the bh weqatal a homogenous form with no haphazard functions (part 2). journal of northwest semitic...

Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 38/1 (2012), pp. 1-30

Alexander Andrason (University of Stellenbosch)

THE BH WEQATAL A HOMOGENOUS FORM WITH NO HAPHAZARD

FUNCTIONS (PART 2)1

ABSTRACT

This article constitutes the second part of a study which demonstrates that by applying panchronic methodology, all temporal, aspectual, modal, textual and consecutive values offered by the BH weqatal (both by its discursive and narrative variants) may be explained as manifestations of a single, functionally coherent and rational phenomenon – one consistent and typologically plausible functional path, i.e. a modal contamination which a Proto-Northwest Semitic consecutive and contingent input periphrasis (composed by the contingent coordinative-consecutive lexeme *wa and a resultative verbal adjective *qatal(a)) originally experienced in conditional apodoses. Furthermore, the panchronic definition of the BH weqatal will enable us to conclude that the gram is a distinct (even though genetically related) phenomenon to the BH qatal because the two categories are products of different functional trajectories and distinct grammaticalization scenarios.

1. SYNCHRONICALLY BASED HYPOTHESIS - THE POINT

WHERE WE LEFT OUR DISCUSSION

In the previously published part of the study (see “The BH weqatal. A homogenous form with no haphazard functions; Part 1”), we observed that the synchronic evidence and the universal laws of functional paths suggest that different uses of the discursive weqatal parallel subsequent phases of the modal contamination trajectory. Concretely, the consecutive value (the least relying on the precise form of verbs in introductory clauses) corresponds to the initial stage where the gram (most likely) did not provide any proper inherent modal connotations. At that time, the formation, whatever the exact input components were, must have conveyed among others the meaning of consecution (thus, it semantically depended on the event expressed in preceding portions of speech/text

1 This article is a result of the research project carried out by myself in co-

operation with Prof. Christo van der Merwe in the Department of Ancient

Studies (University of Stellenbosch) in 2010. I would like to thank Prof. van

der Merwe for guiding me through the world of Biblical studies and especially

for his unceasing and passionate willingness to discuss with me various details

of the Hebrew language.

2 ALEXANDER ANDRASON

which approximates a notion of contingency). The hypothetical apodotic (contingent) sense reflects the phases of the first modal contamination – the original indicative consecutive expression extensively employed in conditional real apodoses was gradually identified with the meaning characteristic for the context in which it appeared. The use of the formation as a simple future (met both in explicit future and neutral “independent” environments), closely related to the real apodotic weqatal, matches a successive partial emancipation of the gram – previously identified with the prospective value – from the conditional context where it was born to unmarked non-contingent milieu. Finally, the volitional meanings (strongly relying on heading locutions) reflect the second contamination, triggered by the use of preceding explicit modal expressions like imperative, cohortative, and jussive, which is certainly connected with an increasing generalization of the gram as a modal contingent form. Hence, these values mirror the phase of a progressive spread of the modally coloured formation to other dependent modal situations. Likewise, the hypothetical protetic and final-purpose values of the weqatal correspond to an extension and generalization of the gram as a proper modal and dependent (in most cases, contingent2) category.

The above-hypothesized diachronic scenario has been deduced from the synchronic evidence (taxonomy of functions and meanings). As explained in the first part of our research, the synchronic panchrony does not, by itself and in isolation from other facts, constitute a valid explanation. In particular, we have affirmed that the deduction of diachrony from synchrony may sometimes be misleading. The ambiguity of explanations achieved by means of the synchronic panchrony, is especially evident in the case of the modal contamination path. This trajectory, in difference with other functional evolutions (such as for instance the resultative path) strongly depends on the contextual factors and its semantic characteristics are significantly less predictable (note that the only stages of the development are: indicative > modally contaminated indicative > modality identified with the context, cf. Section 2.2 in the previously published Part 1). Consequently, the identification of particular meanings of a formation as subsequent stages of the modal contamination is, without sound diachronic and comparative data, a matter of guessing. Therefore, we have concluded that our proposal – based on the synchronic

2 The protetic function corresponds to a dependent subordinate modality but not

necessarily to a contingent one. However, it might have arisen from contingent

uses (cf. Section 1.2 below).

