An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

Gen 3:22
e Sometimes the non-perfective is used in anticipatory (casus pendens) clauses (4.7)
and wəqataltí functions as a main clause (## 30–33), often with a resumptive pronoun
(## 30, 32). 26 The casus pendens resembles a conditional clause.
30. ה ֶכַּי־ר ֶשׁ אֲ
הּד֑ ָ ָכלוּ ְ ר ֶפס־תַי ֵ֫ רְ ִק־תאֶ הסָ כְ ַע־תא ֶ וֹל יתִּ תַ ֫ ָנוְ ׃ה ָשּׁ אִ ְל יתִּ ִבּ
31. . . . הדָ ָצ אֹ ל ר ֶשׁ אֲ וַ
ר ֶשׁ א ֲ םוֹק ָמ ךָ ְל יתִּ ֫ ְמ ַשׂ וְ
׃ה ָמּ ָשׁ ֫ סוּנָי
32. םתֶּ רְ ַמ א ֲ ר ֶשׁ א ֲ ם ֶכ ְפּטַ וְ
םתֹא ָ יתאי ֫ בֵ הֵ ו ְ ה֑יֶהִי ְ ז ַבל ָ
33.
As for him who smites Qiryath-sepher and seizes it, I
shall give him my daughter Aksah in marriage.
Judg 1:12
As for him who did not lie in wait…, I shall provide
you a place whither he may flee.
Exod 21:13
As for your little ones whom you thought would
become prey, I shall cause them to enter…
Num 14:31
ךְ֑ ל ָ יתִּ דְ גַּ֫ הִ ו ְ ינִ א֫ ֵ רַיּ־ה ְ ַמ Whatever he reveals to me, I will tell you.
Num 23:3
32.2.2 After Volitional Forms
a Wəqataltí may express a consequent (logical and/or chronological) situation to a
situation represented by a volitional form (cohortative, imperative, jussive; # 1 b). By
contrast, a construction involving wə bound to an imperative after another imperative
does not signify a directly consequent situation (# 1a; cf. 34.6a).
1a. וּארוּ ְ וּב ְצַי תְ הִ
הוהי ת ַעוּשְׁי־תאֶ 1b. ... בגֶ ֶנּ֫ ַבּ הז ֶ וּל ֲע
ץרֶ א֫ ָ ה־ת ָ א ֶ םתי ֶ אִ רוּ ְ
איהּ־ה ֑ ִ ַמ
Stand firm and see (imperative) YHWH’s deliverance.
Exod 14:13
Go up through the Negev…and (so) see (wqtl) what the
land is like.
Num 13:17–18
26 Phoenician-Punic furnishes examples of this sentence type. See C. R. Krahmalkov,
“The Qatal with Future Tense Reference in Phoenician,” Journal of Semitic Studies
31 (1986) 5–10. Since the w is not always present in the Punic examples, Krahmalkov
contends “that the presence of the conjunction is purely stylistic, serving the sole
function of co-ordinating the clauses. That is, there is no inherent syntactic force in w-
that ‘converts’ a perfect (past) into an imperfect (future). The qatal is, in other words,
unmarked for tense, its future tense reference a factor of the syntactic structure in
which it is embedded” (p. 10). We would propose that historically w was necessary
for this construction and only came to be omitted at a relatively advanced stage in
development.