B-Hebrew: The Biblical Hebrew Forum

Hi:

I'm confused as to why the word וַיַּרְא is Qal (I thought it was Hiphil).

without the waw consecutive,

Qal imperfect 3ms: יִרְאֶה

Hiphil imperfect 3ms: יַרְאֶה

so it seems like our word in Gen 1:4 is Hiphil?????

Glenn

No, it is the waw consecutive. With the accent pulled back (syncopated), the alef becomes silent. So, it is the qal.

Good question. Glad to see you so observant!

Thanxs Kirk for the info! I didn't notice the accent had moved, so thanxs for pointing that out!

Glenn

Hi Glenn and Kirk,

Kirk,
I think that Glenn asks about why there is a Patah' in the letter Y?

because, for example, from יפנה(=yifne) there is ויפן(=vayyifn-->vayyifen)

***
I guess that in that form and process (and there could be other processes with other results), the letter א was at the end of the word (without a vowel) as vayyir'
(just like "vayyifn" that turned to "vayyifen" - because of the combination of consonants "fn" which was broken to "fen")
But in this case of וירא, the Aleph was silent and like was not there
And so, it was like vayyir (with no combiantion of consonants)
and I guess that in that form, the R caused the (upper) vowel "i" to low itslef to vowel "a". Creating the form "vayyar" which is similar to the Hiphil form (also with Patah').

thanxs Ducky for the info! And yes I couldn't figure out how we seemed to have started with a hireq on the Yod, and then it became a pathach (so it looks like Hiphil).

I'm not sure that I'm following how the resh caused the hireq to "lower itself" to pathach.

Maybe to ask the question another way, is there anything wrong with the form וַיִּ֫רא

Thanxs!

Glenn

Hi Glenn,

It is not about "if there is a problem with this or not"
it is that there is no form like that.

Hi Ducky:

I read over your post several times, and I "think" I understand now, but could I try to explain it in my own words (and then you correct where needed?)

Let's start with a normal III-Hey verb:

יִבְנֶה ==> וַיִּ֫בֶן

So following the same pattern for our verb, we have

יִרְאֶה ==> וַיִּ֫רֶא

BUT because the aleph is "really not there", it becomes וַיִּ֫רֶ

There's just no such form. So the seghol had to drop off the resh, changing the hireq to pathah to get וַיַּ֫רא

Is that about right?

Glenn

Hi Glenn,

The process you wrote is missing a link.
I know it is my fault for not being clear enough
I'll try again

***
Let's take the case of יבנה/ויבן

יבנה = yivne
now, let's drop the last vowel -->
yivn

this "yivn" is the link that is missing in what you wrote above
so the process of ויבן starts first with:
vayyivn

(We just drop the last vowel - and the letter ב still keeps its Sheva)
ויבנה---->ויבן
vayyivne---->vayyivn

now, this "vayyivn" ends with a combination of two consonants (vayyiVN)

(Hebrew "doesn't like that "consonants-combinations) and tends to break them with a vowel in the middle)

So this combination of VN (of vayyivn) is broken to vayyiven
vayiVN-->vayyiven

up untill now it is fine?

Hi Ducky:

I'm following so far - when you took off the last vowel you end up with yiv-n (which cannot occur).

Then you prefix the waw consecutive and you got vay-yiv-n (which cannot occur) so we went to vay-yi-ven.

I think that's where your line-of-reasoning finished.

I'll tune in for the rest - and thanxs for the explanation(s)!

BTW, not sure if others are having the same problem as me but I'm getting a ton of "error 500 - can't load page" (so I don't know if and when I'll be able to respond)

Glenn

The historical vowel for the imperfect was a-quality, so וַיַּרְא represents an older, more historical form. The imperfect still uses the a-quality vowel in the qal with gutturals and in the hiphil. It has switched to i-quality with strong consonants in the qal, in the niphal, and in the hitpael.

Essentially, וַיַּרְא is preserving an older vowel. Most of the imperfects and vav-consecutives with imperfect have undergone the switch, but this verb didn't (for whatever reason).