THE BH WEQATAL 3

panchrony – must be confronted with two other types of the panchronic method: the diachronic and comparative panchrony. What follows, if our hypothesis is correct, is the assumption that the definition of the weqatal as a modally contaminated path should be consistent with diachronic and comparative data.

As far as the diachronic panchrony is concerned, we expect that evidence provided by Semitic diachronic linguistics will show that the weqatal historically derives from a non-modal expression accompanied by an evident consecutive tone. Furthermore, the modal contamination should have begun in the real conditional context, and the values offered by the BH gram, both temporal and modal, should be compatible with the input from which the formation emerged. In the next section (2.1), we will study the weqatal from the panchronically diachronic perspective verifying whether historical evidence supports our understanding of the Biblical construction.

2. VERIFYING THE HYPOTHESIS

2.1 Diachronic Panchrony

According to the commonly accepted view, the weqatal is a successor of an ancient periphrasis which originally consisted of two independent items preserved in Biblical Hebrew as -qatal and we-. As far as the unit -qatal is concerned, one is dealing with historically the same grammatical element as the qatal (suffixed conjugation). In other words, there is no evidence which would allow positing two historically distinct suffix conjugations of which one appears in the Bible as the (simple or non-augmented) qatal while the other surfaces as a part of the weqatal (Waltke & O’Connor 1990:521-523; Smith 1991:6-15; Lambdin & Huehnergard 1998; Kienast 2001; Lipiński 2001:514-515; Cook 2008:6-7). The simple qatal is a manifestation of a resultative diachrony originated in the Proto-Semitic (PS) verbal resultative verbal adjective *qata/i/ul (Huehnergard 1987:221-223; Andersen 2000:31; Lipiński 2001:336-337 and 341; Cook 2002:209-219). Hence, the element -qatal – an integral part of the weqatal – must have the same resultative roots (cf. Cook 2002:218). On the other hand, the unit we- (likewise the wa- of the wayyiqtol) is related to the coordinative-consecutive particle ו (Waltke & O’Connor 1990:521-523; Smith 1991:12-15). In consequence, from the diachronic perspective, the weqatal emerged from an analytical locution formed by the *qatal(a) of the resultative path and the coordinative-consecutive (and thus semantically contingent) conjunction *wa. This means that the


consecutive meaning was inherent to the periphrasis stemming from the incorporation of the independent lexeme, i.e. the *wa which linked the periphrasis to the preceding portion of speech and/or text. In Biblical Hebrew, the original Proto-Northwest Semitic3 (PNS) periphrasis *wa+qatal(a) was profoundly grammaticalized turning into a synthetic gram. Thus, the weqatal is a highly developed descendent of the initial resultative-consecutive (contingent) sequence, the originally autonomous segments having fused into a new conjugation.

It should be observed that the input expression was not inherently modal: neither the PS *qatal(a) nor the ancestor of the element we- provided values explicitly related to the concept of modality. However, as indicated by Old Babylonian,4 even in the most primary phases of the development, the PS *qatal(a) could have appeared in modal contexts offering prospective readings (see the uses of the parsaku in optative, prohibitive and conditional constructions below, examples 1. a-f (cf. also Lipiński 1991:515). In fact, being an adjectival atemporal and modally unmarked formation, the construction was employed in any temporal sphere and in various modal situations acquiring the meaning of the environment. Thus, in the explicitly future and modal context, the PS *qatal(a), and hence the PNW *wa+qatal(a), would have offered modal and future readings.

3 I follow the nomenclature and dialectal division of the Semitic languages

employed in Lambdin & Huehnergard (1998) and Huehnergard (2005).

According to this view, Hebrew, Phoenician (the two labelled as Canaanite),

Aramaic and Ugaritic form jointly the Northwest group. Then, the Northwest

Semitic languages together with Arabic and its dialects are referred to as the

Central Semitic branch. Finally, the Central Semitic and Ethiopian (as well as

Modern South Arabian) languages establish all together the West Semitic sub-

family, distinct from East Semitic languages documented by Akkadian and

Eblaite. 4 Of course, this does not mean that the BH form derives from the Akkadian one.

