I was thinking that when a waw prefix isn't waw consecutive, it's termed waw conjunctive.
and that's said here
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/ ... frontcover
"simple waw.. waw that is not consecutive..
that's often called conjunictive waw or copulative waw"
so it's talking there about a vav preix with a shva,
But i'm thinking that actually.. if a vav isn't vav consecutive, it could be that it's not vav conjunctive, but is vav disjunctive.
i'm not sure what it's referring to re "ambiguous"? "the meaning of imperfect with simple waw is disputed"
But is it also fair to say that a waw that is not consecutive, might be conjunctive, or might be disjunctive?
And also, that the way to disntinguish whether that waw is conjunctive or disjunctive is purely based on the semantic context..
https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/ ... frontcover
Gen 39:11 VeAin that's a disjunctive vav (could be translated as "and" or "but")
Whereas a conjunctive vav would be translated as "and".
But is the grammar the same for conjunctive and disjunctive vav? e.g. both if followed by a Bet/Mem/Peh, will turn into a Vav Shuruk?
Ralph Zak