1-14, die Verbform weqatal und die Anfange der
Auferstehungshoffnung," ZA W 97 (1985), 366-389.
Bauer, H. "Die Tempora im Semitischen," Beitriige zur Assyriologie
und semitischen Sprachwissenschajt 8 (1910), 1-53.
Benveniste, E. "Les niveaux de l'analyse linguistique," idem,
Problemes de linguistique generale 1 (Paris 1966), 119-131.
__ "Actif et moyen dans Ie verbe," idem, Problemes de
linguistique generale 1 (Paris 1966) 168-175.
. " .
__ "Les relations de temps dans Ie verbe fran~aIs, Idem,
Problemes de linguistique generale 1 (Paris 1966), 237-250.
Ben-Hayyim, Z. ""Zemaney" ha-pocal bilshon ha-miqra umasoret
ha-shomeronim bahem," S. Verses (ed.) Sefer Dov Sadan
(Jerusalem 1977),66-86 [Hebrew].
. .
Bergstrasser, G. Hebriiische Grammatik, vol. 2 (LeIpzIg 1929~. .
Bhat, D. N. S. The Prominence of Tense, Aspect, Mood, StudIes In
Language Companion Series 49 (AmsterdamlPhiladelphia 1999).

436

Bibliography

Binnick, R. I. Time and the Verb. A Guide to Tense and Aspect

(Oxford 1991).
Birkeland, H. "1st das hebraische Imperfectum Consecutivum ein
Prateritum? Eine Untersuchung der gegen den prateritalen
Charakter der Form angeflihrten Stellen," Acta Orientalia 13
(1935), 1-34.
Blau, J. "Marginalia semitic a I," Israel Oriental Studies 1 (1971),
1-35 (in particular 24-26: The Problem of Tenses in biblical
Hebrew).
- - "Marginalia semitica III," Israel Oriental Studies 7 (1977),
14-32 (in particular 23-27: The System of Tenses in Biblical
Poetry).
- - "BeCayot bahistoriah shel halashon hacivrit," in idem,
CIyunim bebalshanut civrit (Jerusalem 1996 [1970]), 25-40 (in
particular 33-34, 39) [Hebrew].
- - "Hirhurim Cal macarekhet hazemanim besiporet hamiqra,"
in idem, CIyunim bebalshanut civrit (Jerusalem 1996
[1983]),109-113 [Hebrew].
Bloch, A. "Zur Nachweisbarkeit einer hebraischen Entsprechung
der akkadischen Verbalform iparras," ZDMG 113 (1963),41-50.
Bloch, Y. "From Linguistics to Textual Criticism and Back:
Wayyiqtol constructions with Long Prefixed Verbal Form in
Biblical Hebrew," Hebrew Studies 48 (2007), 141-170.
- - "The Prefixed Perfective and the Dating of Early Hebrew
Poetry-A Re-Evaluation," VT 59 (2009), 34-70.
Blum, E. "Das althebrrusche Verbalsystem - Eine synchrone
Analyse," in Oliver Dyma, Andreas Michel (eds.), Sprachliche
Tiefe - Theologische Weite, Biblisch-theologische Studien 91
(Neukirchen 2008),91-142.
~Y~~_~~C4~~_~C_~0c~c_~-Bomheck,,-S-DaS-althebliii'che . Uerbals-y&t8m~aus~-aramiiisGher
Sicht (Frankfurt a. M. 1997).
Brockelmann, C. "Die 'Tempora' des Semitischen," Zeitschrift for
Phonetik und allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft 5 (1951), 133-154.
Buth, R. J. Word Order in Aramaic from the Perspectives of Functional
Grammar and Discourse analysis, dissertation, UCLA 1987.
- - "Functional Grammar, Hebrew and Aramaic: An Integrated
Textlinguistic Approach to Syntax," in W. Bodine (ed.),
Discourse Analysis of Biblical Literature, What it is and What
it Offers (Scholars Press 1995), 77-102.

Bibliography

437

- - "Word Order in the Verbless Clause: A GenerativeFunctional Approach," in C. L. Miller (ed.), The Verbless
Clause in biblical Hebrew. Linguistic Approaches (Winona
Lake 1999), 79-107.
Bybee, 1., Perkins, R. and Pagliuca, W. The Evolution of Grammar. Tense,
Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World
(Chicago 1994).
Cohen, D. "Phrase nominale et verbalisation en semitique," }n F.
Bader et al. (eds.), Melanges linguistiques offerts a Emile
Benveniste (Paris 1975).
- - La phrase nomina Ie et I' evolution du systeme verbal en
semitique (Louvain 1984).
- - L'aspect verbal (Paris 1989).
Cohen, M. Le systeme verbal semitique et I' expression du temps
(Paris 1924).
- - "Verbes deponents internes (ou verbes adherents) en
semitique," idem, Cinquante annees de recherche (Paris
1955), 227-247.
Cohen, O. The Verbal System in Late Biblical Hebrew, dissertation,
Jerusalem 2008 [Hebrew].
Collins, C. J. "The wayyiqtol as 'pluperfect': When and why,"
Tyndale Bulletin 46 (1995), 117-140.
Comrie, B. Aspect. An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect
and Related Problems (Cambridge 1976).
Cook, J. "The Hebrew Verb: A Grammaticalization Approach,"
ZAH 14 (2001),117-143.
- - "The Semantics of Verbal Pragmatics: Clarifying the Roles
of Wayyiqtol and Weqatal in biblical Hebrew Prose," JSS 49
(2004), 247-273.
- - "The Finite Verbal Forms in biblical Hebrew Do Express
Aspect," JANES 30 (2006),21-35.
Corwin, R. The Verb and the Sentence in Chronicles, Ezra and
Nehemiah, dissertation, Chicago 1909.
Dahl, O. Tense and Aspect Systems (Oxford 1985).
Dallaire, H. The Syntax of Volitives in Northwest Semitic Prose,
dissertation HUC, Cincinnati 2002.
Davidson, A. B . Hebrew Syntax (Edinburgh 1896).

438

Bibliography

DeCaen, V. J. J. Onthe Placement and Interpretation of the Verb

in Standard biblical Hebrew Prose, dissertation, University of
Toronto 1995.
- - "Ewald and Driver on biblical Hebrew 'Aspect': Anteriority
and the Orientalist Framework," ZAH 9 (1996), 129-151.
Del Barco, F. J. Profecfa y sintaxis. El uso de lasformas verbales en
los Profetas Menores preexilicos (Madrid 2003).
Diehl, J. F. mSteh Auf, setz dich und is!' Imperative zwischen
Begriffswort und Interjektion," KUSATU 1 (2000), 101-132.
- - Die Fortfuhrung des Imperativs im Biblischen Hebrai"sch,
AOAT 286 (MUnster 2004).
- - "Hebraisches Imperfekt mit Waw Copulativum. Ein
Arbeitsbericht," in J. LUchsinger, H.-P. Mathys, M. Saur (eds.)
... der seine Lust hat am Wort des Herm! Festschriftfiir Ernst
Jenni zum 80. Geburtstag, AOAT 336 (MUnster 2007),23-45.
Dobbs-Alsopp, F. W. "Biblical Hebrew Statives and Situation
Aspect," JSS 45 (2000), 21-53.
Driver, G. R. Problems ofthe Hebrew Verbal System (Edinburgh 1936).
Driver, S. R. A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew
(Oxford 18923).
- - An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (New
York 18976 ).
- .- Notes. on the Hebrew. Text and the Topography of the Books
of Samuel (Oxford 19122).
En~,

MUrvet "Tense and Modality," in Shalom Lappin, The

Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory (Blackwell,
Malden MA 1996), 345-358.
Endo, Y. The Verbal System of Classical Hebrew in the Joseph Story.
An Approach from Discourse Analysis, SSN 32 (Assen 1996).
,"""~"",,~,~-~~.."~~,..~~.w'"~t;-M .. 8tames-tn-V'elbui Aspect l11rctNl1rrarive'Technlque 'in
Biblical Hebrew Prose (Uppsala 1990).
- - "Verbal Syntax in Late Biblical Hebrew," in T. Muraoka, J.
and F. Elwolde (eds.), Diggers at the Well. Proceedings of a
Third International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea
Scrolls & Ben Sira (Leiden, 2000), 84-93.
Ewald, G. H. A. Grammatica critica linguae arabicae, Volumen
prius (Leipzig 1831).
- - Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch der hebriiischen Sprache des Alten
Bundes (Gottingen 18708).

Bibliography

439

Fassberg, S.Studies in Biblical Syntax (Jerusalem 1994) [Hebrew].

- - "Sequences of Positive Commands in Biblical Hebrew," in
S. E. Fassberg and A. Hurvitz (eds.), Biblical Hebrew in Its
Northwest Semitic Setting. Typological and Historical
Perspectives (JerusalemlWinona Lake 2006),51-64.
Fenton, T. "The Absence of a Verbal Formation *yaqattal from
Ugaritic and North-West Semitic," JSS 15 (1970), 31-41.
Fokkelman, J. "Iterative Forms of the Classical Hebrew Verb:
Exploring the Triangle of Style, Syntax and Text Grammar," in
K. Jongeling et al. (eds.), Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic
Syntax, Fs J. Hoftijzer (Leiden 1991), 38-55.
Furuli, R. A New Understanding of the Verbal System of Classical
Hebrew. An Attempt to Distinguish Between Semantic and
Pragmatic Factors (Oslo 2006).
Garr, W. R. "Driver's Treatise and the Study of Hebrew: Then and
Now," in S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in
Hebrew, New edition (Grand Rapids 1998), xviii-Ixxxvi.
- - "The Comparative Method in Semitic Linguistics," Aula
Orientalis 23 (2005), 17-21.
- - "The Paragogic nun in Rhetorical Perspective". in S. E.
Fassberg and A. Hurvitz (eds.), Biblical Hebrew in Its
Northwest Semitic Setting. Typological and Historical
Perspectives (JerusalemlWinona Lake 2006), 65-74.
Gai A. "The Connection between Past and Optative in the
Classical Semitic Languages," ZDMG 150 (2000), 17-28.
Gentry, P. J. "The System of the Finite Verb in Classical Biblical
Hebrew," Hebrew Studies 39 (1998), 7-39.
Gesenius, W. Geschichte der hebriiischen Sprache und Schrift
(Leipzig 1815).
- - Ausfiihrliches grammatisch-kritisches Lehrgebiiude der
hebriiischen Sprache (Leipzig 1817).
Gianto, A. "Mood and Modality in Classical Hebrew," Israel
Oriental Studies 18 (1998), 183-198.
Gibson, J. C. L. Davidson's Introductory Grammar. Syntax
(Edinburgh 1994).
Givon, T. "The Drift from VSo to SVo in Biblical Hebrew: The
Pragmatics of Tense-Aspect," in C. N. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of
Syntactic Change (Austin 1977), 181-254.

.....
440

Bibliography

Goerwitz, R. L. "The Accentuation of the Hebrew Jussive and

Preterite," JAOS 112 (1992), 198-203.
Goldenberg, G. "On Verbal Structure and the Hebrew Verb," in
G. Goldenberg, Studies in Semitic Linguistics (Jerusalem 1998),
148-196.
Goldfajn, T. Word Order and Time in Biblical Hebrew Narrative
(Oxford 1998).
Greenstein, E. "Forms and Functions of the Finite Verb in U garitic
Narrative Verse," in S. E. Fassberg and A. Hurvitz (eds.),
Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting. Typological and
Historical Perspectives (JerusalemlWinona Lake 2006), 75-102.
Gross, W. "Das nicht substantivierte Partizip als Pradikat im
Relativsatz hebraischer Prosa," JNSL 4 (1975), 23-47.
- - Verbform und Funktion. 'Wayyiqtol' fur die Gegenwart? (St.
Ottilien 1976).
- - Die Pendenskonstruktion im Biblischen Hebraisch (St.
Ottilien 1987).
- - Die SatzteilJolge im Verbalsatz alttestamentlicher Prosa, FAT 17
(Tiibingen 1996).
GzelIa, H. Tempus, Aspekt und Modalitiit im Reichsaramaischen,
Akademie derWissenschaften und der Literatur - Mainz.
Veroffentlichungen der Orientalistischen Kommission 48
(Wiesbaden 2004).
Hatav, G. The Semantics of Aspect and Modality. Evidence from
English and Biblical Hebrew (AmsterdamlPhiladelphia 1997).
Hendel, R. S. "In the Margins of the Hebrew Verbal System:
Situation, Tense, Aspect, Mood," ZAH 9 (1996), 152-18l.
Hetzron, R. "The Evidence for Perfect *y'aqtul and Jussive
*yaqt'ul in Proto-Semitic," JSS 14 (1969), 1-2l.
t~'~'~~~-~'~~~"~~~"'~ttrers, D. R. "SriMe' PertOtmative t1trerances~lifllie"BiBle,'" in
D. P. Wright, D. N. Freedman and A. Hurvitz (eds.),
Pomegranates and Golden Bells: Studies in Biblical, Jewish,
and Near Eastern Ritual, Law, and Literature in Honor of
Jacob Milgrom (Winona Lake 1995), 757-766.
Hoftijzer, J. "The Nominal Clause Reconsidered," VT 23 (1973),
501-504.
- - The Function and Use of the Imperfect Forms with Nun
Paragogicum in Classical Hebrew, SSN 21 (Assen 1985).

Bibliography

441

- - "A Preliminary Remark on the Study of the Verbal System in

Classical Hebrew," in A. S. Kaye (ed.), Semitic Studies, in
Honor ofWolJ Leslau. volume I (WiesBaden 1991), 645-65l.
- - "Zukunftsaussagen und Modalitat," KUSATU 2 (2001), 5-45.
Holmstedt, R. D. The Relative Clause in Biblical Hebrew: A
Linguistic Analysis, dissertation, University of Wisconsin,
Madison 2002.
- - "Word Order in the Book of Proverbs," in K. G. Friebel, D.
R. Magary, and R. L. Troxel (eds.), Seeking out the Wisdom of
the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael V. Fox on
the Occasion of HisSixty-Fifth Birthday (Winona Lake 2005),
135-154.
Hopper, P. J. "Aspect and Foregrounding in Discourse," in T.
Giv6n (ed.), Syntax and Semantics volume 12, Discourse and
Syntax (New York 1979), 213-24l.
Huehnergard, J. "The Early Hebrew Prefix-Conjugations,"
Hebrew Studies 29 (1988), 19-23.
Huesman, J. "Finite Uses of the Infinitive Absolute," Biblica 37
(1956), 271-295
- - "The Infinitive Absolute and the waw + Perfect Problem,"
Biblica 37 (1956),410-434.
Hughes, J. A. "Another Look at the Hebrew Tenses," JNES 29
(1970), 12-24.
Hurvitz, A. J7W;; J7W; 7':1, (Jerusalem 1972) [HeBrew].
- - "Hebrew and Aramaic in the Biblical Period: The Problem of
tAramaisms' in Linguistic Reserch on the Hebrew Bible," in I.
Young (ed.), Biblical HeBrew Studies in Chronology and Typology
(London 2003),24-37.
Isaksson, B. Studies in the Language of Qoheleth. With Special
Emphasis on the Verbal System (Uppsala 1987).
- - HtAberrant' Usages of Introductory wehaya in the Light of Text
Linguistics," in K.-D. Schunck and M. Augustin (eds.), "Lasset
uns Bracken bauen... ," BEATAJ 42 (Frankfurt a. M. 1998),9-25.
J akobson, R. "Verschieber, Verbkategorien und das russische
Verb," in idem Form und Sinn (Miinchen 1974),35-54.
Jenni, E. "Untersuchungen zum hebraischen Kohortativ," ZAH 1516 (2002/2003), 19-67.
- - "Aktionsarten und Stammformen im Althebraischen: Das
Picel in verbesserter Sicht," ZAH 13 (2000),67-90.

442

I
I

Bibliography

--"Adjektive und Eigenschaftsverben im Althebraischen," in A.