The Old Babylonian examples are used to illustrate that a similar situation

should have taken place in the early, unrecorded, history of Central and

Northwest Semitic languages and thus of Hebrew as well.

THE BH WEQATAL 5

(1) a. ē naš’āti5 You may not bring (Lipiński 2001:526)

b. kaspum lā nadin The silver may/must not be given (Huehnergard 2005:223)

c. lū dannātunu Be strong (Huehnergard 2005:223)

d. šumma libbu pu-uh ʡʡ ʡʡ - hʡʡ ʡʡu-ur -ma h ʡʡ ʡʡa-ni-iq If the heart is (will be) contracted and squeezed (YOS 10 42 i 30 OB om. in Rowton 1962:270)

e. u šumma ālam la-wi-at ana libbišu terrub … if you are besieging a town (when the omen in question is observed), you will enter it (YOS 10 4: 9 OB ext. in Rowton 1962:248)

f. abullam šâti [u]l teppešā ... [u]l ka-áš-da-tu-nu You will not be able to construct that gateway, you will not succeed (ARM 3 78: 26 OB let. in Rowton 1962:270)

According to Moran (1950:74 and 1961:65), Smith (1991:12-15) and Rainey (1996:358-363), the transformation of this periphrastic locution into an autonomous conjugation (the BH weqatal) originated in its regular use in real conditional apodoses. In this environment, the old sequence PNS *wa+qatal(a) provided an evident consecutive value delimitated by the context to prospective sphere (in real apodosis, this equals the future time frame), additionally, modally coloured (the formation was employed in a real hypothetical period): in that manner, the construction was employed as a real apodotic gram, viz. a “contingent future”. Consequently, following the most accepted view, we may affirm that the grammatical life of the weqatal began when the PNS periphrasis *wa+qatal(a) (built on independent resultative and consecutive items) was generalized in real conditional apodoses (Smith 1991:12-15 and Peled

5 All verbs that appear in the weqatal construction, as well as their translations,

will be given in bold type. The Hebrew quotations reflect the text of the Biblia

Hebraica Stuttgartensia: With Westminster Hebrew Morphology (1996). The

English translation, unless stated otherwise, comes from The Holy Bible: New

Revised Standard Version (1989). Also the relevant verbal forms in examples

from other Semitic languages, and their translation, will be emphasized with

bold type.


1992:12). Only from there, it spread to other situations increasing the repertoire of its contingent modal functions (Cook 2002:227-228). Thus, the modal expansion of the gram is commonly understood as a progressive intensification of the modal value acquired first in conditional periods. This development would concord with a typologically common behaviour of modal grams which frequently spread to other subordinated contexts gradually expanding their modal character (Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca 1994:26).

However, the increasing use of the category in explicit modal positions may also stem from the prospective sense of the weqatal which in the real apodotic milieu equals future meaning. Namely, futures grams (as the real apodotic weqatal which usually corresponded to a prospective category) frequently become complements in subordinate contexts, following verbs such as “want” or “order” and appearing in purpose clauses or in protases. Furthermore, they may develop into imperatives (Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca 1994:240).6

In fact, since the borderline between futurity and modality is not clear-cut, both the modal and the future value of the weqatal might have played a role in the expansion of the gram to further modal environments. As noted by Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca (1994:280), there is universal semantic proximity between futures and moods. The central function of all futures is the intention or the prediction, and hence, the future is less an exclusively temporal category but more “resembling agent-oriented and epistemic modality, with important temporal implications”. Consequently, prospective grams – even those which have been grammaticalized as a primary expression of futurity – can be accompanied by modal tone encouraging their own use in modal context and conversion into modal categories.

