An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax

is normally prefixed to the short prefix-conjugation form, where available (e.g., ְךּבְ יֵּ֫ ו ַ
and not ה ֶכּבִ ְ יּו); ַ (3) the stress is thrown back toward the waw as much as possible
(e.g., םקָ ָיּ֫ ו ַ and not םקָיּ ָ֫ ו); ַ (4) the construction normally begins its clause; and (5) it
does not take an energic ending (31.1.1d, 31.7.2). The relationship between the
wayyqtl and the jussive forms is clear in Gen 1:3: ינְי ִ ו ַ . . . יהִ וְ
, ‘Let there be…and
there was…’ In contrast to waw-relative as used with the suffix conjugation (wəqtl),
waw-relative in the bound form wayyqtl is always pointed differently from the wawcopulative
that occurs with the nonperfective conjugation. The phonologically
conditioned variants of ּ◌ ו ַ — for example, ו ָ with א — do not disguise this fact.
b Two prefix-conjugation forms, long and short, are distinguished in the cases of (1)
the Hiphil of all verbs; (2) every verbal stem of III-he verbs except Pual and
Hophal;[Page 544] (3) the Qal of geminates, hollow roots (II-waw/yodh), I-aleph
verbs, and I-waw/yodh verbs. As Leslie McFall rightly points out, waw-relative with
the prefix conjugation does not always occur with the short form: “ה ֶכּבְ תִּ ו ַ and she
wept occurs alongside ְךּבְ תֵּ ו, ַ ה ֶנ ְבִ יּו ַ alongside ן ֶביּ ִ֫ו,
ַ התֶּ ְשִׁיּ ו ַ alongside תְּ ְשֵׁיּ ו, ַ ה ֶל ֲעַיּ ו ַ
and ל ַע ַיּ֫ ו, ַ ה ֶנ ֲעַיּ ו ַ and ן ַע ַיּ֫ ו, ַ ה ֶשׂ ֲעַיּ ו ַ and שׂ ַעַיּ ו, ַ האֶ רִיּ ְ ו ַ and ארַיּ ְ ו, ַ ה ֶבּרַיּ ְ ו ַ and ברֶ ֶיּ֫ ו, ַ
etc.” 1 If there were originally two sets of prefix conjugations and these are reflected in
the long and short forms of Biblical Hebrew, it may be that the accentuation of the
biblical short form reflects the accentuation of the form from which it is descended.
The rare long forms used after wa(y)- would represent secondary, analogical
developments, as the two prefix forms came to be seen as variants of one form.
c The frequency of the wayyiqtol form hardly requires comment: 29% of the finite
verbs in the Hebrew Bible show this form (14,972 cases; cf. 29.1c). In about ninety
cases the waw-relative occurs with the pseudo-cohortative, principally in the parts of
Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah where the narrative is in the first person, and rarely
elsewhere (34.5). 2 This is not necessarily a late feature of the language: it is not used
1 Leslie McFall, The Enigma of the Hebrew Verbal System (Sheffield: Almond, 1982)
54–55, accentuation modified. See also F. R. Blake, A Resurvey of Hebrew Tenses
(Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1951) 46; and E. Qimron, “Consecutive and
Conjunctive Imperfect: The Form of the Imperfect with Waw in Biblical Hebrew,”
Jewish Quarterly Review 77 (1986–87) 149–61, arguing that the waw tends to trigger
use of the short form.
2 “It seems…likely that the use of the [-ah] affixed form with waw consecutive
reflects the fact that this form was perceived [in later Biblical Hebrew] as the
equivalent, in the 1st person, of the short imperfect form in the 2nd and 3rd person”;
so E. J. Revell, “First Person Imperfect Forms with Waw Consecutive,” Vetus
Testamentum 38 (1988) 419–26, at 422. Cf. S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the
Tenses in Hebrew (3d ed.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1892) 74–75: T. J. Finley, “The Waw-
Consecutive with ‘Imperfect’ in Biblical Hebrew: Theoretical Studies and Its Use in
Amos,” Tradition and Testament: Essays in Honor of Charles Lee Feinberg, ed. J. S.
Feinberg and P. D. Feinberg (Chicago: Moody, 1981) 241–62, at 260.