Redder, Diskurse und Texte. FS Konrad Ehlich (Ttibingen
2007),251-258.
Johnson, B. Hebrliisches Perfekt und Imperfekt mit vorangehendem
we (Lund 1979)
Jongeling, K. "On the VSo Character of Hebrew," in K. Jongeling
et al. (eds.), Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Syntax, Fs. J.
Hoftijzer (Leiden 1991), 103-111.
--mAnd It Came To Pass' Again," in Orientalia Classica VIII.
Memoriae Igor. M. Diakonoff: Babel und Bibel 2 (Winona
Lake 2005),291-329.
Joosten, J. "The Predicative Participle in Biblical Hebrew," ZAH 2
(1989), 128-159.
- - ''The Syntax of haberakah :Jahat he rka :Jabi (Gen. xxvii 38aa) ,"
JSS 36 (1991), 207-221.
- - "Biblical Hebrew weqatal and Syriac hwa qatel Expressing
Repetition in the Past," ZAH 5 (1992), 1-14.
- - "The Indicative System of the Biblical Hebrew Verb and its
Literary Exploitation," in E. van Wolde (ed.), Narrative Syntax
and the Hebrew Bible, Biblical Interpretation Series 29
(Leiden 1997),51-71.
- - "Workshop: Meaning and Use of the Tenses in 1 Samuel 1,"
in E. van Wolde (ed.), Narrative Syntax and the Hebrew Bible,
Biblical Interpretation Series 29 (Leiden 1997), 72-83.
- - "The Functions of the Semitic D Stem: Biblical Hebrew
Materials for a Comparative-Historical Approach," Orientalia
67 (1998), 202-230.
- - "Pseudo-classicisms in Late Biblical Hebrew, in Ben Sira,

f--~--~s~:;~:!::!~;~aE1:;~
I

International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls,

Ben Sira, and the Mishnah, held at Leiden University, 15-17
December 1997 (Leiden 1999), 146-159.
- - ''The Long Form of the Prefix Conjugation Referring to the Past
in Biblical Hebrew Prose," Hebrew Studies 40 (1999), 15-26.
- - "Actif et moyen en semitique. Observations historiques et
comparees a partir de l'hebreu biblique," Comptes Rendus du
GLEeS 33 (2000), 201-220.
- - "Do the Finite Verbal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Express
Aspect?" JANES 29 (2004), 49-70.

Bibliography

443

- - "The Distinction between Classical and Late Biblical Hebrew

as Reflected in Syntax," Hebrew Studies 46 (2005),327-339.
- - "The Disappearance of Iterative WEQATAL in the Biblical
Hebrew Verbal System," in S. E. Fassberg and A. Hurvitz (eds.),
Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting. Typological and
Historical Perspectives (JerusalemlWinona Lake 2006), 135-147.
- - "The Syntax of Volitive Verbal Forms in Qoheleth in
Historical Perspective," in A. Bedejung and P. Van Hecke
(eds.), The Language of Qohelet in Its Context. Essays in Honour
of Prof. A. Schoors on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday,
Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 164 (Leuven 2007), 47..,..61.
- - "A Note on weyiqtol and Volitive Sequences," VT 59 (2009),
495-498.
Jotion, P. Grammaire de l'hebreu biblique (Rome 1923).
Kaufman, S. A. "An Emphatic Plea for Please," Maarav 7 (1991),
195-198.
- - "Paragogic Nun in Biblical Hebrew: Hypercorrection as a
Clue to a Lost Scribal Practice," in Z. Zevit, S. Gitin and M.
Sokoloff (eds.), Solving Riddles and Untying Knots: Biblical,
Epigraphic, and Semitic Studies in Honor of Jonas C. Greenfield
(Winona Lake 1995), 95-99.
Keulen, P. S. F. van, Manasseh through the eyes of the deuteronomists..,.. The Manasseh Account (2 Kings 21:1-18) and the final
chapters of the deuteronomistic history, Oudtestamentische Studien
38 (Leiden 1996).
Klein, G. L. "The Prophetic Perfect," JNWSL 16 (1990), 45-60.
Korchin, P. D. Markedness in Canaanite and Hebrew Verbs ,
Harvard Semitic Studies 58 (Winona Lake 2008).
Koschmieder, E. Zur Bestimmung der Funktionen grammatischer
Kategorien (Mtinchen 1945).
Kottsieper, I. "Yaqattal - Phantom oder Problem? Erwagungen
zu einem hebraistischen Problem und zur Geschichte der
semitischen Sprachen," KUSATU 1 (2000),27-100.
Krahmalkov, C. R. "The Qatal with Future Tense Reference in
Phoenician," JSS 31 (1986),5-10.
- - "The Periphrastic Future Tense in Hebrew and Phoenician,"
Rivista degli studi orientali 61 (1987), 73-80.
Krispenz, J. "Grammatik und Theologie in der Botenformel," ZAH
11 (1998), 133-140.

......
444

Bibliography

Kropat, A. Die Syntax des Autors der Chronik, BZAW 16 (Giessen

1909).
Kuhr, E. Die Ausdrucksmittel der konjunktionslose Hypotaxe in der
iiltesten hebriiischen Prosa. Ein Beitrag zur historischen Syntax
des Hebriiischen (Leipzig 1929; reprint Hildesheim 1968).
Kurylowicz, J. L'apophonie en semitique (Den Haag 1962)
- - "Verbal Aspect in Semitic," Orientalia 42 (1973), 114-120.
Kutscher, E. Y. The Language and Linguistic Background of the
Isaiah Scroll (I Q Isaa), STDJ 6 (Leiden 1974).
Lambert, M. "Le vav conversif," Revue des Etudes Juives 26
(1893),47-62.
- - "De l' emploi des suffixes pronominaux avec noun et sans
noun au futur et it l'imperatif," Revue des Etudes Juives 46
(1903), 178-183.
' .
_ _ "Du passe optatif en hebreu," Revue des Etudes JUlves 80
(1925), 218-219.
- - Traite de grammaire hebraique (Paris 1946).
Landsberger, B. "Die Eigenbegrifflichkeit der babylonischen Welt.
Ein Vortrag," Islamica 2 (1926), 354-372.
Lazard, G. "La categorie de l'eventuel!" in F. Bader et al. (eds:),
Melanges linguistiques offerts a Emile Benveniste (Louvrun
1975), 347-358.
Li Tarsee The Expression of Sequence and Non Sequence in
, Northwest Semitic Narrative Prose, dissertation Hebrew Union
College, Cincinnati 1999.
. ..
Lloyd, A. L. Anatomy of the Verb (Amsterdam 1979).
Loesov, S. "Review of H. Gzella, Tempus, Aspekt und Modalltat
I
im Reichsaramiiischen," Babel und Bibel3 (2006),627-634.
I . ... . .. ... ...................... Lo~cre" R. E. Jo,eph: {1 .St()~-21Pil'l!!:.~~LCZ~trj~l1ce. A Text
r~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---- ThOOr~tical and Textlinguistic Analysis of Genesis 37 and 39-48
(Winona Lake 1989).
.
- - "Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose. A Dlscoursemodular Approach," in R. L. Bergen (ed.), Biblical Hebrew and
Discourse Linguistics (Winona Lake 1994), 50-98.
Lyons, J. Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics (Cambridge 1968).
I

McFall, L. The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System (Sheffield 1?82~.

McKay, K. L. "Repeated Action, the Potential and RealIty In
Ancient Greek," Antichthon 15 (1981), 36-46.

Bibliography

445

Maslov, Y. S. "An Outline of Contrastive Aspectology," in Y. S.

Maslov (ed.), Contrastive Studies in Verbal Aspect (Heidelberg
1985), 1-44.
Meyer, R. Hebriiische Grammatik. Vol. III Satzlehre (BerlinlNew
York 1972).
Michel, D. Tempora und Satzstellung in den Psalmen (Bonn 1960).
- - "Probleme des Nominalsatzes im biblischen Hebraisch," ZAH 7
(1994), 215-224.
- - Grundlegung einer hebriiischen Syntax (NeukirchenVluyn 2004).
Mishor, M. The Tense System in Tannaitic Hebrew, dissertation
Hebrew University, Jerusalem 1983 [Hebrew].
M~nnesland, S. "The Slavonic Frequentative Habitual," in C. de
Groot and H. Tommola (eds.), Aspect Bound. A Voyage into the
Realm of Germanic, Slavonic and Finno- Ugrian Aspectology
(Dordrecht 1984), 53-76.
Moore, G. F. Judges, ICC (Edinburgh 1895).
Moran, W. L. "The Hebrew Language in its Northwest Semitic
Background," in G. E. Wright (ed.), The Bible and the Ancient
Near East (Garden City NY 1961),54-72.
Moshavi, A. "The Discourse Functions of Object!Adverbial Fronting
in Biblical Hebrew," in S. E. Fassberg and A. Hurvitz (eds.),
Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting. Typological and
Historical Perspectives (Jerusalem/Winona Lake 2006), 231-245.
Mulder, M. J. "Die Partikel r~ im biblischen Hebraisch," in K.
Jongeling et al. (eds.), Studies in Hebrew and Aramaic Syntax,
Fs J. Hoftijzer (Leiden 1991), 132-142.
Muraoka, T. Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew
(Jerusalem! Leiden 1985).
- - "The Alleged Final Function of the Biblical Hebrew
Syntagm <waw + a volitive form>," in E. van Wolde (ed.),
Narrative Syntax and the Hebrew Bible, Biblical Interpretation
Series 29 (Leiden 1997), 229-241.
- - "The Participle in Qumran Hebrew with Special Reference to
its Periphrastic Use," in T. Muraoka and J. F. Elwolde (eds.),
Sirach, Scrolls and Sages. Proceedings of a Second International
Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira,
and the Mishnah, held at Leiden University, 15-17 December
1997 (Leiden 1999), 188-204.

446

Bibliography

Nebes, N. (ed.), Tempus und Aspekt in den semitischen Sprachen:

Jenaer Kolloquium zur semitischen Sprachwissenschaft , Jenaer
Beitdige zum Vorderen Orient 1 (Wiesbaden 1999).
Niccacci, A. "A Neglected Point of Hebrew Syntax: Yiqtol and
Position in the Sentence," Liber Annuus 37 (1987), 7-19.
__ The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, JSOT Suppl.
86 (Sheffield 1990).
__ "Simple Nominal Clause (SNC) or Verbless Clause in
Biblical Hebrew Prose," ZAH 6 (1993), 216-227.
__ "On the Hebrew Verbal System," in R. L. Bergen (ed.),
Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics (Winona Lake
1994), 117-137.
__ "Basic Facts and Theory of the Biblical Hebrew Verbal
System in Prose," in E. van Wolde (ed.), Narrative Syntax and
the Hebrew Bible, Biblical Interpretation Series 29 (Leiden
1997), 167-202.
__ "The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry," in S. E.
Fassberg and A. Hurvitz (eds.), Biblical Hebrew in Its
Northwest Semitic Setting. Typological and Historical
Perspectives (JerusalemlWinona Lake 2006), 247-268.
Notarius, T. The System of Verbal Tenses in Archaic and Classical
Biblical Poetry, dissertation Hebrew University, Jerusalem
2007 [Hebrew].
__ "Poetic Discourse and the Problem of Verbal Tenses in the
Oracles of Balaam," Hebrew Studies 49 (2008), 55-86.
__ "Prospective Weqatal in Biblical Hebrew: Dubious Cases or
Unidentified Category?" JNSL 34/1 (2008), 39-55.
Orlinsky, H. "On the Cohortative and Jussive after an Imperative or
Interjection in Biblical Hebrew," JQR 31 (1940-41), pp. 371-382;
32 (194T-42),pp. 191-205, 273-277 ~
_~~"~M~~_"M~"._

~"M_M~~~_~"""~"_"" """'~

_ __

Pardee, D. review of Z. Zevit, The Anterior Construction, JNES 60

(2001), 308-312.
Peckham, B. "Tense and Mood in Biblical Hebrew," ZAH 10
(1997), 139-68.
Polotsky, H. J. "A Note on the Sequential Verb-Form in Ramesside
Egyptian and in Biblical Hebrew," in S. Israelit-Groll (ed.),
Pharaonic Egypt, the Bible and Christianity (Jerusalem 1985),
157-161.

Bibliography

447

Provan, I. W. "Past, Present and Future in Lamentations ill 52-66: The

Case for a Precative Perfect Re-Examined," VT 41 (1991), 164175.
Qimron, E. "Consecutive and Conjunctive Imperfect: the Form of the
Imperfect with Waw in Biblical Hebrew," JQR 77 (1987), 149-161.
- - "A New Approach to the Use of Forms of the Imperfect
Without Personal Endings," in T. Muraoka and J. F. Elwolde
(eds.), The Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, STDJ
26 (Leiden 1997), 174-81.
- - "AI Massoret Halashon she I Sopherey Hamiqra," in Y.
Bentolila, Hadassah Shye Jubiliee Book (Jerusalem 1997),
37-43 [Hebrew].
Rabinovitz, I. '" az Followed by the Imperfect Verb-Form in
Preterite Contexts," VT 34 (1984), 53-62.
Rainey, A. F. "The Ancient Hebrew Prefix Conjugation in the Light
of Amamah Canaanite," Hebrew Studies 27 (1986),4-19.
- - Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets. A Linguistic Analysis of
the Mixed Dialect Used by the Scribes From Canaan, Vol. II:
Morphosyntactic Analysis of the Verbal System, Handbook of
Oriental Studies / Handbuch der Orientalistik, 1: The Near and
Middle East / Der Nahe und Mittlere Osten (Leiden 1996).
- - "The yaqtul Preterite in Northwest Semitic," in M. F. J.
Baasten and W. Th. van Peursen (eds.), Hamlet on a Hill:
Semitic and Greek Studies Presented to Professor T. Muraoka
on the Occasion of his Sixty-Fifth Birthday, OLA 118 (Leuven
2003), 395-407.
Rattray, S. The Tense-Mood-Aspect System of Biblical Hebrew,
with Special Emphasis on 1 & 2 Samuel, dissertation
University of California, Berkeley 1992.
Reichenbach, H. Elements of Symbolic Logic (New York 1947).
Reinhart, T. "Principles of Gestalt perception in the temporal
organization of narrative texts," Linguistics 22 (1984), 779-809.
Revell, E. J. "Stress and the waw (Consecutive' in Biblical
Hebrew," JAOS 104 (1984), 437-444.
- - "The System of the Verb in Standard Biblical Prose," HUCA 60
(1989), 1-37.
- - "The Conditioning of Word Order in Verbless Clauses," JSS 34
(1989), 1-24.