Given the resultative origin of the weqatal, a question arises: how can we explain the fact that the gram does not provide a taxis meaning of anteriority, but to the contrary as demonstrated in the first part of the

6 This stems from the fact that the grammatical life of future tenses begin and

ends in modal formations: lexical modal expressions > modal future > future

tense > syntactic mood(s) (Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca 1994:274). Even when

functioning as a prototypical future tense, a gram may offer some infrequent

modal values (cf. the Spanish simple future which in some cases have a modal

reading, Andrason 2010a:28-29)

THE BH WEQATAL 7

study, is employed as a simple7 modal and prospective-future category? This problem can be solved by means of a common and well documented evolutionary fact: resultative expressions (and/or perfects), employed in the explicit future time context may evolve into simple futures. The phenomenon may be illustrated by Latin constructions like meminero “I will remember” (a simple future meaning but a future perfect form, cf. amavero “I will have loved”), by the Polish analytic future będę robił “I will do” which derives from an old Polish expression with the meaning “I will have done” (Długosz-Kurczakowa & Dubisz 2003), by the Vilamovicean future Yhy wo gybata “I will ask (lit. I will [have] asked)” (Andrason 2010b) or by the Yiddish conditional Ix wolt gezogt “I would tell (lit. I would [have] told)” (Geller 1994:51). As observed above, in the case of the BH gram, the future reading is imposed by the real conditional environment which also adds a modal tone to the resultative formation. In this position, the successor of the resultative *qatal(a) – similarly to what happened in Latin and in Polish – lose its resultative connotations and turned into a simple prospective-future gram. In other words, it did not follow the resultative path which is the prototypical evolutionary scenario for original resultative constructions. Since the future temporal reference stemmed from the conditional environment, the identification of the weqatal with the real prospective and thus future time sphere was inseparable from the modal progression of the gram. And consequently it is not surprising that the gram can frequently provide both the modal and future force.

Suma sumarum, the diachronic evidence is entirely consistent with our definition of the weqatal as a modally contaminated diachrony based on a non-modal consecutive (contingent) expression. The gram derives from a PS indicative atemporal resultative formation *qatal(a) augmented by an independent consecutive-coordinative lexeme (related to Hebrew ו) which connected it to the preceding fragment of speech and/or text. This initial contingent PNS locution was generalized first in real apodosis receiving a more customary prospective (future) and modally tinted values, both prototypical to the real conditional context in which it originated. The temporal and modal meanings of the weqatal are, therefore, entirely compatible with the input from which the gram emerged, namely from the PS *qatal(a) which even though indicative and temporally undetermined,

7 The term “simple” is employed in the sense of a non-taxis (resultative, anterior

or perfect) and non-aspectual (perfective) formation, as for instance in the

English simple past I did or the French passé simple je fis.


could easily be employed in modal and prospective situations. The original resultative connotations disappeared and the gram does not provide any taxis (resultativity, anteriority, perfect) values. Finally, volitional, purpose and prothetic values are products of a gradual – and typologically common – expansion of the (modal future) contingent gram to other modal dependent environments.8

The posterior evolution of the construction, albeit not conclusive, does not contradict our definition. In Late Biblical Hebrew (LBH) the discursive weqatal was still attested (as documented by some prospective and prophetic uses in Qumran Hebrew) suffering however a gradual decay.9 In Mishnaic Hebrew, the (future modal) weqatal disappeared (Joosten 2006:143-145).10

After having demonstrated that the diachronic panchrony confirms our synchronically based understanding of the weqatal, we shall proceed to study the comparative evidence and see whether the comparative panchrony further corroborates the explanation of the gram in terms of a modal contamination path.

2.2 Comparative Panchrony

In order to comparatively confirm the thesis founded in the synchronic and diachronic data, several pieces of evidence must be discussed. First, if our proposal is correct, one would expect to detect genetically related formations in other Semitic languages – composed by the consecutive-coordinative morpheme and a successor of the PS *qatal(a) – which furthermore offer similar values to those recorded in Biblical Hebrew, especially consecutive and real hypothetical ones. Second, since the weqatal appears to be a contextualization of the original simple PS *qatal(a) – through an element related to the conjunction ו – one would

8 It is likely that the use of the weqatal in protases as a subordinate (but not

necessarily contingent) modality stemmed from its original contingent nature.

