An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

wayyiqtol 14,972 5
29%
weəyiqtol 1,335 3%
50,858
The prefix forms are appreciably more common than the suffix forms. Although
the most frequent combination is wayyiqtol, the forms without waw are altogether
more common, 28,173 forms (55%), as opposed to those with waw, 22,685 forms
(45%). 6 Also noteworthy is the dominance of three of the combinations, qatal, yiqtol,
and wayyiqtol, which account for 85% of the Hebrew conjugational forms of the Bible
(43,145).
d Hebraists are not agreed about the significance of the conjugations and their
constructions with waw. Various theories, each with strengths and weaknesses, have
been[Page 457] advanced. In their study of the conjugations Hebraists have been
something like the proverbial five blind men examining an elephant. Each of them has
described a portion of the beast accurately, but they differed in their conclusions
because they tried to describe the whole by generalizing from a part. In order to avoid
the reductionistic abstractions that have plagued this most difficult area of Hebrew
grammar, it seems advisable to begin by surveying the theories; after we critically
appraise them we shall be able to construct a provisional scaffold from which to
pursue the investigation.
e Leslie McFall has recently reviewed the literature on the subject from the earliest
medieval Jewish grammarians to T. W. Thacker’s study of 1954, concentrating on
“solutions from Ewald to the present day.” 7 We follow McFall’s review closely up to
the introduction of the comparative-historical approach to the subject, around 1900.
From that point on his work must be supplemented, because he neglected some
significant studies (e.g., Brockelmann, Sperber, Hughes, and Michel). 8
f Some features of any modern view of the conjugations represent a break with the
terms of the traditional debate. From the time of the Renaissance to the late nineteenth
century, there was a consistent tendency to regard the Hebrew verbal system as
intrinsically “primitive,” Biblical Hebrew being an archaic tongue unable to approach
the complexities of languages attested later. 9 No modern solution could be based on
such a suspicious and misleading notion of Hebrew as a language. Further, prior to the
5
According to SA/THAT, the ca. 15,000 cases of waw with wayyqtl account for 30%
of the 50,000 cases of waw in the Hebrew Bible.
6
These occurrences of waw constitute about 45% of all cases; see previous note.
7
McFall, Hebrew Verbal System.
8
See references in nn. 29, 33, 36, 49, 74. McFall claims that “no fundamentally new
solution to the [Hebrew verbal system] has appeared since 1954 that has received
significant support from Hebraists and Semitists” (Hebrew Verbal System, 27, cf.
185), but this is unjust to the work of several scholars. Michel is cited in passing, p.
225.
9
On the “primitive” character of Hebrew, see, e.g., McFall, Hebrew Verbal System,
41, 45, 50, 55, 85, 146, 177.