Bibliography

448

Robertson, D. A. Linguistic Evidence in Dating Early Hebrew

Poetry, SBL Dissertation Series 3 (1972).
Rossler, O. "Die Pdifixkonjugation Qal der Verba Iae NUN im
Althebraischen und das Problem der sogenannten Tempora,"
ZAw74 (1962), 125-14l.
Rogland, M. F. "The Hebrew 'Epistolary Perfect' Revisited," ZAH 13
(2000), 194-200.
--Alleged Non-Past Uses ofQATAL in Classical Hebrew, SSN 44
(Assen 2003).
Rosen, H. B. "The Comparative Assignment of Certain Hebrew
Tense Forms," in Proceedings of the International Conference
on Semitic Studies Held in Jerusalem, 19-23 July 1965
(Jerusalem 1969), 212-234.
- - "Qawim letoledot ma'arekhet zemane ha-po'al ha-'ivrit,"
in M. Bar-Asher (ed.), Mehqarim belashon 1 (1985), 287-293
[Hebrew].
Rubinstein, A. "The Anomalous Perfect with Waw-Conjunctive
in Biblical Hebrew," Biblica 44 (1963), 62-69.
Rubinstein, E. "Adjectival Verbs in Biblical Hebrew," Israel
Oriental Studies 9 (1979),55-76.
Rundgren, F. Intensiv und Aspektkorrelation (Uppsala 1959).
- - Das aithebriiische Verbum. Abriss der Aspektlehre
(Uppsala 1961).
- - "Erneuerung des Verbalaspekts im Semitischen," Acta
Universitatis Upsaliensis, Acta Societatis Linguisticae
Upsaliensis, Nova Series 3: 1 (1963),49-108.
I:

