An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

a The Hebrew conjugations qtl and yqtl are opposed as perfective (pfv.) and
nonperfective (non-pfv.). The morphological marking of this aspectual opposition is
complex. Many languages mark only one of a given pair of aspects, with a prefix (mifor
Persian imperfective [impfv.]; pro-, na-, etc., for Russian pfv.) or a suffix (-zhe for
Chinese progressive). English usually uses a simple verb form for perfective (e.g.,
‘she read’) and a compound form for progressive (e.g., ‘she was reading’). 1 The
Hebrew opposition is marked in several ways. The morphological distinction between
perfective and nonperfective is shown by (1) distinct infix patterns (e.g., qātal- versus
-qtōl-), (2) distinct sets of affixes indicating person (first, second, third), number
(singular, plural), and gender (masculine, feminine), and (3) the use of suffixing (pfv.)
versus affixing (both suffixing and prefixing for non-pfv.). Thus: qātal-tā versus tiqtōl,
ti-qtel-û. The perfective also differs from the non-perfective, which is closely
related to the various modal and volitional forms (Chap. 34), in not being closely
associated with other parts of the verb system.
[Page 480] b As the names suggest, the perfective conjugation is more specialized in
meaning than the non-perfective conjugation. The suffix form of the verb announces
that a certain category (perfectivity) is relevant, while the prefix form does not invoke
this category. Perfectivity involves viewing a situation as a whole, viewing it globally
(29.6). If the verb is fientive, the perfective form refers to an event.
c The perfective and non-perfective conjugations are complementary parts of the verb
system. There is an opposite to perfective verb aspect, imperfective; many but not all
uses of the Hebrew non-perfective conjugation show imperfective aspect. If a verb is
fientive, an imperfective view of it describes a process (rather than an event).
Imperfectivity directs attention to the internal distinctions of various separate phases
making up the situation. 2
pfv. perfective
non-pfv. non-perfective
impfv. imperfective
1 Bernard Comrie, Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related
Problems (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1976) 88–94.
2
Comrie, Aspect, 16. F. Rundgren (cf. 29.6d n. 96) takes a similar view: he designates
the suffix conjugation as the marked member, arguing that the prefix conjugation has
both a negative value (i.e., imperfective) and a neutral value; see Das althebräische
Verbum: Abriss der Aspektlehre (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1961) 84–104.
It is generally recognized that the perfective form developed in the West Semitic
languages, including Hebrew, from a form cognate to the one known in Akkadian as
the permansive (or stative); see G. Bergsträsser, Introduction to the Sermitic
Languages, trans. and sup. Peter T. Daniels (Winona lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns,
1983) 20–23; H. Y. Priebatsch, “Der Weg des semitischen Perfekts’ ” Ugarit
Forschungen 10 (1978) 337–47. The interpretation of the Akkadian form is, however,
so controverted that it can shed little light on the working of the Hebrew system. See
J. Huehnergard, “ ‘Stative,’ Predicative Form, Pseudo-Verb,” Journal of Near Eastern