27 The narrative use of imperfects with vav consecutive became so
commonplace that they were often used in this sense even without a preceding governing perfect, especially with the imperfect forms of the
verb
, “he was.” Kelley 1992, 210-11 This comment reveals a perspective which is much more far-reaching than the
analysis of . The implications of this comment are that the occurrence of a linguistic
entity such as has little or no functional motivation. By some type of developmental
process, the frequency of the
WAYYIQTOL
form is apparently so overpowering that certain verbs begin to be used in new ways. This analysis is based on the assumption that the
proper pattern is that the
WAYYIQTOL
follows a “preceding governing perfect” and indicates either consequence or sequence. This is characteristic of the waw consecutive
view which must explain why a
WAYYIQTOL
, which by definition is sequential, is found without a governing perfect. The use of
is only marginally in focus here, since Kelley’s concerns are more related to issues of governing sequences. Understanding of
is advanced very little by Kelley’s grammar.
3.3.5 Seow, A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew, 1995
Seow’s comment about in A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew uses terms like
“discourse” and “context,” but the use of such terms does not make Seow’s analysis textlinguistic; it remains essentially descriptive despite the use of this terminology. Seow
states: In a discourse, context may be provided in a number of ways. A past event
is typically introduced by , literally, “and it wascame to pass.” Future
events are introduced by , literally, “and it shall be.” Further
indication of the context usually follows: a prepositional or adverbial expression giving a specific time e.g., after these things, a reference to
28 some event introduced by
even as or when or the like. Seow 1995, 231
One of the ways that this comment differs from the other Descriptive analyses presented up to this point is its statement that
typically introduces a past event. This may reflect awareness of some of the early textlinguistic studies, such as the 1982 study
of by Bartelmus see 3.4.4 below in which he discusses the function of
as an indication of past tense narrative. The specific ways in which
is used, however, are not addressed in any more detail beyond the citation above.
3.3.6 Chisholm, From Exegesis to Exposition, 1998
From Exegesis to Exposition is the title of Chisholm’s guide to using biblical Hebrew. This is technically not a grammar, but since its goal is practical instruction in
using Hebrew in exegesis, its comments regarding are important to take into
consideration. Chisholm states that “[t]he wayyiqtol form , ‘and it so happened,’
often followed by a temporal clause, is frequently used to begin a new narrative or scene” Chisholm 1998, 120. Andersen’s Sentence discusses the use of
at the beginning of an episode; Chisholm here refers to
being used to begin a new narrative or scene. These are very similar claims and, at first glance, seem to help better define what
is doing. The problem, though, is that episodes, new narratives, and scenes can be found
that do not begin with . This indicates the need for greater precision in claims
regarding the functions of . These claims also show the way in which terms like
episode and scene are used without clear definitions. What exactly is an episode? What constitutes the beginning of a new narrative or scene?
29 Chisholm makes one further comment about the use of
to introduce a parenthetical note:
Occasionally a wayyiqtol form, especially , introduces a parenthetical
note in the narrative. For example, 1 Kings 18:3 states that Ahab summoned his palace administrator Obadiah. Verse 5 then records Ahab’s
orders to Obadiah. But in between the narrator places a parenthetical note about Obadiah’s loyalty to the Lord v. 4. This parenthesis is introduced
by
. For another example see 1 Chronicles 11:6, which inserts parenthetical information about Joab’s role in the conquest of Jerusalem.
Chisholm 1998, 122-23 This comment is indicative of the broad range of functions that are attributed to
in the literature. This is not the place for detailed discussion of this comment, but it seems confusing to claim that
can have what appear to be quite contradictory functions. How can
both begin a new narrative as well as introduce a parenthetical note? These functions are discussed in Chapter 10, The Discourse-Pragmatic Uses of
.
3.3.7 Schertz and Yoder, Seeing the Text: Exegesis for Students of