I
Ii

!I

Saenz-Badillos, A. A History of the Hebrew Language, ET J. Elwolde

(Cambridge 1993).
Saussure, F. de Cours de linguistique generale, edited by C. Bally

~~~"~'"~"~~"~'"~~~~~~~"'"'""'"

I
I
I
I
I,
I,

I
I
Ii

I'

'and A. iSechehaye-tparis

i'94~)-.''_~"_~,_"~e,~,"",e,,,~~,,,",,,,,

Schneider, W. Grammatik des biblischen Hebriiisch (Miinchen 1974).

"Und es begab sich ... Anfange von Erzahlungen im
biblischen Hebrilisch," Biblische Notizen 70 (1993), 62-87.
SchUle, A. "Deutung und Neugestaltung. Althebraische grammatik
in alttestamentlichen Texten," ZDPV 116 (2000), 14-25.
Shulman, A. The Use of Modal Verb Forms in Biblical Hebrew
Prose, dissertation, University of Toronto 1996.
"The Particle ~J in Biblical Hebrew Prose," Hebrew Studies 40
(1999), 57-82.

--

--

Bibliography

449

- - "The Function of the (Jussive' and (Indicative' Imperfect

Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose," ZAH 13 (2000), 168-180.
Siedl, S. H. Gedanken zum Tempussytem im Hebriiischen und
Akkadischen (Wiesbaden 1971).
Sivan, D. "The Use of QTL and YQTL Forms in the Ugaritic Verbal
System," Israel Oriental Studies 18 (1998), 89-103.
Smith, C. The Parameter ofAspect (Dordrecht 1991).
Smith, M. The Origins and Development of the WAW-Consecutive.
Northwest Semitic Evidence from Ugarit to Qumran, Harvard
Semitic Studies 39 (Atlanta 1991).
- - "Grammatically Speaking: The Participle as a Main Verb of
the Clause (Predicative Participle) in Direct Discourse and
Narrative in Pre-mishnaic Hebrew," in T. Muraoka and J. F.
Elwolde (eds.), Sirach, Scrolls and Sages. Proceedings of a
Second International Symposium on the Hebrew of the Dead
Sea Scrolls, Ben Sira, and the Mishnah, held at Leiden
University, 15-17 December 1997 (Leiden 1999), 278-332.
Spieckermann, H. Juda' unter Assur in der Sargonidenzeit, FRLANT
129 (Gottingen 1982).
Steiner, R. C. "Ancient Hebrew," in R. Hetzron (ed.), The Semitic
Languages (London/New York 1997),145-173.
Stempel, R. "Aspekt und Aktionsart, Tempus und Modus: Zur
Strukturierung von Verbalsystemen," Indogermanische
Forschungen 104 (1999), 23-44.
Stipp, H.-J. "Narrativ-Langformen 2. und 3. Person von
zweiradikaligen Basen nach qalY im biblischen Hebraisch:
Eine Untersuchung zu morphologischen Abweichungen in den
Buchern Jeremia und Konige," JNSL 13 (1987), 109-149.
- - "w=haya fUr nichtiterative Vergangenheit? Zu syntaktischen
Modemisierungen im masoretischen Jeremiabuch," in W.
Gross, H. Irsigle and H. Satzinger (eds.), Text, Methode, und
Grammatik: Wolfgang Richter zum 65. Geburtstag (St. Ottilien
1991),521-547.
Streck, M. "ittasab ibakki weinend setzte er sich : iparras fUr
die Vergangenheit in der akkadischen Epik," Orientalia 64
(1995), 33-89.
Tropper, J. "Althebdiisches und semitisches Aspektsystem,"
ZAH11 (1998), 153-190.

450

Bibliography

Van der Merwe, C. "The Elusive Biblical Hebrew Term "iI",,"

Hebrew Studies 40 (1998), 83-114.
Van de Sande, A. Nouvelle perspective sur Ie systeme verbal
de I'hebreu ancien. Les formes *qatala, *yaqtul et *yaqtulu,
Publications de l'Institut Orientaliste de Louvain 57 (Louvain
2008).
Van Peursen, W. Th. "Periphrastic Tenses in Ben Sira," in T.
Muraoka and J. F. Elwolde (eds.), The Hebrew of the Dead
Sea Scrolls and Ben Sira, STDJ 26 (Leiden 1997), 158-173.
- - The Verbal System in the Hebrew Text of Ben Sira, SSLL 41
(Leiden 2004).
Vendler, Z. "Verbs and Times," The Philosophical Review 66
(1957), 143-160.
Voitila, A. "La technique de traduction du yiqtol (1' imparfait
hebreu) dans l'histoire de Joseph grecque (Gen 37, 39-50)," in
C. Cox (ed.), VlI Congress of the International Organization
for Septuagint and Cognate Studies. Leuven 1989 (Atlanta
1989),223-237.
- - Present et imparfait de I "indicatif dans Ie Pentateuque
grec. Une etude sur la syntaxe de traduction (Helsinkil
Gottingen 2001).
Wagner, A. Sprechakte und Sprechaktanalyse im Alten Testament,
BZAW 253 (Berlin 1997).
Waltke, B. K. and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical
Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake 1990).
Warren, A. Modality, Reference and Speech Acts in the Psalms,
dissertation, Cambridge 1998.
Washburn, D. L. "Chomsky's Separation of Syntax and
"~~'""~~,~"""~~~~_""_~" ~,~~mantics," Hebrew Studies 35 (1994), 27-46.
-Weinrich, H-:Temp~BesprocTiene 'Ulllr'erzan11ir"Welf(StlJttgart
1964; 19773).
Weninger, S. Das Verbalsystem des Althiithiopischen. Eine
Untersuchung seiner Verwendung und Funktion unter
Beriicksichtigung des Inte1jerenzproblems, Veroffentlichungen
der Orientalischen Kommission 47 (Wiesbaden 2001).
Wright, W. Lectures on the Comparative Grammar of the Semitic
Languages (Cambridge 1890).

Bibliography

451

Young, I. and R. Rezetko, Linguistic Dating of Biblical Texts. An

Introduction to Approaches and Problems, 2 vols. (London!
Oakville 2009).
Zaborski, A. "Kurylowicz and the So-called 'Aspect' in Classical
and Modem Arabic," in W. Smoczynski, Kurylowicz Memorial
Volume. Part One (Cracow 1995),529-541.
Zewi, T. "The Nominal Sentence in Biblical Hebrew," in G.
Goldenberg and S. Raz (eds.), Semitic and Cushitic Studies
(Wiesbaden 1994), 145-167.
Zuber, B. Das Tempussystem des biblischen Hebraisch, BZAW 164
(Berlin 1985).
- - "Das ~Nun paragogicum'," Dielheimer Blatter zum Alten
Testament 27 (1991), 17-45.

Index of Biblical References

Genesis
1:1-2
1:3
1:5
1:6
1:9
1:10
1:11
1:14
1:22

1:24
1:26
1:28
1:29
2:5
2:6
2:10
2:16
2:17
2:18
2:19
2:23
2:24
2:25
3:2
3:3
3:4
3:5
3:6
3:10
3:11
3:12
3:14
3:15
3:16
3:17
3:18

165
121, 165, 336n
44,217,367
260, 336n
148n, 149
44n
77, 336n
336n
316n, 331, 334
336n,339
336n
320, 325n
151,331
103,203
282
285,286,307
286,307
273
270
238n,320
283,286
233n,268
18,277,302
63n,86,284
273
270
268
249, 264n, 295
370
45n
15,40, 359n
45n,359n
268
268,360
268,321
268
15,268

3:19
3:22
4:1
4:2
4:3
4:10
4:12
4:14
4:16
4:18
4:24
5:4
5:7
5:24
5:29
6:1
6:3
6:4
6:6
6:7
6:11
6:12
6:13
6:16
6:17
6:21
7:4
7:8
7:19
7:23
8:13
8:17
8:21
8:22
9:1
9:2
9:5
9:6

268
301
132, 372n
44n,47n,360n
167n
77,240
11n
268
372
352n
268
1710
1710
46
268
165n
268
286,307
169n
320
168
368n
88n,118
12n
106,268
274
242,295
238n,393n
132n
168
104n,368
296n,315n
268
268
331
268
268
76

Index of Biblical References

454
9:7
9:9
9:11
9:15
9:25
9:26
9:27
10:9
10:14
11:1
11:2
11:3

11:4
11:6
11:7
11:8
11:9
11:13

12:1
12:2
12:3
12:4
12:15-16
12:19

12:20
13:7
13:8
13:9
13:12
13:15
13:16
13:18
14:1
14:10
14:12
14:13
14:21
14:22
15:1
15:3
15:5-6

15:12

315n,331
241n
268
268
268
339
149,339
277, 373n
222n
213-214, 372
213-214

47n,144n,213
214, 325n
320
96n, 213-214, 268
144n,213-214,325n
213-214
213-214, 374n
1710

145,384
145, 152
76
83, 169n
367
121,182,190
372n
112, 130n,247n
337
145
47n,131n,360n
240n
273
372n
165n
44n,218n,352n
127n, 128n
127n
315n,329
203
216n,340
241n
"226
91n, 139

15:14
15:15

255
265-266,3190,429

15:17
16:2
16:5
16:8
16:10
16:11
16:13
16:14
17:1-2
17:4
17:5
17:16
17:19
17:20

139 .
103n,321,324n
45n,120n,271n,353
57-58, 240n, 278
274,321
295
222
223, 374n
145
294
113n
207
241n,295
203,294
127n,174,233

18:1
18:2
18:3
18:4

18:5
18:6
18:7
18:8
18:10
18:11

18:12
18:13
18:15
18:16
18:17
18:20
18:22
18:27
18:29
18:30
18:32
18:33

19:1
19:2

19:3
19:4
19:5

174

700,299
700,121,152,269

152,269
168n
218
127n
128n,169
93, 223, 355n
209
88n
220
53, 128n
251n
54-55, 88n, 199
144n, 321, 323n
115n,130n
103n
321
146, 321, 323n
146
46, 47n, 220, 360n,373
20,64
70,296
218
282
145

455

Index of Biblical References

19:6
19:8
19:9

19:10
19:13
19:14
19:17
19:19
19:20
19:22
19:23
19:24
19:28
19:31
19:32
19:34
19:38
20:6
20:7
20:9
20:11
20:13
20:15
20:16
21:7
21:8
21:10
21:12
21:14

21:16
21:20
21:21
21:25
22:1
22:4
22:5
22:7
22:8
22:13
22:14
22:17

22:20
23:4
23:6

217,218
152, 316n
96n,190,328
218
253
252
67n,315n,341
93n, 277, 300
149, 323n
93n,277
139n,368n
139n,368n
104n,368n
233n
144n, 320, 325n, 332
152, 167n,320
373n
45n
142n, 148, 151
239, 330n
277
294,299,300
315n,328
315n,328
218
207,209
84
328
315n,343n
218,223
222,340,342
84n
372n
227
165n
43n,216n
144n,315
167
199
104n,368n
277
309,310,321
44n,87,196
121,145,326
121, 315n, 328

23:8-9
23:10

148
129n

23:11

120

23:13
23:15
23:19
24:1
24:2-3

145
315n
216n
131n, 132n, 138n
145
18n,67n,2650

24:8

334,341

24:15
24:18
24:19
24:20
24:21
24:31
24:35
24:37
24:40
24:42
24:43
24:45
24:46
24:49
24:50
24:51
24:54
24:55
24:56
24:58
24:60
24:62
24:67
25:1
25:11

106n
145,2050,298,321
135-136,244
168n
205
128n, 168n
128n
278,329
84n, 182
68n,270
41
99n,251n
106n
282,321
14, 168n,321
145,251
93,277
148
169n
269n
145
265n,320n
121,148,331
127n
372n
168
167n

25:22

1700

25:25
25:26
25:27
25:28
25:29
25:30
25:34

43
43, 127n,216n
84n
128n
248n
253
132n, 169

24:13
24:14

456

Index of Biblical References

26:2
26:8
26:10
26:13
26:16
26:18
26:22
26:24
26:27
26:28
26:30
26:32
27:1
27:2
27:4
27:5
27:6
27:7
27:9
27:14
27:16
27:19
27:21
27:25
27:27
27:28
27:29
27:30
27:31
27:33
27:34
27:35

342
244n
303-304
84n
88n,328,384
168n,219
97n,294
294
45n, 182
45n
169n
194
165n, 167n, 178
88n
128n, 145
128n
103n
145
145
219n
218
332
122, 145
145
65,332
65
65,331
139n
335,434
45n,184,282
1220, 216n, 329
44, 45n, 355

27:37
27:39
27:40
27:41
27:42
27:43-44
27:45
27:46
28:1
28:3
28:6

120n,321
65, 100
65
46,145,1700
106n
700,296
700
57,199,251
68, 68n, 270
.271
68n,227,270

28:12-13
28:15
28:16
28:20
29:2
29:3
29:5
29:6
29:8
29:9
29:15
29:17
29:20
29:21
29:23
29:24
29:25
29:26
29:32
29:35
30:3
30:6
30:8
30:13
30:15
30:18
30:20
30:24
30:25
30:26
30:27
30:28
30:30
30:31
30:32
30:34
30:36
30:38
30:39
30:41
30:42
31:1
31:3

lOIn
205,275,294
89
292
63,286,306,307
306,307
201
106n,240n
93n,277
115, 130n, 135n
297
47n,360n
1710
145,200
167n
172
195
277
96n, 222, 268
321
146, 148
49n, 352n, 355
49n, 196
207
273
120n, 352n, 355
355
271n,338
145
145
180
145
195
321
320
3200
336
128n
282,286
174
307
286,307
354
145

457

Index of Biblical References

31:5
31:7
31:8
31:16
31:19
31:20
31:26
31:27
31:28
31:30
31:32
31:33
31:34
31:35
31:37
31:39
31:40
31:41
31:43
31:44
31:47
31:49
31:50
32:5(4)
32:6
32:7
32:8
32:10
32:11(10)
32:12(11)
32:13
32:17
32:18
32:20
32:21
32:25-26
32:27
32:29
32:30
32:32
32:33(32)
33:3
33:4
33:9
33:10

30,236
49, 50n, 225
307
315n
132n
253
180n, 182
190
97n
97n, 196
.275
132
132, 176n
93n, 277, 343n
148
63,286
182
50n
321
325n
47, 360n
121, 222, 271n, 338
332
99, 185
1810,1970,3210
3930
1700
145
88-89, 97n, 195
253,300
295
268,272
278
222
321, 323n
170
210,328
113n
278, 279n
128n,246
373
132n, 174
169n
337
299n

33:12
33:13
33:14
33:15
33:17
34:3
34:4
34:5
34:7
34:9
34:13
34:14
34:19
34:23
34:26
34:27
34:29
34:30
34:31
35:2
35:3
35:11
35:12
35:16
35:18
37:2
37:3
37:4
37:5-6
37:7
37:9
37:11
37:15
37:16
37:17
37:18
37:20
37:21
37:22
37:24
37:27
37:30
37:32
37:34-35

144n,325n
92,300
315n
322
360
169n
1220,329
227
169n,277
269n
167
93n,167,277
248n
149
218
132n
218
300
285
141n
141n, 185
331
120n
169n
374
174,178,259
307
42
174
49n, 63n, 100-101
1880,279-280,287
103n,244n
86
61, 244n, 278
62,240, 358n
2050
282
296
66n,167,270
66n
232
316
279n
122
171

460
3:17
3:22
4:3
4:4-6
4:7
4:9
4:12
4:13
4:14
4:15
4:18
4:23
4:26
4:27
5:1
5:3
5:5
5:7
5:8

Index of Biblical References

5:9
5:13
5:15
5:16
5:17
5:21
6:1
6:2-3
6:6
6:24
6:11
6:28

117n,323n
297
70n,328
70n
70n,368n
70n
295
329
274n,293
293
144n,322n
91n, 148, 185
112n
328
148,328
326
293n,300
270
52n,2390,248
253,270
156,344
328
278
106n,394
248
148n, 271n, 338
96
181, 182
292,294
181
148
129n

10:10
10:11
10:12
10:13
10:17
10:21
10:26
11:2
12:5
12:32
12:33

7:9
7:15
7:16
7:17
7:26
7:27(8:2)
8:1(5)
8:4(8)
8:12
8:16
8:17

148
108o, 242n, 345
148
91n,241n
148
57,251
330
142, 148
296n
108o, 148, 345n
239, 241n, 295

12:37-38
12:44
12:48
13:7
13:15
13:18
13:22
14:2
14:3
14:4
14:6

8:19(23)
8:20
8:23
8:25
9:1
9:2
9:13
9:17
9:18
9:20
9:21
9:22
9:23
9:29
9:30
9:34
10:2
10:3
10:4
10:7

267
620,282
295
343n
148
251
148, 345n
114
107,242
47n,360n
217n
148
1330
113n
282n
220
205
148,209n
1070,251
121,148,277
282n,329
339
240n
148
133, 139n
148
148
93n,277
148
264n
296, 315n
222
282
218
108
300
157n
243,277
218
286
142n, 148
248
153
218

461

Index of Biblical References

14:10
14:12
14:15
14:16
14:17(10)
14:25
14:26
15:1
15:16
15:18
16:4
16:6
16:7
16:10
16:16
16:19
16:21
16:23
16:28
16:29
17:2
17:4
17:5
17:6
17:10
17:11
17:12
18:5
18:11
18:14
18:15
18:16
18:17
18:18
18:19
18:23
18:26
19:3
19:9
19:11
19:15
19:16
19:18
19:19

244n,361,368
145
142n, 278, 279n
148, 151n
107, 153
246n, 322, 324n
148
109n,110,323n
283, 415n
271
241n,295,311n
264n,292
264n
368n
328
316n,343
174,307
315n
209
51n,343n
1220,145,278,329
295
315n
294,297
131n
286,307
93, 248n
245n
98
52, 245n,279n
277
301
238n
237n
145, 149
352n
32,286,307
309,311,3190
335,406,429
241n
260
260
165n
169n
63n,169n,258,286

19:21
19:24
20:9
20:13
20:19
20:21
20:23
21:6
22:4
22:30
23:1
23:4
23:5
23:7
23:8
23:10
23:11
23:12
23:13
23:14
23:19
23:24
23:29
24:7
24:11
24:12
24:14
25:2
25:10-18
25:23
26:3
26:23-24
27:20
28:1
28:27-28
28:43
30:20
30:30
32:1
32:10
32:18
32:22
32:24
32:30
32:34

300
316n,344n
64,292
64
145, 344n
44, 47n, 86, 360n
266
298
334
269
68n,68
269
269,298
68n,269
61,277,309,311,429
354
269
309,311,429
269
269
269
270
276,300
308,311,4290
169n
145
150n
142n, 148
298
298
260
153,309n
141n
315n
153,309n
2910
157n
292
173n
142n, 148
249
343n
152
96n,323
lOOn

Index of Biblical References

462
33:5
33:7
33:8-10
33:11
33:12
33:13
33:15
33:20
33:21
34:2
34:3
34:8
34:9