In the language of Amarna, the construction was used in complex protases,

where it depended on a preceding (frequently injunctive) verbal form (Rainey

1996:360). 9 As maintained by Joosten (2006), the reduction of the modal weqatal was

related to the extension of the functional load of the yiqtol. 10 As noted by Smith (1991:59-63), the weqatal is frequently met in Qumran texts

with the future value. Smith (1991:64) also argues that the system of

“converted” tenses (i.e. with the successor of the PNS *wa), and hence the

weqatal, reflected more formal and literary usage.

THE BH WEQATAL 9

assume that in languages which do not include in their verbal repertoire a category strictly corresponding to the BH weqatal, the direct descent of the non-augmented PS *qatal(a) should display a highly similar functional load to that provided by the Hebrew construction. In other words, in such languages, the equivalent of the non-augmented PS *qatal(a), employed in similar context to those in which the weqatal is met, should provide analogous values – in both cases, one is supposedly dealing with a modal contamination. Thirdly, the modal meaning of both augmented and simple descendents of the PS *qatal(a) is expected to be more generalized in real conditional phrases since this environment hypothetically constituted the starting point of the modal contamination. In order to provide an answer to the above posed questions and to verify whether the comparative panchrony confirms our hypothesis we will briefly analyze a few members of the Semitic linguistic group: the dialect of Amarna, Old Babylonian, Arabic, Ugaritic and Phoenician-Punic.11

In the language of the Amarna tablets, one finds a construction which morphologically and functionally matches the BH weqatal – this is what we will refer to as u qatala, a formation which consists of the suffix conjugation qatala (descent of the PS *qatal(a)) and the consecutive-coordinative particle u (related to the Hebrew morpheme we-). According to Moran (1950:74) and Rainey (1996:358), the u qatala is extensively employed in real conditional apodoses where it denotes future events (2.a). Albeit the expression quite regularly surfaces as the immediate sequence u qatala, it is still analytical and in some infrequent cases may be separated by other lexical elements (Rainey 1996). This fact panchronically corresponds to a less advanced stage of the formal development of the gram. The construction partially preserves its original periphrastic character showing less consistent positional fixation (Hopper & Traugott 2003:52-55, 62 and 148) than its homologue in Biblical Hebrew (2.b). The u qatala can also appear in complex apodotic sequences (i.e. in apodoses composed by various propositions) or following explicitly injunctive forms like the jussive (2.c). In some cases, the gram may provide purpose meaning (2.d). At last, it can also follow an imperative, yet again offering a final-purpose reading (2.e).

11 Also the Ge‘ez language from the Ethiopic family will be mentioned during the

comparative analysis.


(2) a. šum-ma ti-iš-mu-na a-sí-mi ERÍN.MEŠ pí-tá-ti ù i-zi-bu URU.MEŠ-šu-nu ù pa-at-ru

If they hear “The regular army has gone for the”, then they will abandon their towns and depart (EA 73:11-14 in Rainey 1996:360)

b. šum-ma-mi a-na-ku us-sú-na UGU KUR ša LUGAL ù a-na ia-ši in4-né-ep-ša-ta

If I go forth against the land of the king, then will you be aligned with me? (EA 333:15-18 in Rainey 1996:361)

c. šum-ma ki-a-ma la-a ti-iq-bu ù i-te-zi-ib UR[U] ù pa-at-ra-ti If thus you do not speak, then I will abandon the ci[ty] and

depart (EA 83:45-47 in Rainey 1996:360)

d. ˹šum˺ -ma lìb-bi LUGAL be-li-ia a-˹na˺ na-sa-˹ ar˺ URU-šu ù ya-[d]i-˹na7˺ BE-ia ˹ LÚ˺.MEŠ ma-sa-ar-<ti> ˹ a˺ -[n]a ˹URU˺ ˹ù˺ na-as-ra-at

