84 This interactive morpho-syntactic orientation is consistent with and builds on the
descriptive orientation described in the previous section. The goal is the full description of the morpho-syntactic phenomena of biblical Hebrew in their contexts of use.
5.2.2.2 Syntactic Constraints
An important concept in this morpho-syntactic orientation is that certain constructions in language are framed in particular ways that constrain syntactic patterns,
such as the use of verb forms. The proper interpretation of the verb forms of biblical Hebrew presents a variety of challenges and requires careful evaluation of the syntactic
context in which a given form occurs. This includes not only text type or genre, but information type as well. Consider the following example:
God called the light day, and the darkness He called night.
+ + ? :
4
Gen 1:5
In some approaches, the
QATAL
and
WAYYIQTOL
in Gen 1:5 would be discussed in terms of the assumed temporal contrast between these forms. However, there is very
little that can legitimately be said about the use of
QATAL
in the second half of this verse unless the syntactic pattern is considered. Minimal significance can be attributed to the
contrast between
WAYYIQTOL
and
QATAL
in this verse if there is some sense in which the occurrence of these forms is governed by the syntactic shape of the sentence in which
both of these forms occur. Very little is accomplished by merely giving a sentence like this a label such as chiastic without, first of all, addressing why it has this syntactic shape
and secondly, investigating its distribution. It is also important to consider what other ways this sentence could have been framed and then analyze how this would affect the
85 information status of the sentence. For example, if Gen 1:5 had been written with two
WAYYIQTOL
s, it would still report the same events, i.e., the naming of light and darkness as day and night respectively, but the narrative framing would be different. The
WAYYIQTOL
-
QATAL
sequence in Gen 1:5 depicts narratively the
SIMULTANEITY
or
PARITY
of the two events, whereas two
WAYYIQTOL
s would give a
SEQUENTIAL
depiction of the events.
Some analyses identify one of the main features of
QATAL
as
ANTERIORITY
. This may apply in many cases and may clarify some otherwise perplexing occurrences of
QATAL
, but full analysis must take the narrative and syntactic context into consideration. In the Gen 1:5 example above, the
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
in the second half cannot be analyzed independently of the first half with the
WAYYIQTOL
. In this construction, the temporal feature of
ANTERIORITY
that
QATAL
often has does not appear to be operative; rather, this construction syntactically frames the two “namings” as co-temporal. Analysis of an entity
like the
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
always needs to reflect sensitivity to the context in which it occurs. The
WAYYIQTOL
–
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
frame discussed here is one of the reasons why the sentence is an important area of analysis beyond the clause. The
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
here is not the same as the sentence-initial
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
which has its own peculiar discourse- pragmatic function. Both need to be analyzed in their broader context, but this is beyond
the scope of the present discussion. Another example of the
WAYYIQTOL
–
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
frame is 2 Sam 2:12-13 displayed below:
86
Now Abner the son of Ner, went out from Mahanaim to Gibeon with the
servants of Ish-bosheth the son of Saul. And Joab the son of Zeruiah
and the servants of David went out and met them by the pool of Gibeon;
and they sat down, one on the one side of the pool and the other on the
other side of the pool. Pc-vqw3ms np ncmsc-np Pc-ncmpc np
ncmsc-np Pp-np npXd Pc-np ncmsc-np Pc-ncmpc np vqp3cp Pc-vqw3mpX3mp
Pp-ncfsc np Pd Pc-vqw3mp acp Pp-Pa- ncfs Pp-ams Pc-acp Pp-Pa-ncfs Pp-ams
8 + G 3 +
+ G G
. ,
8 . ,
2 Sam 2:12-13
The
WAYYIQTOL
–
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
frame spans verses 2:12 and 13. The
NASB
, shown in the left column, renders 12 and 13 as if they were both
WAYYIQTOL
, but the beginning of 2:13 in
BHS
is a
WE
-
X
-
QATAL
which highlights the temporal
PARITY
of the actions of Abner and Joab. The
PARITY
of their actions is also indicated in 2:13 by and
. … , and . … , . The narrative depiction of the tension of the impending war is heightened by the parallel framing of Abner and Joab’s meeting. This
type of analysis not only takes into consideration the syntactic shape of the clause at hand, but also considers the narrative purpose or pragmatics of why the particular clause
is found where it occurs. Subordination is another example of a category of syntactic patterns that requires
special attention. For example, clauses with or are typically followed by certain
verb forms. Familiarity with these patterns eventually develops into a degree of anticipation of what will come next. For example, clauses with
may be followed by a
QATAL
as in 2 Sam 11:16 or by a participle as in 1 Kgs 5:13 ;
.
87
When Joab guarded the city, he put Uriah at the place where he knew
there were valiant men. Pc-vqw3msXa Pp-vqc np Pp-Pa-ncfs Pc-
vqw3ms Po-np Pp-Pa-ncms Pr vqp3ms Pp ncmpc-ncms Pd
+ +
+ 3 5
8
2 Sam 11:16
He spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon even to the hyssop
that grows on the wall; he spoke also of animals and birds and creeping
things and fish. Pc-vpw3ms Pp-Pa-ncmp Pp-Pa-ncms Pr
Pp-np Pc-Pp Pa-ncms Pr vqPms Pp+Pa- ncms Pc-vpw3ms Pp-Pa-ncfs Pc-Pp-Pa-
ncms Pc-Pp-Pa-ncms Pc-Pp-Pa-ncmp
+ + ,
1 ;
F 9+
8 C
1 Kgs 5:13 4:33
These examples provide a good contrast between the function of the
QATAL
and the participle that can be explained in terms of temporal reference. The
QATAL
in 2 Sam 11:16 reflects the fact that Joab’s knowledge is prior to giving the order to Uriah and the
participle in 1 Kgs 5:13 gives present temporal reference. It is not difficult, however, to conceive of the same clause in 1 Kgs 5:13 with a
QATAL
if the intended temporal reference is past: which grew. These examples demonstrate the need for not
only recognizing the function of as a relative pronoun, but also for developing an
awareness of the syntactic patterns of the relative clauses it forms. Awareness of these patterns is crucial for determining whether certain
occurrences are significant, since significance is typically the result of occurrences which depart in some way from the standard patterns. If the clause being analyzed matches a
regular syntactic pattern, there is minimal exegetical significance. For example in 1 Kgs 5:13 above, the use of the participle for present temporal reference conforms to the
regular pattern. As such, it would not be legitimate to emphasize the aspectual features of the participle in this type of occurrence. All of this underscores the need for an
88 interactive, unit-in-context morpho-syntactic analysis that builds on a full and thorough
description of biblical Hebrew.
5.2.3 A Functional-Typological Orientation