34:30
34:32
34:34
34:35
36:1
36:4
36:5
36:6
36:29
36:30
36:38
37:9
37:16
38:8
38:28
39:3
39:21
39:22-23
39:43

145,274
19,286,307
286,307
277,286,307
49n,51n
145,299
238n,239
24, 291n
297
260
69, 344n
168n
299
104n,368n
216
286,307
307
227
245n
255
343n
227,286
227
228n
258
282
222
228n
228n
158
158
368n

5:21
5:24
7:24
8:3
9:4
9:6
10:3
10:6
10:9
10:16
10:18
10:19
11:4
11:5
11:7
11:21
11:34
11:37
11:38
11:43
13:4
13:5
13:8
13:11
13:13
13:17
13:25
13:31
13:32
13:34
13:36
13:43

40:31
40:32
40:36-38

307
286
286

13:55
13:57
14:3
14:8
14:21
14:38
14:39
14:44
14:48
15:2
15:3

Leviticus
1:1
2:12
2:13
3:1
3:7
5:16

165n
273
157n
251n
-2510
11n

292
11n
273
315n
207n
153, 155
85
68, 157
157, 316n
368n
285
304
93,248
93
93
273
274
274
93
68n, 157
238n
105n
105n
253
105n
105n
105n
238n
105n,238n
105n
105n
233n
105n
105n
113n
105n,311n
311n
238n
311n
105n
105
105n
260
355

463

Index of Biblical References

15:19
15:20-23
15:24
16:2
17:11
17:13
17:15
18:24
18:28
18:30
19:2
19:3
19:4
19:5
19:10
19:12
19:14
19:15
19:17
19:19
19:25
19:29
19:30
19:31
19:32
19:37
20:7
20:26
21:3
21:22
22:2
22:5
22:6
22:9
22:15-16
22:23
23:18
24:2
25:3
25:14
25:36
25:44-45
25:45
25:48
26:4

260,340
340
339,345
157
358n
274
298
68n
393n
298
270
270
68n
270
270
291
291
270
270
68n,270
273
68, 157
270
68n
270
298
298
181, 182
273
273
148, 157
274
210
291n
291n
273
153
141n, 148
273
68n
68n
273
205
272
334

26:26
26:34
26:43
26:44
27:8
27:31

295
295
153
207
231n
lIn

Numbers
1:1
1:50
3:31
4:7
4:9
4:11-12
4:15
4:19
5:2
5:7
5:19
5:21
5:27
6:24
6:25
6:26
7:1
7:9
7:19
8:19
8:22
9:7
9:8
9:15-18
9:19
9:20
9:21
9:22-23
10:17-18
10:22
10:25
10:29
10:35
11:4
11:5
11:6
11:8

165n
315n
286
286
286
286
157n,286
296n
141n,148,296
11n,205
94n,345
334
189
339
271n,339
271n,339
173n
282
218
158, 321n
216n
233n,248n
145
286
16,286,307
286
286,307
286
307
307
307
237n
148
46-47, 132n, 168n
118n,286
233n
218, 307, 355n

Index of Biblical References

464
11:9
11:12
11:13
11:15
11:26
11:27
11:28
11:29
11:32
11:33
12:2
12:4
12:7
12:8
12:10
12:12
12:14
13:2
13:33
14:2
14:3
14:4
14:9
14:13
14:14
14:15
14:16
14:20
14:22-23
14:24
14:31
14:33
15:13
15:19
15:25
15:34
15:40
16:3
16:5
16:7
16:9
16:10
16:11

16:14
16:16
16:20
16:21
16:22
16:34
17:2
17:3
17:7
17:10
17:12 (16:47)
17:15
17:19
17:23
17:25 (10)

286
277,278
123n, 145
77, 156,251,329, 391n
248n
20,40,231
329
59,251
84n,86,218
140n,282
169
328
248
61,277
132n
184
269n,273
148
14
211
279n
144n,325
355
290,300
290
205,290
183
203
185
65,294
264n, 292, 293
260

18:2
18:3
18:26
19:2
19:11
20:3
20:7
20:11
20:18
20:19
20:24
20:26
21:7
21:9

267
330
205n
283
300, 428n
233n,278
309,310,334
310n,345
302
293n;302
278

21:15
21:16
21:17
21:21
21:22
21:26
21:27
21:34
22:2
22:4
22:6

17:27 (12)

191n
315n,345
328
145
191n
222
88n,148,200,315n
153,264n,309n
368n
145
104, 368n
46-47, 131n
277
368n
18n,148,150-157
3190,335,4020
119, 189
206, 350, 352n
148
157n
292
142n, 148
264n
211
121
175n
68n
315n,323n
266
292
142n, 148
307, 431n
373n
307n
145
109n,110
307n,324
323n,324
131n
277, 373n
393n
52
96
147,337

465

Index of Biblical References

22:8
22:11
22:13
22:14
22:16
22:19
22:22
22:34
22:35
22:38
23:3
23:5
23:7
23:9
23:10
23:16
23:19
24:2
24:5
24:10
24:14
24:17
24:18
24:19
24:24
25:4
25:17-18
25:19
26:65
27:11
27:16
30:12
30:14
31:3
31:17
31:18
31:19
31:23
31:49-50
32:1
32:7
32:17
32:22
32:23
32:25

345
185
200
355
343
lIn, 145,345
147n,253
236
238
102
145
269n
167
280
338
269n
154,209, 238n, 289n
254n
200
328
98n
207
419n
419n
419n
148
252
129n
222n
311
271n
300
273
148,328
315n
315n
315n
274
187
233
278
205, 311n
2730
331n,345
267

33:3
35:2
35:16
35:17
35:18
35:20
35:25
35:33

165n
296
189
189,274
274
189
311n
274

Deuteronomy
1:8
1:11
1:12
1:13
1:18
1:22
1:25
1:28
1:31
1:32
1:38
1:42
1:44
1:45
2:4
2:12
2:16
2:18
2:20
2:22
2:24
2:30
3:20
3:25
3:26
4:1
4:10
4:11
4:12
4:14
4:16
4:20
4:21-22
4:33

333
316n, 334, 339
274
145
282
148
167
279n
277
396n
315n
69n
277
168n
241,297,309
311, 315n
63n,287
129n
242
286
99n
142, 315n
225
51n
144n
113n
428n
145
127,130
127n,245,2490,396
358n
300
358n
236
191n

Index of Biblical References

466
4:41
4:42
5:5
5:22
5:23
5:24(21)
5:25
5:27
5:31(28)

109,110
282
52n,127n,247n
173
127n
302
59,251
308
145,406n

12:15
12:20
12:30
12:31
13:1
13:3(2)
13:4(3)
13:7
13:9

273
273, 323n
146,278
277
lIn, 157n
325
59,252,253
144n,325n
11n

467

Index of Biblical References

20:6
20:7
20:8
20:19
20:20
21:7
21:18
21:21
22:2
22:7

150,318,337
150,337
337
191n
292
292
600
309,311
238n
273

30:13
30:19
31:3
31:9
31:12
31:14
31:16
31:18
31:22
31:23

149
297
235n
172
311, 428n
145
295
352n
173
167

Index of Biblical References

466
4:41
4:42
5:5
5:22
5:23
5:24(21)
5:25
5:27
5:31(28)
5:33
6:11
6:18
7:16
7:19
7:20
7:25
8:1
8:5
8:10
8:12
8:18
8:19
9:4
9:5
9:7
9:14
9:15
9:16
9:22
9.:24
9:26

109, 110
282
52n,127n,247n
173
127n
302
59,251
308
145,406n
428n
205
428n
11n
93, 248n
358n
2910
290-291
60, 243n, 277
205
300
205
203
241n,358n
241n
259
142, 145
127n
104, 368n
258
258
343

12:15
12:20
12:30
12:31
13:1
13:3(2)
13:4(3)
13:7
13:9
13:12
13:14
13:15
14:2
14:6
14:9
14:11
14:20
15:1
15:3
15:6
15:8
15:9
15:10
15:12
15:14
15:17
15:20
15:22
16:16
16:19
16:20

273
273, 323n
146,278
277
lIn, 157n
325
59,252,253
144n,325n
11n
309,3110
144n,325n
298,355
358n
273
273
273
273
270
273,334,337
207
270
200,355
157n,270
270,298
270
270
270
270
157n
309, 311, 429n
276
113,309~311

10:12
10:15
10:16
10:19
10:22
11:1
11:4
11:10
11:16
11:26
12:5-7
12:8

358
297
297
97n, 195
297
99n
286,307
301
333n
298
60

17:14
17:17
18:9
18:16
19:3
19:6
19:11
19:13
19:20
19:21
20:3
20:5

59, 323n
157n
59
11n, 14n, 113
266,3190
19n
260
11n
309,311
11n
343n
150,337

467

Index of Biblical References

20:6
20:7
20:8
20':19
20:20
21:7
21:18
21:21
22:2
22:7
22:27
25:3
25:7
25:9
25:12
25:18
26:3
26:5
26:10
26:13
27:14
28:7
28:8
28:9
28:10
28:12
28:15
28:20
28:21
28:22
28:24
28:25
28:27
28:28
28:29
28:30
28:31
28:35
28:36
28:39
28:41
28:49
29:5
30:11
30:12

150,318,337
150,337
337
191n
292
292
600
309,311
238n
273
355
273
355
292
11n
248n
203
182,292
97n,203
49n
292
271n,339
271n,339
339
311
271n,339
345n
271n, 339, 345
271n
339,345
271n,339,345
339,345
339,345
339,345
260
157
233n
339,345
271n,339,345
157n
157n
271n, 339, 345
285
238
149

30:13
30:19
31:3
31:9
31:12
31:14
31:16
31:18
31:22
31:23
31:27
31:28
31:29
32:1
32:3
32:5
32:6
32:7
32:8
32:9
32:10
32:11
32:12
32:13
32:14
32:15
32:16
32:17
32:18
32:19
32:20
32:21
32:22
32:23
32:24
32:25
32:26
32:27
32:30
32:35
32:36
32:37
32:38
32:39
32:40

149
297
235n
172
311, 428n
145
295
352n
173
167
259
145
354
145
418
418
417,418
148,419
74,417
74
74,417,418
74,417,418
418n
417
418n
417,418
417, 418n
417,418
18n,417,418
417
323n
418
418
418
418
418
323n,418
418
418
418
418
418
419
418
418

Index of Biblical References

468

1:6
1:7
1:15
1:17
2:3
2:4
2:5
2:6
2:8
2:11
2:15
2:16
2:24
3:1
3:10
3:13
3:16
3:17
4:1
4:9

23
67n,341n
51n
271, 434n
171,328
171,172
139n
177
140,282
114
127n,247,3960
172,301, 315n
49n
282
328
309,310
218,223
64, 128n
129n
99n

6:13
6:15
6:18
7:3
7:7
7:9
7:10
7:11
7:13
8:14
8:19
8:20
8:30
8:32-33
8:34
9:8
9:11
9:12
9:19
9:25
9:27
10:3
10:4
10:11
10:12
10:13
10:14
10:17
10:25
10:26
10:33
12:1

4:14
4:16
4:24
5:2
5:4
5:6
5:14
5:15
6:3
6:8
6:9

216n
141n, 148
2020, 275n
216n
222
2210
97n
328
297
. 307
130n, 138n

13:3
14:7
14:10
14:14
15:3-11
15:63
16:2-3
16:6-7
16:8
17:7-9
17:10

32:41
32:42
32:43
32:49
32:50
33:2
33:6
33:18
33:24
33:27

418
418
418
94
18,94,330
225
339, 344n
331
339
327

Joshua

130n,138n,2240,307
175n
301, 315n, 328
337,344n
211
309
90
48n,355
296
168n
168n
104n,368n
109n,110
127n
216n
278
296
98,225
96
329
282
43n
145
222
109n
283
246n
355
248n
216
112
177
200
286
182
97n,233n
223,374
307
93n
307
307
286,307
307
286,287

469

Index of Biblical References

17:14
18:4
18:8
18:12-19
18:20
18:21
19:11-14
19:22
19:26-28
19:29
19:34
21:43
22:1
22:4
22:7
22:8
22:18
22:19
22:22
22:28
23:2
23:10
23:16
24:8
24:27
24:29

196
145, 149
172
307
286,287,307
307
307
307
307
307, 309,310, 398n
307
23
109n
97n
331
315n,331
275n
251
60
265n
200
286,287
295
3210
lOOn
44n

Judges
1:1
1:2
1:3
1:4-6
1:7
1:8-9
1:16
1:21
1:30
2:1
2:6
2:17
2:18
2:19
2:22
3:16
3:19

165
352n,359
700,145,296
174
173,174,258
366
177
358n
166
117, 165n,287
173n
223
287,307
307
51n,252
172
132n,328

3:20
3:23
3:24
3:25
3:26
4:1
4:2
4:4
4:5
4:14
4:19
4:21
4:22
5:1
5:6
5:24
5:26
6:3
6:4
6:5
6:8
6:9
6:10
6:11
6:13
6:17
6:18
6:20
6:23
6:27
6:28
6:29
6:30
6:31
6:32
6:33
6:35
6:36
6:37
6:39
6:40
7:2
7:3
7:4
7:10

127n
223,227
139n
396n
132n
165n
127n
247n
174
207n
88,200
248n
244n,2500
165n
216n
336
227
177, 307, 431n
177,287
287,307
117n
14,3210
3210
128n, 165n
97n,99
299
341n
315n
66
1680
368n
359n
148
338
338n
177
218
251n
91, 241n
146, 343n
373n
360n
150
233n
248, 250n, 251

Index of Biblical References

470
7:12
7:13
7:14
7:17
8:2
8:3
8:4
8:5
8:7
8:20
8:23
8:24
8:33
9:1
9:3
9:7
9:8
9:9
9:11
9:13
9:15
9:16
9:19
9:25
9:27
9:29
9:31
9:32
9:33
9:36
9:43
9:45
10:1
10:4
10:12
10:13
11:2
11:4
11:6
11:7
11:8
11:9
11:10

127n
16,75,1880
355
241n
97n
112n
247n, 256, 375n
253
295
366
360
152, 322n
168n
165
222
148
164, 165
209, 289n
209
209
2510
180n,181,182
327
63,174,287
169n
123n, 147
106n,240n
345
108n,242n
240n

11:19
11:23
11:27
11:34
11:35
11:36
11:37
11:38
11:40
12:3
12:5
12:6
13:3
13:8
13:9
13:10
13:12
13:14
13:15
13:19
13:20
13:21
13:24
14:2
14:3
14:4
14:10
14:13
14:15
14:16

324
275
235n
244,368
202
329
145,296
328
287
239, 3210, 396n
178,286,287,307
284,287
291n,292
167
127n
168n
275n
69, 316n, 344n
326
128n,393
24, 128n
112
84n
1220
26,1220,200,315
130n,247n
277,287
145

244n
130n
127n
287, 373n
3210
182
68n,84n
168n
298
182
298
150
260,270

15:2
15:3
15:7
15:11
15:12
15:14
15:18
16:2
16:5
16:10
16:12
16:15
16:18

337
200,253
210
235,253
328
139n
96n
84n,355
94
182
127n,135
55, 196, 274n, 278
227

471

Index of Biblical References

16:20
16:21
16:24
16:25
16:26
16:28
16:31
17:2
17:3
17:6
17:7
17:8
17:9
18:1
18:3
18:4
18:5
18:9
18:15-16
18:17
18:18
18:24
18:27
19:7
19:9
19:11
19:17
19:18
19:20
19:21
19:22
19:24
19:25
19:27
19:30
20:3
20:13
20:28
20:31
20:32
20:33
20:34
20:36-38
20:39

146, 319n, 323n

258
355
148
146
145
132n
49n
. 96n,203
287
127n
280,282
278
130n,138n,247
140,243
44
145
127n, 145
127n
127n,218
243
278
132n
168n
700,296
146, 319n
278
181,182,227
237, 240n
316n
169n
136,328
152
83
244n
307
328
145
113, 129n,328
218,223
248, 324n
91n, 128n
198, 235n, 253
172
172,222,237

20:40
20:41
20:42
20:43
20:44-47
20:48
21:6
21:25

1 Samuel
1:1
1:2
1:3
1:4
1:5
1:6
1:7
1:8
1:9
1:10
1:12
1:13
1:14
1:15
1:17
1:18
1:22
1:23
1:28
2:1
2:6
2:11
2:13
2:14
2:15
2:16
2:19
2:20
2:21
2:22
2:23
2:24
2:25
2:28
2:29

172, 368n
172
128n,172,218
172,218
172
373n
355
287
372
178,372
305,307,372
372
131n,132n,287,372
307,372
178,287,372
278
127n
63n,282
128n,227
244,284
328
181, 182
269n,331
12
222n
271,338
203,2050
200
187
259
307
287,307
178,282,307
96,178,307
287,307
271n,307,339
84n, 175n
283,287,307
2490,278
2490
284
3210
183,190

472
3:1
3:2
3:3
3:7
3:8
3:9
3:10
3:11
3:13
3:19
4:1
4:3
4:7
4:11
4:13
4:17
4:18
4:19
4:20
4:21
4:22
5:1
5:3
5:5
5:7
5:9
5:11
6:2
6:3
6:6
6:7-8
6:13
6:14
6:21; .
7:1
7:3
7:5
7:8
7:10
7:13-14
7:15
7:16
8:3

Index of Biblical References

130n
93n, 130n, 138
130n,282
282
236,253
2490,253
2490,253,329
241n
235n,253
84n
131n, 132n
325n
222,355
218
244n
355
132n
227
43n,216n
355
355
177
244n
277, 373n
88n,200,227
220
148, 156, 223, 355n
1220,329
278,3930
278
296
129
218
355
218
148,2510
146, 319n
149
31, 129n,137
1710
1710, 174 .
307
174

8:8
9:5
9:6
9:7
9:9
9:10
9:11
9:14
9:17
9:20
9:27
10:2
10:5
10:7
10:8
10:9
10:10
10:11
10:12
10:18
10:23
10:24
11:1
11:3
11:5
11:10
11:12
11:14
12:2
12:7
12:9
12:10
12:11
12:17
12:19
12:23
13:4
13:9
13:12
13:14
13:16

51,57,240-241
139n
277
100
287
325n
135-138
91, 244n
139
316n
135n, 142, 145, 148
49n,225,295,355
309,334
345
18n,107,242
2650,3340,335
174,227
174
174, 217n
223, 374n
117n
86
339
145,329
145
62, 244n, 278
299
145
144n,146,319n
26, 49n, 51,98n
106n, 225, 243n
147, 319n
145
175n,320n
175n,329
175n
152
156, 341n
294
49n,355
328
96n
361
53, 132n, 138n

Index of Biblical References

13:17-18
13:19
13:20
13:21
14:8
14:10
14:11
14:12
14:13
14:19
14:20
14:29
14:33
14:36
14:40
14:41
14:42
14:43
14:46
14:47
14:48
14:52
15:1
15:2
15:11
15:12
15:14
15:16
15:17
15:19
15:23
15:24
15:25
15:26
15:28
15:29
15:32
15:34
16:4
16:7
16:11
16:14
16:17
16:23

63n, 133-134, 282

284,307
174,307
305,307
241n
206
106n,233
145
128
2170
104, 368n
88n,199,355
106n, 236n, 240
14n,2650,315n
325,329,3340
315n,329
217
328
100n,265n
131n
132n,287
169n
178,307
328
207
84n
355
2490
142, 145
89, 182
182
184
182
145
182
50,355
154n
328
47n,131n,360n
203
277, 341n
106n,114
305
70
306,307

473
17:2
17:3
17:8
17:10
17:11
17:13
17:15
17:20
17:23
17:24
17:25
17:29
17:32
17:34-35
17:36
17:38
17:43
17:44
17:45
17:46-47
17:48
18:5
18:6
18:7
18:8
18:9
18:10
18:11
18:13
18:15
18:16
18:17
18:21
18:22
18:25
18:29
19:2
19:3
19:4
19:5
19:9
19:10
19:11
19:12

177
138n
148
145,203
169n
218,223
246,3960
227
107, 169n,244n
169n
392
97n
343n
307
294
227
279n
145,384
235
153
168n,227
287
173n
355
169n
258
128n
175n,323n
174
128n
127n,128n,236
243n, 246n, 247
131n,338
149,338
328
131n,221n
258
237n,249
295
343
223n
130n,138n,235n
132n,360n
239
345n

474
19:14
19:15
19:17
19:18
19:20
19:21
19:24
20:1
20:2
20:3
20:4
20:5
20:7
20:13
20:16
20:19
20:21
20:22
20:29
20:30
20:31
20:36
20:39
20:41
20:42