If the king, my lord, is of a mind to protect his city, then let my lord give garrison troops for the city that it may be protected (EA 127:26-29 in Rainey 1996:362)

e. 3 LÚ ša-a šu-ri-ib IPí-hʡu-ra uš-š[i-]ra ù bal-t á-ti Send the three men whom Pihʡura had sent (to Egypt) in order

that I may survive (EA 123:33-35 in Rainey 1996:363) The Ugaritic language possesses an expression which perfectly matches the BH weqatal, i.e. a construction composed by the suffix conjugation and the prefixed coordinative-conjunction w (certainly related to the BH element we- and the Amarna morpheme u). As in Biblical Hebrew and in the Amarna dialect, the formation usually appears in real conditional apodoses denoting consecutive future events (3.a) (Mallon 1982:51-54, 77, Sivan 2001:98 and Smith 1991:8-12). In some cases, the gram may provide a final reading of purpose (3.b).12 (3) a. w hm hʡt ‘l w l’ikt ‘mk (2.30, 17-18)

And if the Hittite has attacked, then I will send (a letter) to you (Sivan 2001:98)

12 Similarly to the situation in the Arabic language, Ugaritic could also employ

the particle p (as the Arabic ف, a direct descendent of the older *pa) to convey

the consecutive meaning (see in this paragraph below).

THE BH WEQATAL 11

b. [w] [’u] ˹n˺t ’inn ‘d tttbn ksp ’iwrkl w tb l ’unsthm (3.4, 16-19) And they do not have a feudal obligation until they return the money of Iwirkallu, then they [will] return to their feudal obligation (Sivan 2001:98)

Also the Phoenician-Punic language includes in its repertoire an analogous construction formed by the qatal and the particle w. As expected, the sequence, found in most frequently real conditional apodoses, indicates future consecutive activities (Krahmalkov 1986:5-10 and 2001:176-177;13 Smith 1991:14; Waltke & O’Connor 1990:529; Fassber & Hurvitz 2006:65). It should be observed that the use of the element w was not obligatory but seemed to be determined by stylistic reasons (Krahmalkov 2001).14

Albeit Arabic, a language from the Central Semitic sub-group, does not includes in its repertoire a fully grammaticalized construction analogous to the BH weqatal, the qatala gram – a direct descendant of the PS *qatal(a) and thus the cognate of the BH qatal – is extensively employed in real conditional periods. In apodoses, similarly to the situation observed in Biblical Hebrew and in Amarna, it may include an additional consecutive morpheme, in this case the particle ف. Since Arabic, contrary to Hebrew and Amarna, differentiates between a coordinative particle و and a consecutive conjunction ف (see the discussion in this section below), it frequently employs the second one in conditional apodoses (4.a)15 where it means “and so, and consequently” (Wright 1967.I.291 and II.345). Even though in various cases this use is facultative, in multiple instances, the insertion of the ف is obligatory (see Haywood & Nahmad 1965:293 for details). One should note that the consecutive element ف may be separated from the inflected verb form and prefixed to another lexeme (4.b). This clearly corresponds to the situation in the Amarna dialect and is a sign of a less fixed word order (cf. positional fixation) and

13 To the contrary, Garr (2004:180) states that a cognate of the BH weqatal is not

attested in Standard Phoenician. 14 Waltke & O’Connor (1990:529) criticize this view and claim that the use of the

particle was historically obligatory “and only [came] to be omitted at a

relatively advanced stage in development”. 15 Conditional apodoses are highly propitious for employing consecutive particles

given the fact they denote a logical and/or temporal consequence of the

situation expressed in the protases.


thus of a less profound grammaticalization. As far as the functional load is concerned, the (fa)qatala functions in the apodotic context as a modally coloured simple future with no aspectual (perfectivity) or taxis (anteriority) connotations (4.c and 4.d). It is also interesting to note that the particle fa may introduce result clauses (being followed by the subjunctive yaqtula). In such instances – similarly to what we have observed in case of the weqatal – it must be preceded by the imperative or words equivalent to it. Finally, it can also express wishes and hopes (Wright 1967:II.30-31).

