נִשְׁקָֽף in Psalm 85.11: why translated as imperfect?

[Andrew Chapman]

Max Rogland has a chapter disputing (as I understand it, from a cursory look) the gnomic qatal, and argues for the past tense here in Psalm 111.5:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ije ... &q&f=false

(This is different to the English perfects I was looking at, but just thought it was of interest.)

[Jason Hare]

I know that John Cook deals a lot with verbal forms. We'll try to get his feedback on this and let you know. He isn't currently active on B-Hebrew, but we have a way to reach him.

[Andrew Chapman]

Thanks Jason.

The introductory section 1.1 of 'The Gnomic qatal' by Alexander Andrason helpfully distinguishes three views:

1) an 'experiential perfect' - a general truth derived from past experience - this is what I was thinking.
2) an aspectual view - that the gnomic qatal is used when a universal situation is viewed as a single event, rather than an ongoing repetition.
3) Rogland's thesis - that there is no gnomic qatal - the verb preserves its inherent past temporal value.

https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/d ... TEXT01.pdf

[Jemoh66]

In my own personal view, and that includes knowledge of two East African languages (both Hebrew and Swahili for example are afroasiatic umbrella), neither the qatal nor the yiqtol in these examples varies its own meaning; they work in tandem, the same way a weqatal might follow a wayyiqtol. When a yiqtol follows a qatal it seems an ancient native speaker feels compelled to use a MODAL verb, which is an intangible feeling for a non native speaker, and untranslatable. Just like modern English speakers no longer have a feel for the subjunctive:
He studied hard so he can pass the test, instead of
He studied hard that he might pass the test. In my view all that’s going on here is the native BH speaker wants a modal in that follow up verb, hence the yiqtol.