21:3
21:4
21:10
21:12
21:15(14)
22:14
22:15
22:17
22:22
23:1
23:3
23:4
23:7
23:10
23:11
23:13
23:14

Index of Biblical References

55,92,231,249
328
328
132
254
168n
84n,90,373n
393n
100-101
344n
142n, 147
270n,298
345
339
227
3190
lOOn
206
144n
253
328
139n
47n,360n
139n, 169n
331
344n
315n
275
1180,287,355
101, 274n
279-280

25:23
25:24
25:25
25:27
25:28
25:29
25:31
25:35
25:37
25:42

235n
343n
253
283
106n, 127n
235n
236
355
2500,253
265ti
285
84n

26:4
26:5
26:6
26:7
26:8
26:19
26:21
26:23
26:24
26:25
27:1
27:4

23:18
23:26
23:27
24:8
24:9
24:10
24:11 (10)
24:12
24:13
24:15
24:16
24:18
24:20
25:4
25:8
25:10
25:11
25:18
25:19
25:20

47n,360n
129n,1370,138n
123,1370
132n,360n
43n,216n
106n,2500,278
49n,226
329
271n,277
26
148n, 298, 338
235n
271
253
148
88n, 200, 293n
293n,297
168n
235n,328
129n, 131n
173, 227, 244n
168n
152
341n,434
298
284
298
298
331
132n

127n
359n
244n
355
206,337,338
89,200,225
270
200
47n, 94, 360n
96n
113n,284

475

Index of Biblical References

27:5
27:6
27:9
27:10
27:11
27:12
28:3
28:7
28:9
28:11
28:15
28:16
28:19
28:20
28:22
28:24
29:1
29:2
29:4
29:5
29:7
29:8
29:10
29:11
30:1
30:2-3
30:8
30:13
30:15
30:20
30:21
31:4
31:12

146,299
223
178,287,307
178, 340n
287
294
132n, 176n
144n, 145
279
315n
3210
278
309,310
168
41,145,148,152,329
168n
127n
130n, 138n
148, 157
1180,287,355
157
2910
345n
53, 132n
132n, 175
175
266,3200,328
55,200
145
218,223
177
301
84n

2 Samuel
1:3
1:6
1:10
1:22
1:23
2:1
2:5
2:6
2:10
2:19

278
105n, 218n, 368n
14n,1560,283
287
89
328
180n
271n,338
223
254

2:21 ..23
2:23
2:24
2:28
2:32
3:1
3:5
3:6
3:8
3:16
3:17
3:21
3:23
3:29
3:31
3:33
3:39
4:1
4:2
4:3
4:5
4:6
4:7
4:10
5:8
5:17-18
5:19
5:20
5:23
5:24
6:3
6:4-5
6:12
6:14-15
6:16
6:20
6:22
7:1
7:2
7:4
7:5
7:6
7:9
7:11

215..216
177
132n, 139n
63n,114,284
84n
130n, 138n
223
259
99n,1900
83
258
144n, 149
45n,355
344
128n
285
271n
388n
286
99n
127n
131n
127n
184,3210
277, 287, 373n
176
176,328
355
153
108, 111, 153
206,309,334
128n
130n, 138n
355
130n, 138n
129n,139n,227,254n
200
315n,323
132n
126, 235n, 333n
69
69, 296n
258
3210
226

Index of Biblical References

476
7:16
7:19
7:22
7:25-26
7:28
7:29
8:6
8:10
8:15
9:1
9:7
9:13
10:2
10:3
10:5
10:12
11:1
11:2
11:4
11:6
11:11
11:15
11:16
11:18-19
11:20
11:21
11:25
12:1
12:3
12:4
12:7

260
85
88n, 199 .
148
181, 183
211
174
177
257
143,147
320
247
320
251n
328
146, 319n
127n,369
170
127n
122,328
235n
172
219
172
283
182, 359n
343n
128n, 164
84,287
165
182,363

12:10
12:11
12:16
12:18
12:20
12:21-22
12:23
12:26
12:27
12:28
12:31
13:2

182, 352n
241n,295
227,307
355
166
182
235n
47
47,49,50
30(}
307
169n

13:4
13:5
13:6
13:8
13:9
13:10
13:12
13:18
13:19
13:25
13:26
13:30
13:32
13:33
13:36
14:5
14:6
14:7
14:13
14:14
14:15
14:17
14:21
14:26
14:32
15:2
15:5
15:6
15:7
15:10
15:13
15:14
15:18
15:19
15:20
15:23
15:25
15:26
15:30
15:32
15:36

240n
1430, 148n,296
1430, 146, 147
127n
328
145
67n,277,341n
224n,227,287
227
157, 320n, 341
66
140n,355
343n
343n
105n
181, 182
181, 182
105, 145
218n,304,368n
237n
320n
122n,182,323n
271n,316n
335,337,434
103,206
287,307
145,299
1780,287,307
307 '
287

130n, 138n
234,249
127n
130n, 138n
328
335,434
130n,138n,227
129n,139n,287
297

477

Index of Biblical References

15:37
16:1
16:3
16:5
16:8
16:9
16:11
16:13
16:14
16:15
16:16
16:23
17:1
17:2
17:7
17:9
17:10
17:11
17:12
17:17
17:20
17:24
17:29
18:3
18:4 .
18:9
18:14
18:18
18:19
18:20
18:22
18:23
18:24
18:27
19:2 (1)
19:3
19:9 (8)
19:10 (9)
19:11
19:16
19:17
19:18
19:19
19:27
19:28

63n,134,282
132n
106n
227
182,355
144n
142, 148, 240n
128n,169n,227
248n
134
338
221
144n
248n,319n
238n
98,106n,300
92,253
203
205n,3410
93n,282,303
88
139n
248n
68n
3880
127n
315n,323n,342
177,222
315n,323
299
168n,315n,338
3150,338
31, 129n
30,240
l06n,I87,236n,24On
355
58-59, l06n, 132n
97, 195
279n
132n
168n
227
227
146, 319n
182,329

19:30
19:32
19:33
19:36
19:38
19:41
19:42
20:4
20:6
20~8

20:12
20:15
20:16
20:17
20:19
20:21
21:3
21:4
21:17
22:24
22:39
23:10
23:12
23:13
23:20
24:3
24:10
24:12
24:14
24:17
24:21
24:22
24:23
24:24

113n,203
132n
132n
113n
lOOn, 146, 319n, 337
132n
244n
315n
96n, 275n, 300, 329
140n
129n,264n,307
128n
145
237n,249
236, 250n
145
152
142n, 147
112n,157n
3210
266
63n,287
171
127n
227
338
220
145, 204, 240n
342
337
154
203,337
203,271,389
157n

1 Kings
1:1
1:2
1:3
1:5
1:12
1:13
1:14
1:15
1:22

63,284
297
2520
129n
152
115,296
115
128n
115n

478

Index of Biblical References

1:25
1:29
1:31
1:34
1:37
1:39
1:40
1:41
1:42
1:45-46
1:47
1:50
2:5
2:6
2:16
2:17
2:22
2:23
2:24
2:26
2:30
2:31
2:32
2:36
2:37
2:38
2:45
3:3
3:4
3:7
3:9

106n,1880,339
167
338,339,401
.339
339
339
128n
131, 132n
115n,130n
49n
49n,339
221
182
18n, 67n, 2650,334,341
98n
148
279n,328
126
184n
315n
328
296
132n
68n
269
232
260
127n,247
287
93
298

5:4
5:7
5:8
5:11
5:13
5:18
5:19
5:20(6)
5:23(9)
5:24
5:25
5:28
6:7
6:8
6:13
6:27
6:32
6:35
7:7
7:8
7:13
7:14
7:15
7:23
7:26
7:38
7:51
8:1
8:5

3:12
3:13
3:16
3:17
3:18
3:19
3:20
3:21
3:26
3:27
4:7
4:20

379n,390
207
109
181, 182,364-365
181, 364-365
364-365
93, 248n, 364-365, 367
364-365
69n,128n,329
69n.
287,307
393

8:8
8:12
8:14
8:24
8:27
8:28
8:30
8:32
8:34
8:36
8:39
8:41-43

5:1 (4:21)

127n,247,259
392-393, 3960
246n
287,307
287
86
393n.
97n
106n
141,148,328
398
258
287
287
358n
286,287,307n
158
85n, 130n
228n
228n
282
282, 287, 307n
173n
85
286,287,307n
286, 287, 307n
286,287
286,287
218
108, 109n, 110,334
284

127n
181, 182
274
289
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
271

Index of Biblical References

8:47
8:48
8:50
8:57
8:62
8:64
8:65
8:66
9:1
9:7
9:8
9:11
9:15
9:16
9:25
10:1
10:3
10:5
10:7
10:9
10:12
10:16
10:17
10:22
10:23
10:24
10:25
10:28-29
11:7
11:10
11:15-17
11:21
11:22
11:27
11:29
11:31
11:39
12:1
12:4
12:6
12:9
12:10
12:12
12:14
12:26

49n,205,225
205
205
271n,338
128n
216n
2210
216n
129n,219n
398
292
109
222
177
227,307
128n
259
287
184n
182, 271n, 339
223
287
287
287
84n
130n, 138n
127n, 130n, 138n,246n
287
109n,110
227
172
146, 319n
106n,250n,272
218,222
127n
91n,295
309,310
53
315n,329
248n,259
147, 248n, 319n
270, 315n
345
266, 397n
96n

479
12:30
12:32
13:1 (4)
13:3
13:4
13:6
13:7
13:9
13:11
13:12
13:13
13:17
13:18
13:20
13:24
13:28
13:31
13:33
14:1
14:2
14:5
14:7
14:15-16
14:17
14:19
14:24
14:27
14:28
15:19
15:27
16:3
16:9-10
16:15
16:16
16:21
16:34
17:6
17:10
17:12
17:17
17:19
17:21
18:1
18:2

174
227
105n,127n,218n,368n
227
368n
142, 148
145
205
129n
172
328
23,205
148,222-223
129
130n, 138n
127n
315n
155, 168n, 216n, 287
216n
98n,295
92, 126n,249
253,309,334
296n
309
136
222
223
227
287,307
148,197
128n
295
48
127n
48,49,50,355
109n
216n
243n,246n,287
145
106, 294, 295n
44n
245n
337
145
55

480
18:3
18:4
18:5
18:9
18:10
18:11
18:13
18:24
18:27
18:37
18:44
19:4
19:5
19:6
19:7
19:8
19:10
19:11
19:19
20:8
20:11
20:12
20:13
20:16
20:18
20:21
20:25
20:27
20:28
20:31
20:32
20:36
20:39
20:40
20:41
21:2
21:6
21:7
21:9
21:10
21:12
21:13

Index of Biblical References

259
173n, 227, 307,370
147, 157, 324n
279
283,307
98
180n, 182
167
93,148,150,167,248
148
157
1220, 132n,329
91n
168, 169n
168n
169n
185
244n
58, 128n
68n,68
344n
128n
104, 218n, 295, 368n
128n
315n
227
153
225,227
238n
325n
337
295
105n, 129n
136, 218n, 368n
129n
168n
17, 148
63n,251,287
97,148,275
172
148
218,227
355

21:14
21:19
21:21
21:22
22:1
22:3
22:6
22:7
22:8
22:10
22:13
22:15
22:17
22:20
22:21
22:22
22:23
22:25
22:34
22:44(43)
22:50

45n,355
49n,209
295
184n
372
127n
328
147
382,394
130n, 138n
337
328
45n
128n,149,359n
359n
94,265,3190
97n
1070
380n
115, 130n, 243n
112n

2 Kings
1:6
1:9
1:10
1:11
1:12
1:13
2:3
2:5
2:9
2:10
2:11
2:12
2:15
2:16
2:17
2:18
2:19
2:20
2:21
2:22

51n
123n,204,244n
148n
123n, 168n
148n,336
168n
91n
91n
1
337
338, 345n
128n,129,244
128n,244
355
275n
328
127n
127n,371n
371n
203, 371n
371n

481

Index of Biblical References

2:23
3:4
3:7
3:11
3:15
3:22
3:25
3:27
4:5
4:8
4:10
4:12
4:13
4:16
4:18
4:22
4:23
4:24
4:28
4:31
4:38
4:40
4:41-43
5:2
5:6
5:7
5:8
5:10
5:13
5:18
5:19
5:20
5:22
5:25
6:1-3
6:4
6:5
6:6
6:10
6:12
6:13
6:17
6:19
6:20
6:22

53, 129n, 135n

307
265n
147
227
132n
178,287,307
281
130n,138
287
146, 319n
328
240n
242
84n
145
279n
210
68n,2700
177
129n
140n
148
177
197
253
148n,337
18, 152, 153, 330n
151, 330n, 358n
126n,248n
331
210s,289n
97n
132n
371n
170, 371n
136n,170,371n
371n
307
276-277
146, 319n
148
145,278,279-280
148
68n,148,243n

6:26
6:28-29
6:30
6:32
6:33
7:3
7:4
7:9
7:12
7:13

7:15
7:17
8:5
8:7
8:8-9
8:10
8:11
8:12
8:13
8:14-15
8:21
8:22
8:28
8:29
9:1-2
9:3
9:5
9:10
9:13
9:14
9:15
9:16
9:17
9:18
9:20
9:26
9:27
10:6
10:13
10:19
10:24
10:32
11:1
11:3
11:12

129n, 136n
145
128n
129n,282
115n, 130n, 244n
205
3200
127n,144n,240n,300
309,311
144n, 146
233n,248n
393n
129n, 131n
92, 127n,355,371n
371n
69, 226, 371n
371n
279n,371n
355, 371n
371n
139n
109
2530,3890
92,249,253,287,3890
296
68n,203,204,296
244n
358n
168n,355
259,260
287
53,246, 389n
129,137, 148, 240n
355
279-280, 287
50
315n
345
180, 182
315n
220
217n
227
128n
339

482
11:14
11:15
12:4
12:8 (7)
12:10
12:12
12:13-14
12:15
12:16-17
12:18
13:11
13:14
13:20
13:21
14:4
14:7
14:9
14:10
14:14
14:25
15:4
15:5
15:16
15:19
15:29
15:35
15:37
16:4
16:5
16:6
16:15
17:21
17:25
17:26
17:27
17:28
17:29
17:31
17:32
17:33
17:34
17:35
17:37

Index of Biblical References

243
222, 315n, 401
130n
238
307
178,307
287
287,307
287
109n,110
14n
63,281,372
287
129n,137n
130n
227
164n
49n,226,300,384n
227
164n
130n
128n,235n
109n,110
218, 355n
217n
130n
217n
174
109n,110
99, 217n
315n
227
258
54, 106n
148
258,283
245n,258
128n
258
259
243n .
67
157n

17:41
18:1
18:4
18:7
18:16
18:21
18:24
18:25
18:26
18:32
18:36
19:6
19:7
19:18
19:19
19:25
19:26
19:29
19:31
19:35
19:37
20:1
20:4
20:5
20:7
20:8
20:9
20:10
20:12
20:14
20:18

51n,258
173n
227, 259, 378n, 387
287,307
217n
54n, 103, 186n
186,188
352n
249,253
153, 157
16, 224n, 227
67
241n,295
224n,227
148
97n, 155
226
330, 345n
267
233n
129n, 136n
217n,253
139n
241
328
172
209

1
21:4
21:6
21:12
21:13
21:15
21:16
22:4-5
22:9
22:14
22:17
22:20
23:4-8

223,227, 378n, 387

241n
226
258
358n
148
45n,355
127n
227
295
227, 378n, 387

Index of Biblical References

23:9
23:10-14
23:15
23:17
23:18
23:25
23:29
24:1
24:10
24:11
24:14
25:3
25:4
25:5
25:14
25:24
25:29

64,227, 284, 378n, 387

227, 378n, 387
227
240n
316n
222
217n
217n
217n
128n
227
43n,216n
284n
388n
287
148
227, 378n, 387

Isaiah
1:2
1:3
1:19-20
1:21
1:25
1:29
2:2
2:3
2:22
3:15
4:1
5:1
5:14
5:15
5:16
5:19
5:25
5:29-30
6:1
6:2
6:3
6:4
6:5
6:7
6:11
7:9

225
205
292
287
146
427
260, 294n
146, 149
248
278
152
164n
225
189n
189n,423
18n,143,146
189n
428
43n, 93, 216n
287,307
307
134,282
206
226
205
45n

483
7:23
8:8
8:9
8:10
9:5
9:7
9:10-11
9:19
10:7
10:19
11:1
11:8
11:9
11:10
12:1
13:2
13:10
14:8
14:10
18:4
19:5
19:6
19:7
19:8
19:12
19:14
19:16
20:1
20:2
22:4
22:5-8
22:17
23:4
23:7
24:6
24:14
25:8
25:9
26:2
26:17
26:21
27:4
28:24
28:25
29:1

286,287
208
331n
148
189n
226,294
189n
227
358n
274
294
208
206
393n
150n,434
148
208
286,287
428n
204
292
208
208
208
149
226
295
43n
217n
146
189n
237n
331n
287
227
208
208
143, 155, 189n
148
272n
253n
147
427
302
13

Index of Biblical References

484
29:20
30:8
30:12
30:17
30:19
30:20
30:32
31:1
31:2
31:3
31:4
32:10
33:5
33:9
33:14
34:14
35:2
35:6
36:8
36:9
36:11
36:21
37:4
37:19
37:23
37:25
37:26
37:27
37:30
37:38
38:10

226
148
1860
205
208
260
208
202
294
16
204
208
393n
255
200
208
208
206,427
145
1860
253
224n
226
224n
225
225
155n,225
226
330, 345n
129n
321, 433n

42:6
42:16
43:9
43:12
43:14
43:17
43:21
43:26
44:8
44:20
44:27
45:19
45:22
46:1
46:5
47:3
48:4
48:5
48:6
49:7
49:9
49:20
50:7
50:8
51:11
51:12
51:13
51:23
52:7
53:2
54:14

38:21
39:1
40:14
40:22
40:25
40:27
41:22
41:23
41:26
41:28
41:43

428,434
149
172
1900
187
147
427
143, 145
145
147
14n,154
14n

55:3
55:9
55:10
56:12
57:3
57:11
59:2
60:1
60:2
63:10
63:19
65:17

14n
207
212
225
226
208
4150
145
225
158
95,330
51n
151n,330n,333
255
147, 150n
336n
183n
183n,282
203
393n
330
145
186
147,150
208
186,189
84n
145
201
154

314n
187
1900
259
330
1020
225
211
253n

485

Index of Biblical References

65:18
65:24
66:6
66:7
66:9

253n
115n
240n
226,282
293n

Jeremiah
1:5
1:9-10
1:11
1:12
1:13
1:15
2:19
2:22
2:25
3:6
3:9
3:16
3:18
3:19
3:22
3:25
4:5
4:13
4:16
4:19
4:21
4:22
4:29
4:31
5:1
5:22
5:28
6:4
6:10
6:13-14
6:16
6:17
6:20
6:27
7:3
7:8
7:17
7:19

282
333n
240n
253
240n
253n
152
427
422
417n
227
292
427
427
145
149
145
1020,202,206
lOOn, 183n,1880,423
235n,257
433n
238
58
200
147
284
154
280
149, 433n
183n,1880
152
155,307
200
156
145
54n
238
2520

7:24
7:25
7:28
7:31
8:3
8:7
8:14
8:17
8:23
9:1
9:3
9:11
9:16
10:4
11:21
12:1
12:3
13:7
13:10
13:17
13:26
14:10
14:22
15:17
16:16
17:14
17:17
17:18
17:19
18:3
18:4
18:18
. 18:23
19:4
19:5
20:4
20:8.;9
20:10
20:17
22:5
22:15
22:22
22:23
22:28
23:11

43n
43n,216n
225
226
205
205
145
253n
147
147
406n
149
148
157
157n
202
302
284, 368n
185, 187
428
208
427
147
191n
60
145
341n
342
204
244n
178,307
342
149,406n, 417n, 433
226
226
24
307
145, 147
' 190
203
225, 279n
292
201
225
200

Index of Biblical References

486
23:14
23:16
23:17
23:18
23:31
23:32
24:1
24:2
24:3
25:4
25:6
25:7
25:27
25:31
26:3
26:13
26:14
26:15
26:18
26:20
28:2
28:6
28:11
29:6
30:10
30:21
31:18
31:33
32:2
32:29
32:30
32:33
33:3
,33:10
33:24
34:11
34:15
34:16
35:15
36:7
36:18
36:23
37:11

226
237
237n,394
149
185,187
185
355
284
240n
307
157
275n
95n
248
150
148
329
251
258
259
207
338
207
148,152,331,343
253n
209
145
207
U2
226
259
396n
145
93,248
184
43n,216
99n
