Page 1 of 1

waw-consecutive without the waw

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2020 3:45 pm
by SteveMiller
‎ WTT Psalm 47:4 יַדְבֵּ֣ר עַמִּ֣ים תַּחְתֵּ֑ינוּ וּ֜לְאֻמִּ֗ים תַּ֣חַת רַגְלֵֽינוּ׃
H. C. Leupold says that the 1st word of this verse is a waw-consecutive without the waw.
So it should be translated as past "He subdued" even though it is imperfect.
The non-waw-consecutive hiphil imperfect form has a yod before the resh.

Leupold references KS pp 194f, which says that the vav-consecutive form often appears without the vav.
KS is Lehrgebaeude der hebraeisschen Sprache. Is it available in English?

Does anyone know other examples of waw-consecutives without the waw in the Bible?


Re: waw-consecutive without the waw

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2020 5:55 pm
by Schubert
Gesenius (para. 109k) treats יַדְבֵּ֣ר as a jussive, as do van der Merwe, Naude and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar , p. 166, in particular at footnote 26. At page 71, they discussed the tsere under ב.

Re: waw-consecutive without the waw

Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2020 9:25 am
by SteveMiller
Thanks John. I looked up the Gesenius ref, and I see he says Ps 47:4 is a jussive.
I don't have access to the other reference.
John Goldingay also calls it an apparent jussive and translates it as past tense.
I thought jussive was a wish, like "May God subdue peoples under us".
Why does Goldingay translate the imperfect as simple past "He subjected peoples under us", and gives as a reason that it is an apparent jussive?
Goldingay refs IBHS 34.2.1c & the Gesenius paragraph that you ref.
IBHS is An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax by Waltke and O'Connor.
I don't have access to IBHS either.

Re: waw-consecutive without the waw

Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:16 am
by Charles Loder
According to IBHS
Rarely, a jussive form occur where we would expect a non-perfective conjugation (cf. Ps 25:9, 47:4, 90:3, 107:29; Isa 12:2; Joel 2:2, etc.) These unexpected forms may be due to the confusion between the form groups or to textual corruptions; or they may represent vestiges of an earlier verbal system. Some grammarians explain them on rhythmical ground (references GKC §109k). Because of this minor formal confounding, it is best in problem passages of this nature to be governed by sense rather than by form. A similar approach is warranted in the few passages where the vocalization that characterizes the jussive occurs with the first person (cf. Isa 42:6). (references GKC §48g n.1; and Moran "Early Canaanite Yaqtula")
As the LXX understands יַדְבֵּר as an Aorist (πέταξεν), I would be inclined to think that יַדְבֵּר is a vestige of the old yaqtul form. This would essentially be a "waw-consecutive without the waw."