40 publications, certain scholars claim, in contrast to Longacre, that
does indeed have the same “mainlining” function of other preterites or
WAYYIQTOL
s.
3.4.6 Niccacci, The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, 1990
Niccacci’s 1990 study, The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, also identifies text-level functions of
, discussing its macrosyntactic function as “connecting circumstances and events with the main narrative thread” Niccacci 1990,
159. This study considers several macro-syntactic signs: Besides these typical verb forms, in narrative and discourse there are
certain textual pointers, called ‘macro-syntactic signs’. These are elements which mark the relationships among segments of the text. The main
indicator of narrative is wayehi; wehinneh chiefly marks discourse but also functions in narrative, while we‘atta is exclusive to discourse. Mention
should also be made here of wehaya, an important macrosyntactic marker in discourse which also occurs in the comment-sections of narrative.
Niccacci 1990, 33
According to Niccacci, then, the main indicator of narrative is . As he states
elsewhere in Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, “wayehi is the supreme ‘macro-syntactic sign’ of narrative. This means that its presence is enough to mark the
passage as narrative” Niccacci 1990, 48. The implications of this claim need to be carefully evaluated. In one sense, it seems more like a hyperbolic remark than a serious
claim that identifies the surrounding text in which it occurs as narrative. What about
other texts that seemingly exhibit the normal characteristics of narrative, but where does not occur? Is this function as “macro-syntactic sign” meant as a type of genre signal
like “once upon a time”? Niccacci’s discussion of this function of cites Judg 11:1-5
as an example text; occurs in both 11:4 and 11:5 and Niccacci comments that “the
41 two wayehi’s mark off the passage as narrative and at the same time indicate the two
basic components of the account: the war and Jephthah’s role in it” Niccacci 1990, 49. The second part of this statement reflects Niccacci’s claim that “[t]he textual function of
wayehi is to introduce a new element into the main narrative thread so that that element becomes an integral and important part of the account” Niccacci 1990, 48. These are
significant claims that require further exploration. With a slightly different slant on the functions of
, Niccacci comments in Lettura Sintattica della Prosa Ebraico-Biblica, that
’s function is to “create continuity throughout a text, so that the narration moves ahead at a regular pace”
9
Niccacci 1991, 252 [my translation]. Similarly in Lettura Sintattica, Niccacci comments that
’s “function is to ensure cohesion throughout the various parts of a text, to promote the ‘textuality’ of the text”
10
Niccacci 1991, 17 [my translation]. These functions are related to those found in his Syntax, but the discussion of cohesion and
“textuality” moves beyond a mere label like “macro-syntactic sign” and identifies possible “effect[s] of its use in a particular text” Talstra 1978, 169. These claims will be
brought back into the discussion at a later point.
9
“Il fatto che sia un mezzo sintattico che crea continuità all’interno di un testo,
comporta che la narrazione conserva un ritmo constante” Niccacci 1991, 252.
10
“Di conseguenza, la sua funzione a livello linguistico è assicurare la connessione tra le varie parti del testo, promuovere la “testualità” del testo” Niccacci 1991, 17.
42
3.4.7 Eskhult, Studies in Verbal Aspect and Narrative Technique in