168n
151n
150
118,281,287
285,287"
227

37:15
37:20
38:9
38:14
38:16
38:20
38:21
38:22
38:24
38:25
38:26
38:28
39:4
40:3
40:4
40:9
40:10
42:2-3
42:5
42:11
42:12
42:13
42:17
42:19
43:1
44:7
44:11
44:15
44:18
44:22
44:25
44:29
45:5
46:27
47:1
48:6
48:8
48:11
49:35
50:9
50:18
51:6
51:9

227
157
188,423
255
393n
148
251
226
157
157
255
227
284n
227
146
148
203
149
338
93
428
251
428
355
129n
279n
91n
253
200
93n
184, 217n
52n
253n
253n
282
148
428
249
91n
253n
52
343
146

487

Index of Biblical References

51:14
51:28-30
51:60
52:6
52:7

210
423
282
43n,216n
282,284

Ezekiel
1:7
1:9
1:13
1:24
2:1
2:3
3:16
3:25
4:8
5:U
5:14
6:6
7:4
7:9
8:6
8:12
8:18
9:2
9:7
9:8
9:9
9:10
U:17
12:3
12:12
12:25
12:28
13:3
13:5
13:6
13:7
13:13
13:15
14:7
15:5
16:6
16:10
16:16

394
231n
394
287
146
255
129n
208
158
Un
428n
428n
Un
Un
60n,238,251n
238n,394
Un
393n
227
251n
238n
11n
290
296
428n
428n
428n
393n
191n
226
394
290
428n
428n
285
94,330
14n
394

16:19
16:22
16:57
17:18
18:30
19:12
20:6
20:7
20:16
20:22
20:26
20:39
21:12
21:15
21:18
21:19
22:24
24:14
26:2
26:11
27:30
28:16
28:17
30:6
31:10
32:19
32:30
33:4
33:6
33:31
33:32
34:2
34:21
35:12
36:13
36:32
37:1
37:2
37:3-6
37:7
37:8
37:9
37:10
37:11
37:12

226
260
282
226
157
227
217n
406n
247
227
285
239,406n
393n
394
394
148
238
394
156, 314n
428n
428n
423
198
265n
226
330n
394
189
189
60n
238n
259
205
200
394
152
387n
227, 387n
387n
227, 387n
227, 387n
148, 387n
227, 387n
206,226
91n

488
40:24
40:35
40:42
41:3
41:6
~43:1

43:6
43:10
43:11
43:27
47:5
47:9
48:14

Index of Biblical References

227
227
428n
227
394
393n
259
148
148
428n
93n
428n
265n,334,341n

Hosea
1:2
2:4
4:15
5:5
6:1
6:2
7:6
9:15
9:17
10:8
10:15
11:4
12:9
13:10
14:3
14:10

277
148
250
208
145
146
248
lln,14n
149,260
95n
208
14n
200
149
145
149

Joel
1:7
2:2
2:10
2:23
4:4

226
11n
200
189n
251

4:12
5:2
5:4
5:6
5:8
5:14
5:23-24
6:2-4
6:8
6:11
6:14
7:2
7:3
7:4
7:6
7:10
7:12
8:3
8:5
9:1
9:5
9:9
9:10

260
255
151n
151
187, 205, 421n
148
148
187, 421n
249
253n
253n
227
355
106n,303
355
371
70n,269n
208
147
148
187, 227, 421n
253n
428n
346
346
346n

Jonah
1:1
1:5
1:6
1:11
1:12
1:13
3:9
4:5

157
149, 246n
148,253
246n
158
172,283

Amos
4:1
4:2
4:4
4:7

145
355
328n,416
306

275n

2:14

2:11
2:13
3:3
4:2
4:6
4:8
4:11
4:13
5:2
5:8
6:1
6:6
6:14
6:16
7:6
7:19

260
189n
226
146
321n
292
338
211
205
337
141n
427
428n
428
90
428

Zechariah

148
253n
211

93
146
217n
253n
253
253n
209
168n
168n
202
102n
208
148
253n
148

1:3
1:7
2:13
2:14
3:8
4:10
~~5:1

6:1
9:2
9:9
9:15
11:1
11:16
13:7

Malachi
Nahum
1:2
1:4
3:17

256
187
226

1:2
1:6
1:11
1:13
1:15
1:16
2:7
2:13
2:18
3:5

209,427
253n
226,227
427
428
427
427
428
209
428

Zephaniah
1:2
3:5

265n
238

Haggai

Micah
1:2
1:3
1:10

2:1"0

Habakkuk

Obadiah
11
12
13-14

489

Index of Biblical References

1:8
2:3
2:6
2:13

145, 380n
51,98
242n
265n

149
226
339
145
148
200

1:10
2:11
2:12
3:7
3:10
3:13

Psalms
1:3
1:6
2:1-2
2:8
2:10
3:2
3:5
4:2
4:3
5:12
6:9
7:6
7:8
7:10
7:12
7:13
7:15
7:17

432n
253,424
427
145
433n
90,

198~201

422n
212
427
150n
207
433
406n,433
434
422, 424n
422
432n
434

Index of Biblical References

490
9:15
10:1
10:10
10:14
11:2
11:3
11:6
12:4
13:2
14:7
16:5
16:9
16:19
17:14
18:8
18:12
18:19
18:33
18:37
18:41 (40)
18:47
18:48
19:2
19:10
19:12
19:14
20:4
20:7
20:9
21:14
21:28

275n
427
432n
259
1020
209
433n
339
426
150
424n
186
85n
432n
422n
432n
422n
187
432n
155
434
185
256,424
202
424n
432n
18n, 143n
207
225
145,325
424n

27:4
27:14
28:1
28:7
29:5
29:8
29:9
31:2
31:4
31:6
31:18
31:23
31:24
31:25
33:16
33:22
34:4
34:5
34:6
34:8
34:11
34:23
35:6
35:11
35:15
36:13
37:4
37:6
37:10
37:11
37:14

22:15
22:22
22:27
23:6
24:7
24:9
25:2
25:11
25:20
26:3
27:2
27:3

225
212
337
432n
148
148
342
298, 432n
156, 320n
226"
225
424n

37:28
37:29
37:34
37:38
38:7
38:9
38:20
39:5
39:14
40:6
41:6
41:10

203
148
423n
225
91, 183n, 187
280
280, 424n
342
428
212
342
206
256, 424n
148
424n
337
141n
225
225
187,249,424
200,225
256, 424n
339,424
431n
225
207
148
432
432
432
225,432
424n
424
427
148
207
200
225
225
145,248
145
154
432n
432n

491

Index of Biblical References

41:11
41:14
42:5
42:6
42:12 (43:5)
44:2
44:3
44:10-15
44:19
44:21
44:22
44:25
45:2
45:8
47:5
48:8
48:11
49:8
49:9
49:10
49:11
49:15
49:19
50:5-6
50:7
50:15
50:21
50:23
51:4
51:9
51:10
51:17
51:18
52:7
52:9 (7)
53:2
53:7
54:6
54:7
55:6
55:7
55:13
55:15
55:18
57:5

145
420n
287
183, 190o, 422n, 425
425
431n
422n
431n
191n
189
424n
427
255, 424n
85n, 186
431
431n
202
154
154, 432n
154
432n
422n
428
422
145
150n
225, 293n
432n
142
434
434
272n
154
427, 432n
1860,421
225
150
424
434
422n
147
154
287
422
321n,433n

57:6
59:5
59:8
59:14
59:16
59:17
60:11
64:11
65:5
~66:4

66:6
66:14
66:17
68:2
68:36
69:15 (14)
69:23
69:24
69:26
69:36
71:1
71:14
72:1
72:14
72:18-20
73:6
73:11
73:14
74:1
74:10
74:23
75:2
76:9
77:4
77:7
77:13
78:5
78:6
78:13
78:15
78:21
78:25
78:26
78:29
78:31

332, 433n
428n
1020,424
148
422n
427
209
432n
428n
427
433n
225
225
434
424n
156,322,344
339
406n,433
339
427, 432n
342
432n
406n,433
428
420n
427
209
84n
427
427
424n
203,254,390
225
149
422
432n
285
282,285
431
422n,431
431
431
422n,431
431
431

I
i

492

78:34
78:36
78:38
78:40
18:45
78:47
78:49
78:50
78:58
78:72
79:5
80:4
80:5
80:8
80:9
80:13-14
80:18
80:20
81:9
81:11
81:14
82:1
83:3
83:4
83:5
83:17
85:14
86:10
86:11
86:13
86:17
88:15
89:5
89:7
89:10
89:24
89:26
89:29
89:30
89:33
89:47
89:49
90:3

Index of Biblical References

431n,432n
431
307, 432n
287
422n,430
431
431
431
431
431
426
145
209
145
422n,431
427
337
145
145
145
424n
353
102
428
157
148
427,428
199
146
226
148,225
427
432n
427
424n
432n
432n
424n
432n
432n
427"
427
422n

90:6
90:11
90:12
90:14
91:16
92:6 (5)
94:11
94:16
95:10
97:3
97:6
99:6-7
102:27
103:7
103:14
104:7
104:32
105:40
106:2
106:17
106:19
106:43
106:47
106:48
107:43
108:11
109:10
109:28
110:2
110:6
111:3
112:10
113:2
116:16
118:14
118:19
118:26
118:27
119:17
119:18
119:27
119:33
119:34

432n
424n
145, 406n, 433
145
428,434
200
424n
426n
287, 422n
427
225
287
428n
287,432
420
431
187
431
426n,427
422n,431
422n,431
287
420n
420n,432n
149
209
432n
422n
331, 433n
434
424n
424n
432n
339
212
421
145
203
421
145
145
145
145
145

493

Index of Biblical References

119:67
119:73
119:74
119:77
119:88
119:106
119:115
119:116
119:117
119:125
119:134
119:144
119:146
119:162
119:163
119:173
122:2
126:2
128:5
128:6
129:8
131:2
134:1
135:10
135:11
135:12
136:14
136:15
136:17-18
136:21
137:9
138:3
139:10
139:14
139:17
141:6
143:6
143:7
143:12
144:3
144:5
144:6
145:14
145:15
145:20

424n
145
428n
146
145
187, 225n
145
145
145
145
145
145,406n
145
249,424
14n
337
259
109n
152,327
327, 331, 433n
203n
225
lOOn
227, 386n
386n
227, 386n
227
227
185
227
432n
43n,216n
427
198, 202, 424n
201
202
203
432n
432n
189
148, 150n,402n,420
150n,402n
424n
424n
256, 424n

146:8
146:9
147:11
148:5
149:4

424n
424n
249
225
253,424

Proverbs
1:11
1:16
1:23
3:3-4
3:9-10
3:21-22
4:6
4:10
4:18
5:18
5:20
5:21
6:6
6:12-14
6:33
7:7
7:8
7:13
7:22
9:4
9:8
9:9
9:16
10:1-8
11:2
11:8
12:13
13:5
13:20
14:6
14:18
16:3
16:29
18:10
18:17
19:7
19:11
20:22

145
427
lOOn
151n
148
148
149
148
392n
331,339
427
392n
151n
392n
12
321n,433n
287, 392n
387
392n
335
143n,148
148
335
277
186n
186n
186
428n
153
204
204
148
32,302
302
302
205
204
148

Index of Biblical References

494
20:26
20:28
22:3
22:10
22:12
23:7
23:22
23:35
24:16
24:28
25:4
25:5
26:2
26:19
27:11
27:25
29:6
29:9
29:17
30:3
30:20
30:25
31:5
31:27
31:31

186n, 187
302
302
148
186n
141
67n,341n
147
302
209
186n
153
337
237,302
95, 145
302
302
302
148
201
302
186n
428n
392n
148

Job
1:1
1:2-3
1:4
1:5
~~14~~

1:16
1:17
1:18
1:21
2:3
2:9
2:10
3:1
3:4
3:6
3:7
3:9

164n,372
372
307,372
178,225,287,307,372
~ ~ O"""~"~~"~"""_ _"~"~""~~~"~"'""~~"" _ _ ,_

_
""

3:10
3:20-21
4:3
4:5
4:12
4:15
4:16
6:4
6:10
6:21
6:25
7:14
9:32
9:33
9:34
10:16
10:17
10:20
11:3
11:5
11:6
11:17
12:3
12:7
12:8
12:22-24
13:2
13:5
13:27
14:5
14:6

191
187
287
186
431n
431n
431n
58n,245n,255
335
183,1860
201
307
154
154,335
335
335
335
145,146
183
152
152,335
18n, 143n
238
148,335
148
187
238
150,335
335
158
148

~~"~"-"-"--"'2f.:1U~-"~""~""~~F~"

115n,135n
115n, 135n
135n
339
114n
114n
279-280
216n
316n, 334, 335
335316n,335
335, 341n

14:17
14:20
15:8
15:15
15:33
16:20-21
17:2
18:9
18:12
18:17
19:8
20:17

182
187
149, 150n
202
335
156
335
335
335
212
158
341n

495

Index of Biblical References

20:19
20:23
20:28
21:2
21:3
22:6
22:13
22:28
23:3
23:5
23:9
23:11
24:14
27:7
27:8
27:22
29:2
29:6
29:7
29:9
29:12-13
29:16-17
30:26
31:29
32:4
32:15-16
32:20
33:11
33:21
33:27
34:29
34:37
35:5
36:1
36:2
36:4
36:14
36:15
37:4
37:5
37:15
38:3
38:21
39:26
40:7

12n
335
335
335
2730
287
209
335
211
146
14n,335
14n,335
335
335
3340,335
335
287
287
287
287
287
287
14n
307
253
293n
149
335
335
335
335
335
202
168n
145
238n
335
335
335
335
93n
144,145,152
109n
335
144, 145, 152

40:9
40:19
41:3

335
335
147

Song of Songs
1:4
2:7
2:9
4:10
5:2
6:1
7:1
7:2
7:7
7:8(7)
8:1

145,212
203
56,249
201
240n
147
145
201
201
56, 75
147

Ruth
1:1
1:8
1:9
1:18
2:3
2:4
2:7
2:8
2:9
2:19
2:21
3:3
3:7
3:9
3:11
3:14
4:3
4:4
4:11

40, 164n, 165n

335, 434n
151
253
368n
105n, 218n, 368n
99n
266
300
339
205
297
169n
298
253
282
204
145,275
152

Lamentations
1:19
1:21
2:13
3:7
3:50
3:54

155
212,248
147
158
153
206

Index of Biblical References

496

9:27
3:55-59
4:1
4:7
4:8
5:2

212
427
89n
200
145

Ecclesiastes
1:4
1:5
1:6
1:7
1:13
1:16
1:17
2:1
2:3
3:13
3:14
3:21
4:1
4:7
4:15
5:5(6)
5:14
5:16
7:7
7:16
7:23
8:10
8:12
9:8
9:14
9:15
10:4
10:19
10:20
11:6
12:1-3
12:4
12:5
12:6
12:7

235n
256,392
392
392n
226
226
385
152, 384n
283
397
285
2520, 392n
385
385
282
397
405n
397
309n
404n
323n
309n,399
253
407
227,385
227,304,385
404n
392
406-407
404n
397
309n,399,406n
253,309n,399
309n,399.
309n,399,405

158, 224n, 228, 284

Esther
1:1
1:12
2:1
2:3
2:7
2:11
2:12
2:13
2:14
2:15
2:19
2:20
2:21
3:1
3:2
3:4
3:5
3:15
4:3
4:16
5:1
5:3
5:6
5:14
6:1
6:10
7:2
7:4
7:6-7
7:8
8:1
8:3
8:14
8:15
8:17
9:1
9:3-4
9:11
9:12
9:19
9:23-24
9:25

164n
389
217n
404n
258
283,395
287
287
287, 303, 392n, 395
258,287
395
238n,396
395
217n
287,395
283
238n,254n
389
287, 395n, 395
205n
395
149
149,404
142n, 148
258
404n
149,404
238n
387,389
387,389,395
388
389
168n
389
224n,227,389
395
282
395
217n
404
395
224n,227
224n,227,401,4080

497

Index of Biblical References

Daniel
1:5
1:8
1:10
1:12
1:18
2:4
2:26
3:9
3:15
5:10
6:7
6:22
8:3
8:4
8:5
8:7
8:11
8:12
8:22
8:24
8:27
9:5
9:16
9:21
9:25
9:27
10:2
10:4-5
10:7
10:9
10:13
10:14
10:15
10:18
11:4
11:5-6
11:7
11:10
11:11
11:12
11:15

282
283
248
148
43n,216n
401
252n
401n
251n
401n
401n
401n
395
224n, 228, 284,387,403
259
224n,228
224n, 228, 387,403
224n, 228, 282
309n,399,405
185
397
224n,225
224n,225
404n
395
309n,399,405
397
259
216n
224n,228
259
395
224n,228
224n,225
168n
309n,399,405
309n,399
309n,399
309n,399,405
309n,399
397
309n,399

11:16-19
11:22
11:25
11:28
11:30
11:33
11:36
11:40
11:42
11:45
12:1
12:4
12:5
12:8
12:10
12:12
12:13

309n,399,405
309n, 398, 399
309n,399,405
309n,399,405
309n,399,405
397
309n,399
309n,399
309n,399
309n,399
397
309n, 397n, 399,406n
224n,228
284
309n,397n,399
309n,399,406n
309n,399,402,406n

Ezra
1:3
1:4
1:6
3:10
3:12
3:13
6:22
7:1
8:30
8:36
9:2
9:4
9:6
9:12
9:13
10:3
10:6
10:8

150,404n
392n
389
224n,228,387
395
246n,389,395
224n,228
217n
224n,228
224n,228,387,403
224n,225
287,395
224n,225
397
224n,226
401
392
282

Nehemiah
1:4
1:6
1:11
2:3
2:5
2:6

258
404n
404n
401
153
395

498
2:13
2:15
2:17
2:18
2:20
3:14
3:15
3:26
3:33
3:35
3:37 (4:5)
4:10
4:11
4:12
4:14
4:15
4:17 (31)
5:2
5:3
5:4
5:8
5:12
5:13
5:18
6:2
-6:3
6:7
6:9
6:10
6:12
6:13

Index of Biblical References

258
258
157
266, 397n
397n
282, 309n, 399,406n
282,309n,399
259
254n
392n
341n,404n,406n
395
395
392,395
401
395
238n, 381, 396
395
154,395
395
397
266
401
259
384n,392n,395
397
384n
157, 246n, 395
392,401
304
304, 309n, 399

9:27
9:28
9:37
10:33
10:39
12:39
12:47
13:1
13:12
13:14
13:15
13:16
13:19
13:22
13:24
13:29
13:30

287,309n, 398, 399

287, 309n, 399
392
224n,226
304,397
224n,228
395
217n, 224n, 228, 387
389
404n
217n
392
158,283
260,283
396
3840
224n,228

1 Chronicles
4:10
4:43
5:8
6:17
8:7
9:24
9:26
9:27
9:28
11:8
11:22
12:18 (17)

397
99n
392n
258
224n,228
287
224n,228,403
287,403
287
287
224n,228
404
~-~*J89

6:17
6:19
7:3
7:65
8:7
8:9
8:11
8:14
8:15
9:3
9:7
9:8

257n,395
259
392n
283
395
231n,253,257n
395
283
309n,399
392,395.
224n,226
224n,226

12:23
12:40-41
14:13
14:14
14:15
15:12
15:22
15:24
16:5
16:31
17:1
17:4

287
395
168n
380n
206
380n
287
395
395
404n
333n
380n

499

Index of Biblical References

17:10
17:11
17:23-24
17:27
18:14
19:3
20:3
21:2
21:3
21:8
21:10
21:13
21:16
21:17
21:18
21:22
21:23
22:5
22:16
22:18
23:1
23:5
23:14
23:32
29:3
29:13
29:17
29:22
32:24

187, 224n, 226

205
148
211
258
251n
287
145
404n
217n
145, 380n
320n,342
254n
404n
283
145, 148, 384n
379n,389
323n
148
224n
224n,228
395
287
403
379n,389
254,390
278
169n
217n

2 Chronicles
1:10
1:12
1:16-17
2:2
2:7
2:9
2:11
2:12
2:15
3:7
3:11-12
4:2
4:3
5:2

145, 314n
379n,390
287
182
254n
379n,389
282
197
309n,398,399
224n
395
287
395
108, 109n, 110,334

5:8
5:9
6:19
6:21
6:23
6:25
6:27
6:30
6:33
__ .. _(j;3~__

6:39
6:42
7:14
7:20
9:4
9:7
9:8
9:14
9:15
9:16
9:21
9:24
9:26
9:28
10:4
10:6
10:9
10:14
12:5
12:7
12:8
12:10
12:11
13:1
13:8
13:9
13:11
14:6
15:56
16:3
17:11
17:12
18:5
18:6
18:7

258
99n,284
298
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
272n,298
298
298
