Is there a prophetic imperfect and not just a prophetic perfect? e.g. Yayikra in Isaiah 9:5 ?

[ducky]

I don't know if proverbs 31 is a good example.
(I remember we were talking about it before here).

Seems to me that this was a song about a specific woman and it was originally understood in a past reference. But in time, this song became a symbol for a great woman and it is "read" in a general way of acting.

***
In another thread, Isa. 31:4 was at the "headline". I noticed verse 2 when it is said
וְגַם הוּא חָכָם וַיָּבֵא רָע

[ralph]

Ducky mentions isaiah 31:2

וְגַם הוּא חָכָם וַיָּבֵא רָע

Thanks that's a great example.. do you have any others?

It's interesting that you mention that Proverbs 31 was about a specific woman of the past rather than a generic.. so then past.

What about Isaiah 9:5 וַתְּהִי הַמִּשְׂרָה, עַל-שִׁכְמוֹ

The government will be on his shoulder

That has to be future, right? (and at least certainly not past tense).

'cos when a child has just been born, the government is not yet on his shoulder(s).

The JPS 1917 has it as "and the government is upon his shoulder" https://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1009.htm

The JPS 1985 has it in the past tense by translating it as authority rather than government, which is perhaps a bit looser "authority has settled on his shoulders" https://www.sefaria.org/Isaiah.9.6?lang=bi

[ducky]

It seems that it is linked to the future.

By the way, the child was already a teen at that time, and he was the king's son. So surely he had kingship symbols.
משרה doesn't have to be "government". It can mean the symbol of government.
It can also mean a garment. and so on...

Anyway, it seems that this is about the future.
And it seems to me that this can happen in cases of prophecy.
As the prophecy is said in the past tense as if it was already done.
Also, for example, God told Abraham that he would give Canaan to his seed.
In Gen. 12:7 it is in a future tense (using the imperfect form אתן)
לְזַרְעֲךָ אֶתֵּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת

And in Gen. 15:18 after a covenant. it is said in a past tense (using the perfect form נתתי).
לְזַרְעֲךָ נָתַתִּי אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת

It is just a thought.
Anyway, the point of "my thought" is to say that don't use these example as a matter of studying the grammar and use it as "pure grammar rules".

[ralph]

regarding vathee in Isaiah 9:5 "the government/authority" will be on his shoulder..

It seems that it is linked to the future.

agreed

so is a good example.

waw prefix with patah, and not past tense.

And it seems to me that this can happen in cases of prophecy.
As the prophecy is said in the past tense as if it was already done.
Also, for example, God told Abraham that he would give Canaan to his seed.
In Gen. 12:7 it is in a future tense (using the imperfect form אתן)
לְזַרְעֲךָ אֶתֵּן אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת

prophecy in the future ok, and imperfect with no vav patach prefix, and used for future, nothing unusual there.

And in Gen. 15:18 after a covenant. it is said in a past tense (using the perfect form נתתי).
לְזַרְעֲךָ נָתַתִּי אֶת הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת

That's the prophetic perfect, not so unusual.. and it's a known thing, the "prophetic perfect".. Hence I was more interested in cases of a prophetic waw-with-patach imperfect. Or, a waw with patach and imperfect, that's future, and not a case of prophecy..

Maybe a waw with patach imperfect that's future for prophecy, isn't unusual?

The great example you gave of Isaiah 31:2 I suppose that's prophecy? וְגַם הוּא חָכָם וַיָּבֵא רָע

Thanks

[Jason Hare]

<heb>וְגַם הוּא חָכָם וַיָּבֵא רָע</heb>

This is the second time you've done this. The last time, I corrected it. The forum software does not read <> as stylizing codes. This is not HTML. It reads the codes as BBCode, which has brackets. You need to use [​heb], not <heb>.

[ralph]

<heb>וְגַם הוּא חָכָם וַיָּבֵא רָע</heb>

This is the second time you've done this. The last time, I corrected it. The forum software does not read <> as stylizing codes. This is not HTML. It reads the codes as BBCode, which has brackets. You need to use [​heb], not <heb>.

Well the fact that I used "heb" with angle brackets the first time, and you changed it so it appeared to work, and you didn't tell me you changed it, made it look rather like I had the "code" right!

By the way, "heb" with angle brackets wouldn't be HTML either.

Now you've told me that I should use square brackets but that's the first time you've told me.

[talmid56]

Ralph, if you want to do this correctly, it's easy. Once you click on Reply, click on the Full Editor and Preview button. When the editor window opens, you'll see a menu with several buttons above the window. A little right of center is the "heb" button. Click on that and then type or paste your Hebrew text between the tags. The brackets are already there then.

[Jason Hare]

Right, but HTML uses the angled ones. That's what I meant.

With the new CSS definitions, you actually can create <heb> as a sort of pseudo-selector using CSS, but you shouldn't. It's not good form, but it certainly can be done. In the example, I created heb as a selector in the stylesheet instead of p or span, and then I used it as <heb> in the body of the document, and it used the definitions that I set for its attributes. It isn't good practice, but CSS today is really flexible even in this regard.

Cool, no?

[Chris Watts]

The great example you gave of Isaiah 31:2 I suppose that's prophecy? וְגַם הוּא חָכָם וַיָּבֵא רָע

Thanks

Hi Ralph, Ironially I do see this as Prophetic, but not from the grammar since it appears to me as simple consequential narration subsequent to "Yet He also is Wise..." and from this perspective I can not see any Prophetic nature here. However I did say I see this as Prophetic due wholly to what follows, where it is said : וְגַם־ה֤וּא חָכָם֙ וַיָּ֣בֵא רָ֔ע וְאֶת־דְּבָרָ֖יו לֹ֣א הֵסִ֑יר. The words being referred to, I believe, are the words of chapters 29 and 30. But the evil against the house of the evil doers and those that helped, that God said He will bring is not specified but could presumably be those who went down to Egypt for help (but I do not believe this is the case here), Hence I see as prophetic but not due to the Imperfect plus vav with patach.

Chris watts