(4) a. م�آ�ام ��ىى�ان آ�� ا�� ه�� If you art ’Ibn Hammām, mayest thou be saluted with honour! (Wright 1967:II.3)

b. ان ى��ق�ق �� اخ If he steals, a brother of his did indeed steal before … (Qur-án 12.77)

c. ان � ذه��ز! ذه#� If Zèid goes, I will go with him (Haywood & Nahmad 1965:290)

d. ان ��$�ه�� ذ If you do this, you will perish (Wright 1967:15)

The comparative evidence entirely confirms our definition of the weqatal as a modally contaminated path. As expected, one may find, in other Semitic languages, formations that both morphologically and functionally equal the BH gram: the u qatala in Amarna (an analytical, infrequently separable, construction predominantly employed in real apodoses with the future meaning), the w qatala in Ugaritic (commonly met in real conditional apodotic context denoting future events), the w qatal in Phoenician-Punic (with a possible omission of the consecutive particle; yet again the gram is found in real apodoses with the future time reference), and finally, to an extent, (fa)qatala in Arabic (frequent in apodoses). The above mentioned languages, together with Biblical Hebrew, from the panchronic perspective, represent diverse phases of the grammaticalization of genetically the same construction: a periphrastic expression built on the successor of the PS *qatal(a) introduced by a (coordinative-)consecutive particle. In some languages (as for instance in Arabic), the successor of the PS *qatal(a) together with the consecutive particle forms a “detachable” and “discontinuous” analytical periphrasis. In Amarna, the positional fixation of the formation is more regular, and

THE BH WEQATAL 13

although still analytical, the gram in most cases appears as a stable and unaltered sequence u qatala. Finally, in Biblical Hebrew, the formal grammaticalization is complete; the weqatal loses its original periphrastic character having turned into a synthetic gram, a new conjugation. As far as the functional load of all these genetically related locutions is concerned, they regularly appear in real conditional apodoses expressing future, modally coloured and consecutive events.

The consecutive value in all previously mentioned Semitic constructions derives from the use of an originally independent and explicitly consecutive lexeme (u in Amarna, w in Ugaritic and Punic, and fa in Arabic). One should note that the practice of employing a consecutive particle together with a verbal form in order to link sentences and provide temporal and/or logical consecutive (contingent) meaning is highly common in Semitic languages (see for instance the Old Babylonian -ma in Huehnergard 2005, the Arabic ف in Wright 1967:I.290-291 and II. 345 and Danecki 1994:364, Ugaritic p in Watson 1990:84-85, and especially the Biblical Hebrew w- in the form wayyiqtol in Waltke & O’Connor 1994:545 and Smith 1991:12-14). In Biblical Hebrew (contrary to the state of affairs in Arabic, Akkadian and partially in Ugaritic) the original Proto-Northwest Semitic (and as indicated by the Arabic evidence, Proto-Central Semitic) distinction between the coordinative and consecutive particles was not maintained, and the simple ו expressed both the idea of coordination and that of consecution (Waltke & O’Connor 1994:522-523).16 As far as the Northwest Semitic group is concerned, the successors of the PNS consecutive particle *pa “then, and then” – genetically related to the Arabic ف (Aartun 1978:1-14; Watson 1990:83-84) – is not abundant. It is attested in Ugaritic (Sivan 2001:188; Watson 1990:83-84), in certain Aramaic dialects (Jean & Hoftijzer 1965), and in scarce and disputed instances in Biblical Hebrew (Dahood 1966:307-308; Waltke & O’Connor 1994:655).

It is highly important to note that in Ugaritic, in some cases, the consecutive particle p and the coordinative w functioned as equivalents and the former could be replaced by the latter (Parker 1967:78; Watson 1990:78). In fact, the Ugaritic p, besides providing its original consecutive meaning of immediate succession and result (Pardee 1977:5), temporal and/or logical consequence (Tropper 2002:82) or of continuation and

16 According to Garr (2004:114-115), the original distinction between PNS *wa

(coordinative) and *pa (consecutive) was lost within the first millennium, the

latter being uniquely found in Old Aramaic and Samalian.


resumption (Aartun 1978:1-5), it can also be employed as a “simple coordinating conjunction” (Watson 1990:85). Furthermore, it shall be observed that both the p and the w appeared in the conditional periods introducing the apodosis (Parker 1967:72). Panchronically, this corresponds to an intermediate stage between the initial Proto-Northwest Semitic (or Proto-Central Semitic) situation (the two particles are clearly distinct) and the state of affairs in Biblical Hebrew (only the PNS *wa survived having incorporated the values of the *pa; thus, no distinction is made between the coordinative and consecutive variant).

