Page 1 of 2
imperfect as past tense
Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 3:29 pm
by Mike Atnip
In Psalm 3:4 (5 in Hebrew text) I find אֶקְרָ֑א
I would parse that as Qal Imperfect 1cs, and so does my software in both softwares that I am using. But I notice that it is translated as a past. I assume that is because the following verb וַיַּֽעֲנֵ֨נִי is a Qal WC imperfect, which would mean that the previous verb has to have already happened.
So is this a case of an imperfect having a past tense, something I have read can happen? Is there any "marker" to indicate when imperfects have a past temporal sense, other than context?
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 3:47 pm
by Mike Atnip
I will post the entire verse:
קוֹלִי אֶל־יְהוָ֣ה אֶקְרָ֑א וַיַּֽעֲנֵ֨נִי מֵהַ֖ר קָדְשׁ֣וֹ סֶֽלָה׃
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Sun Sep 11, 2022 3:50 pm
by Chris Watts
Hallo Mike,
Actually I disagree with the English. It should clearly be translated in the present tense not the past. IE : My voice to the Lord I cry, or with my voice to the Lord I cry, and He heard me. This would indicate a sort of "more than once" cry, not a single cry. This imperfect is not in the past tense is my opinion.
chris watts
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 12:05 am
by kwrandolph
Mike Atnip wrote: ↑Sun Sep 11, 2022 3:29 pm
In Psalm 3:4 (5 in Hebrew text) I find אֶקְרָ֑א
I would parse that as Qal Imperfect 1cs, and so does my software in both softwares that I am using. But I notice that it is translated as a past. I assume that is because the following verb וַיַּֽעֲנֵ֨נִי is a Qal WC imperfect, which would mean that the previous verb has to have already happened.
So is this a case of an imperfect having a past tense, something I have read can happen? Is there any "marker" to indicate when imperfects have a past temporal sense, other than context?
Mike: In Biblical Hebrew especially from before the Babylonian exile had no imperfects with a temporal sense, making the only way to tell temporal sense is from context. The Qatal (mistakenly called “perfect”) and the Yiqtol (mistakenly called “imperfect”) referred to modalities, but modalities that mostly differ from those in English. I discuss these differences on pages 358–359 of the dictionary I wrote, available for download from Academia.edu .
Karl W. Randolph.
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 9:45 am
by Mike Atnip
I have been reading the past two weeks about the debate over aspect in Koine Greek. Do Biblical Hebrew verbs have aspect prominence (like most Ancient and Koine Greek scholars tend to feel, with varying degrees of intensity) or temporal prominence? In Koine, a strong debate over aspect has taken place in the last decades; has the same type of debate happened with Biblical Hebrew?
I am interested in the Dictionary you wrote, Karl. Mind giving me the name of it or a direct link? Thanks.
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:40 pm
by kwrandolph
No, Biblical Hebrew doesn’t have aspect either. Conjugations give zero time references, neither tense nor aspect.
Possible exception: did the Piel and Pual binyamim indicate imperfective aspect? I noticed that Piel and Pual participles, which can be recognized by their form in the consonental text, is often used for actions that are repeated or continuous. Any thoughts?
Karl W. Randolph.
Ps: my dictionary can be downloaded from
https://www.academia.edu/83050735/BIBLI ... DICTIONARY
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:26 pm
by Jason Hare
I don’t feel like opening another argument up with Karl on this issue. I disagree with him. Forms do normally correspond to tense, though the system is more nuanced than Karl will accept. The vayyiqtol is the form used for narrative past tense. The veyiqtol is used as a jussive (“let”) or modal (“could, would, should”) form in the past. The qatal is used as a past tense generally (even pluperfect at times). At other times, the qatal can be used modally, especially in conditionals and when attached as veqatal. The issue that must be understood is that these are final forms that developed from older forms that were more distinct. The entire discussion of the system is well presented in John Cook’s Time and the Biblical Hebrew Verb: The Expression of Tense, Aspect, and Modality in Biblical Hebrew (Eisenbrauns, 2012), which Karl has not read.
Principle intent: Don’t take someone’s word for it. Investigate the issue for yourself.
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:53 pm
by kwrandolph
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:26 pm
Principle intent: Don’t take someone’s word for it. Investigate the issue for yourself.
And that includes taking the word of John Cook and Jason.
By the way, Jason, did you know that the majority of quoted sentences in the narrative sections where the action was taking place even as the person was speaking (present action) that the sentence structure consists of subject noun (or pronoun on the verb)—verb in Qatal—object if applicable? This is particularly true of pre-exile books.
Participles are used less often.
It appears that the Qatal is used when the subject is the emphasis. Participles when the action is the emphasis.
I did a survey one time when reading Tenakh through.
Karl W. Randolph.
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2022 7:28 am
by Jason Hare
kwrandolph wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 11:53 pm
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:26 pm
Principle intent: Don’t take someone’s word for it. Investigate the issue for yourself.
And that includes taking the word of John Cook and Jason.
By the way, Jason, did you know that the majority of quoted sentences in the narrative sections where the action was taking place even as the person was speaking (present action) that the sentence structure consists of subject noun (or pronoun on the verb)—verb in Qatal—object if applicable? This is particularly true of pre-exile books.
Participles are used less often.
It appears that the Qatal is used when the subject is the emphasis. Participles when the action is the emphasis.
I did a survey one time when reading Tenakh through.
Karl W. Randolph.
I’ve become convinced, against popular opinion, that the unmarked word order of biblical Hebrew was subject-verb-object (SVO). Robert Holmstedt has written several articles relating to word order that have me convinced. I’m glad that we seem to have agreement on that question. 
I don’t know if SVO is the right designation. It seems to have operated like German, in which the verb occupies second position. First position is naturally occupied by the subject, but if something else is fronted for whatever reason, then the subject drops behind the verb. It could be a temporal statement, the vav-prefix used for the narrative past (vayyiqtol), a fronted object, etc. Whatever it is, it displaces the subject and causes it to drop lower in the structure. Modals of volition (jussives, cohortatives, imperatives) take precedence and are themselves fronted and then followed by the subject.
Re: imperfect as past tense
Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:29 am
by Mike Atnip
Jason Hare wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 9:26 pm
I don’t feel like opening another argument up with Karl on this issue. I disagree with him. Forms do normally correspond to tense, though the system is more nuanced than Karl will accept. The vayyiqtol is the form used for narrative past tense. The veyiqtol is used as a jussive (“let”) or modal (“could, would, should”) form in the past. The qatal is used as a past tense generally (even pluperfect at times). At other times, the qatal can be used modally, especially in conditionals and when attached as veqatal. The issue that must be understood is that these are final forms that developed from older forms that were more distinct. The entire discussion of the system is well presented in John Cook’s Time and the Biblical Hebrew Verb: The Expression of Tense, Aspect, and Modality in Biblical Hebrew (Eisenbrauns, 2012), which Karl has not read.
Principle intent: Don’t take someone’s word for it. Investigate the issue for yourself.
As a beginner, I try to remain neutral on debated topics until I have at least investigated both sides. For Greek I just finished the book "The Greek Verb Revisited." Too much material in there for me to digest, but enough to let me know that being dogmatic on a position is doubly dangerous for beginners.
Thanks to all for the input.