3840,404n
309n,399
309n, 398, 399
287
392
339
395
287
287
287
395
258
392,395
145
260
147
266, 397n
207
397
309n,399
224n,228
403
43n,216n
98n
403
253,392
397n
403
148n
395
258
148
147
382,394

Index of Biblical References

500
18:12
18:14
18:19
18:21
18:33
18:34
19:3
19:11
20:6
20:9
20:11
20:13
20:15
20:16
20:20
20:31
20:35
20:37
21:9
21:10
22:3
22:5
22:6

404n
148
149
265n
380n
259
224n,226
148
235n
309n,399
240n,392n
395
204
108n,242
150n,402
231n
216n
119
139n
109n
259
253n
249, 253n, 253
257n,389~392n

23:11
23:14
23:19
24:5
24:11
24:12

339
400
158
401
287, 309n, 399,403
258

25:12
25:13
25:14
25:18
25:19
25:27
26:21
28:13
28:16
28:22
28:23
29:6
29:10

388
217n
287
384n
224n,226,384n
43n,216n
235n
400n
217n
43n,216n
153, 235n
224n,225
154

19:34

30:6
30:8
30:10
30:15
30:16
30:21
31:18
32:1
32:4
32:9
32:15
32:20
32:23
33:4
33:6
33:14
33:17
33:19
34:4
34:25
35:11
35:21
36:16
36:23

283
148
148
258
389
395
392,395
287
217n
397
217n
341n
217n
395
224n,228
224n,228,403
216n,224n,228
395
224n,228
224n,228
309n,399
395
156
258
150

8en Sira
36:3(33:4)

407n

Tobit
~:5

407n

Deta_led Table of Contents

PART ONE FORMS AND FUNCTIONS
CHAPTER I PRELIMINARIES
Methodological questions
Corpus
Linguistic approach
Verbal forms in biblical Hebrew: an inventory
YIQTOL and the jussive
YIQTOL and WAYYIQTOL
WEQATAL and QATAL
WEQATAL and copulative QATAL
The volitive paradigm: cohortativeimperative-jussive
YIQTOL and WEQATAL
The predicative participle
Marginal items
Summary
Verbal functions expressed in biblical Hebrew

Excursus: *yaqattai in the pre Masoratic Hebrew

The biblical Hebrew verb and tense

The biblical Hebrew verb and time reference
The biblical Hebrew verb and aspect
The biblical Hebrew verb and mood
Text-linguistic functions
Other functions
Voice
Aktionsart
Sequentiality
Conclusion
39
CHAPTER II THE VERBAL PARADIGM
The system in outline
Contrastive studies
WAYYIQTOL and QATAL
Functional similarity between QATAL and WAYVIQTOL

In narrative

503
Detailed Table of content

502

Detailed Table ofcontent

Syntagmatic determination: Temporal adverbs

nn17 "now"

a) QATAL after the negation

b) QATAL after an adverbial phrase of time
c) Object/Adverbial fronting
d) Fronting of a focussed or topicalized subject
In direct discourse
e) Continuative WAYVIQTOL

YIQTOL
QATAL

Participle
WAVYIQTOL

Functional differences between QATAL and WAVYlQTOL

Anterior QATAL versus. main-line WAYVIQTOL
Retrospective QATAL versus. narrative WAYVIQTOL

i1~i1

YIQTOL
QATAL

Reference time identical with speech time

Reference time prior to speech time
Reference time posterior to speech time

Semantic distinctiveness versus syntactic constraints

QAT AL and the predicative participle
The basic opposition
QATAL and participle in subordinate dauses in narrative
Relative clauses
Causal clauses
Circumstantial clauses
QATAL referring to contemporaneous situations

The sequences subject-participle and

participle-subject
The predicative participle and VIQTOL
The expression of the real present
The expression of attending circumstance
Modal functions not expressed by the participle
Volitive and non-volitive modality
Prohibitions
Imperative sequences
Conclusions of the contrastive studies
~'~~~~-~~~~~~~~-~-Historicat-perspeetiye9

. = - ..-~.-~..

Trajectories of the perfect

The renewal of the progressive
Conclusion
CHAPTER III VARYING VERBAL MEANINGS
Introduction: The realization process
The interaction of grammar and lexicon
WAVVIQTOL
QATAL

Participle
VIQTOL and WEQATAL
Volitives

79

Participle
Reference time equals speech time
Reference time prior to speech time
Reference time posterior to speech time

TN
YIQTOL

Future reference
Past reference
QATAL

Future reference
Past reference

Participle
"11
YIQTOL
QATAL

Participle
Conclusions
Pragmatic factors
Temporal shifts
Performative QAT AL
Volitives and politeness
Conclusions

CHAPTER IV INTER-CLAUSAL RELATIONS

125
Circumstantial clauses and simultaneous action
The circumstantial clause
Participle
QATAL

504

Detailed Table of content

YIQTOL
Expressions of simultaneity
Subject-participle - Subject-QATAL
Sub~ect-participle - Subject-participle
SubJect-QATAL - Subject-QATAL
Other constructions
Volitive sequences
Cohortative
Cohortative following another volitive

505

Non-sequential WAYVIOTOL
Successive WAYVIOTOL forms expressing one action
Contemporaneous events
Overlapping time frames
Backtracking
Anticipatory
Iterative processes
WAVVIQTOL in excursive material

Imperative-cohortative
Jussive-cohortative
Negative command-cohortative

Following a question or wish

Jussive
Following another volitive
Imperative-jussive
Cohortative-jussive
Jussives with different subjects
Negative command-jussive
Following questions or wishes
Imperative
Following another volitive
Jussive-imperative
Cohortative-imperative
Following questions
Subor~.ination of volitives to non-volitive clauses
Vol!t!ves follow!ng directives and predictives
Vol/tlves following negative statements
Volitives following past-tense statements
'-----' '-------~'-TlwnegateCl SUbJunctive: N~ .. VIQTOL
Concluding remarks
Inter-clausal relations: Final remarks
PART TWO VERBAL USAGE
CHAPTER V WAVVIQTOL
Introduction
WAVVIQTOL in narrative
The beginning of a narrative
The body of the narrative
Sequential WAYVIQTOL

Detailed Table ofcontent

161

WAYVIQTOL continuing circumstantial clauses

WAYVIQTOL continuing-relative clauses
WAVYIQTOL in iterative passages
Other varieties of backgrounded WAVYIQTOL
Concluding remarks
WAVVIQTOL in discourse
Preterite WAVVIQTOL in discourse
Following QATAL
Following a non-verbal clause
Following a predicative participle
Following YIQTOL
Following non-clausal elements
Following a "relative" participle
Present-tense WAVVIQTOL?
"Present-perfect" WAVYIQTOL
Gnomic WAVYIQTOL
Performative WAYYIQTOL?
Present-tense WAVYIQTOL following a predicative
participle?
WAVVIQTOL expressing the future?
Modal WAVVIQTOL?
WAVYIQTOL following questions
WAVYIQTOL continuing a negative or interrogative
clause
Conclusions on discursive WAVVIQTOL
CHAPTER VI QATAL
QATAL in discourse
QAT AL expressing anterior actions
Immediate versus distant past
Types of actions
Anteriority and completion

193

506

Detailed Table of content

The Epistolary perfect

Present of stative verbs
QATAL expressing the passing of a phase
Anteriority of a subjective phase
Difficult cases
Performative QATAL
Gnomic QATAL
QATAL expressing anteriority in the future
Relative clauses
Temporal clauses
With

il1

"until"

W~th ":l "when"

~~ ~ ~

Causal clauses
Stylistic usages in reference to future processes
Emotional use
Promises
Perfect of confidence
Prophetic perfect
Modal QATAL
Questions
Asseveration after ON .,~
Precative
QATAL in narrative
Preterite QATAL
Negated clauses
QATAL fotlowing temporal phrases
QATAL following an element contrastively topicalized
Non-contrastive topicalization
Other
. ~~-~QAT~l::'expressing anterioritr-~-=~=~-
Explicit subordination
Circumstantial clauses
QATAL in authorial comments
Subordinate clauses
Main ctauses
Appendix: W + QATAL (perfect conjunctive)
Discourse
Narrative

507

Detailed Table ofcontent

CHAPTER VII THE PREDICATIVE PARTICIPLE

229
Two sequences of participle and subject
An analogy: Nominal clauses with an indefinite
predicate
Participial sequences and the syntax of nominal
clauses
Participial sequences and emphasis
Su-Ptcp with focus on the subject .
.
Ptcp-Su with highlighting of the leXical meaning
of the verb
The neutralization of the opposition in negated
clauses
Subject-participle
The real present
Reference to the future
The futurum instans
Future reference time
The extended present
The historic present
Attending circumstance in narrative
Relative clauses
Circumstantial clauses
Causal-circumstantial clauses
Other cases
Participle-subject
Non-dynamic verbs
The use of the sequence Ptcp-Su
with particles
Conditional ON
Interrogative it
Causal"~

Complement clause introduced by

Other uses of the factual present
Performative expressions
Immediate past
General present
Difficult cases
Appendix: The verb il"il + participle
WAYHIQOTEL
HAYAKQOTEL

.,~

508

Detailed Table of content

Discourse
Narrative

continuing a volitive form

Obligation presented as necessity
WEQATAL expressing wishes
WEQATAL

VIHVEH QOTEL and WEHAVAH QOTEL

Volitives
CHAPTER VIII VIQTOL AND WEQATAL
The relation between VIQTOL.and WEQATAL
VIQTOL
VIQTOL in reference to future situations

Prediction
Obligation
continuing a voHtive form
Obligation presented as necessity
YIQTOL expressing wishes
Other modal usages
Permission
Potentiality
Eventuality
YIQTOL

Volition of the subject

YIQTOL with final particles
Concluding remarks
VIQTOL in reference to present situations

Repetition in the present

Proverbial expressions
Present with modal verbs
Real present in questions
Concluding remarks

Other modal usages

261

Permission
Eventuality
Volition of the subject

WEQATAL with final particles

WEQAT AL in reference to present Situations

Repetition in the present

Proverbial expressions
Present with modal verbs?
WEQAT AL in past-tense contexts

Prospective
Past modal
Iterative and durative
Concluding remarks on WEQATAL
Appendix: Non-volitive
+ VIQTOL

CHAPTER IX THE VOLITIVE FORMS

Introduction
.
Problems in positing a volitive paradigm

313

Morphology
Syntax
Semantics

VIQTOL in past-tense contexts

Prospective
.~.......YLQIOL ie-object clallse ,
Past modal
Iterative and durative
Preterite YIQTOL?

509

Detailed Table ofcontent

_.v_.~.~~~~~~

WEQATAL
Introduction

The origin of WEQATAL

The consecutive function
WEQATAL in reference to future situations

WEQATAL expressing prediction

Obligation

Positive reasons for maintaining the existence

of the volitive paradigm

Different and indifferent forms

Light subordination
Absence of second person prefixed forms at the
head of the clause
Conclusion
Cohortative
First person singular

Volition and control

The cohortative and the addressee
Special case
First person plural

Plurality of speakers
Single speaker

510

Detailed Table of content

The cohortative expressing subordination

Imperative
Directive speech acts
The speaker is superior to the addressee
Speaker and addressee are equals
The speaker is inferior

Non-directive speech acts

The addressee is not the agent of the commanded
process
Blessing and well-wishing

The imperative used as an interjection

The imperative expressing subordination
Jussive
Commands and requests
Utterances acting immediately upon the third
person subject
Utterances acting upon the addressee

Wishes, blessings and curses

Wishes
Blessing and curse
Problematic case

Negated volitives
First person
Second person
Third person
Light subordination
Concluding reflections
Volitives and the here and now
Direct and indirect "_ .......,,ft.r.
PART THREE PERSPECTIVES AND OPEN QUESTIONS
CHAPTER X VERBAL FORMS IN TEXTUAL
PERSPECTIVE
349
Word order in verbal clauses in biblical Hebrew
The fonnal structure of the verbal clause in
classical prose
Word order and TAM functions
Clause-initial yolitives versus clause-internal
YIQTOL

The position of QATAL

Detailed Table ofcontent

511

The sequences of the participle

and its subject
Conclusion

The default word order in classical

Hebrew prose
Statistics
Typological arguments
The functions of s-v clauses
Focalization Of the~ubject
Topicalization
Circumstantial clause
Is the v-s sequence marked?
Conclusions

Concluding remarks on word order

Verbs, clauses and narrative texture
Foreground and background
Foreground
Main clauses with preposed elements
Narrative we + QATAL
Clauses introduced by ilJil
Expressions of simultaneity
Background
Circumstantial clauses
Other subordinate clauses
Expressions of iterativity
Continuative WAYVIQTOL

Narrative pace
Overture and closure
Overture
Closure

Narration and authorial comments

Verbs, clauses and the organization Of discursive
texts
CHAPTER XI DEVELOPMENTS IN LATE BIBLICAL
377
HEBREW
Methodological considerations
The unity of Classical Biblical Hebrew
Innovation and continuity in Late Biblical Hebrew
Factors of change

512

Detailed Table of content

Aramaic influence
Influence from spoken dialects
Natural developments

The tendency to classicize

Changes in the verbal syntax: of Late Biblical Hebrew
WAVVIQTOL
QATAL

Sequential QATAL in narrative

Performative QATAL
The predicative participle
The "verbalization" of the predicative participle
The participle expressing durative or iterative
processes in past
VIQTOL

Non-volitive W + YIQTOL
The collapse of the modal subsystem
YIQTOL expressing volition of the speaker
Second person YIQTOL expressing light subordination

WEQATAL

The disappearance of iterative WEQATAL

The volitives
Non-volitive
+ jussive
Volitives in third position in the clause
Conclusions

CHAPTER XII
VERBAL USAGE IN POETRY
411
Preliminary considerations
The grammar of poetry and the grammar of
prose

~ ~ ~~ ~ ~'~~'~~'~"'~~~~~'~""~""~~"""'~~~~"Syntacti'c-tfextt:rt~----~~'-'~~"'~~'~~~'~'~~'-'"

Archaism
The subjectivity of the poet
Diachronic considerations
Archaic biblical poetry
Late biblical poetry
Other poetic texts
Poetic usage: a survey
WAVVIQTOL
QATAL

Participle

513

Detailed Table ofcontent

VIQTOL

in first position and the figure of ellipSIS

Preterite YIQTOL

YIQTOL
WEQATAL

Volitives
The volitives' position in the clause
The use of YIQTOL in volitive clauses