Likewise, the evidence related to the simple qatal agrees with the proposed interpretation of the weqatal. In all languages – both in those which do not possess morphological homologues of the BH weqatal as well in those that has developed a similar formation – the simple and non-augmented successors of the PS *qatal(a) show modal and future uses which strictly correspond to the prototypical load of the weqatal and its cognates. Namely, similarly to the behaviour of the discursive weqatal, when these grams appear in real conditional phrases and in explicitly future contexts, they regularly provide future-modal meaning. As mentioned, this situation is highly frequent in the Semitic family and may be found for example in Akkadian (Huehnergard 2005), Arabic (Wright 1967:II.2-3; Danecki 1994:154; Kienast 2001:332; Haywood & Nahmad 1965:291), Amarna (Rainey 1996:357-359), Ugaritic (Sivan 2001:98) and Ge‘ez (Dillmann 1907:547-550).17

Let us now consider the Akkadian case. Old Babylonian does not possess a formation which would morphologically match the weqatal. Nevertheless, as we have already mentioned, the parsaku – homologue of the BH qatal and descendant of the PS *qatal(a) – can provide prospective and modal interpretation (see paragraph 2.1 above). In particular, when the parsaku appears in contexts which are similar to those in which the weqatal is met, it frequently refers to future activities, expresses real hypothetical events and denotes various modal values, especially optative, jussive and final ones. The Akkadian construction, as

17 I am not claiming here that a given successor of the PS *qatal(a) in a concrete

language is frequently employed as a future tense or as a mood. Prospective

and modal uses are certainly less common than perfect(ive) and past functions.

However, the ability to express future events and modally coloured situations is

frequent and, as already noted, documented in virtually all members of the

Semitic family. Put differently, such uses are specifically infrequent but

globally widespread.

THE BH WEQATAL 15

the BH qatal and the PS *qatal(a), is a prototypical resultative diachrony. In Old Babylonian, structural and semantic properties of the parsaku indicate that the gram mirrors initial phases of the functional and grammatical development, cf. for instance a dominant patientive-passive interpretation of transitive roots, or a different arrangement of intern verbal constituents, especially of the transitive subject and the object, in the parsaku on the one hand and in further finite verbal forms, e.g. iprus, iparras and iptaras on the other. The formation is still not entirely verbalized, remaining partially nominal or pseudo-verbal (Buccellati 1968:2; Huehnergard 1987:229-232). Consequently, the behaviour of the OB parsaku shows that the successors of the PS *qatal(a) from the earliest time, even in the initial stage of the grammaticalization, could be employed in modal environments and with a future time reference (see again examples 1.a-f).

In fact, this situation – i.e., the non-indicative and prospective use of the non-augmented successor of the PS *qatal(a) – may be observed in Biblical Hebrew itself where the simple qatal may offer modal and future readings. In the explicit future time context, it frequently corresponds to the future perfect (especially with particles like עד אם and אם אשר עד, 5.a) or to the futurum exactum (future of certainty, 5.b). In conditional phrases, with the particle אם and, in some cases, כי, it expresses real and possible conditions (5.c). It is also employed in hypothetical phrases with .both in protases and apodoses, corresponding to an irrealis (5.d) ,לוFurthermore, when one of the segments of the conditional period is not expressed, the gram provides optative meaning of an unrealizable or counterfactual desire (5.e). Finally, in limited instances, the formation expresses realizable wishes showing precative value (5.f).

(5) a. Gen 24:33 ד אם־ ל ע א אכ רתיל רתידב רתידב רתידב י דב דבר

I will not eat until I have told my errand

b. Num 24:17 � �דר �דר �דר ב דר ב כוכ יעק ם מ בט ו ק למ ש ישרא

A star shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel;

c. 2 Kgs 7:4 ם ואם־אמרנו אמרנו אמרנו אמרנו אם־ תנו ש ב בעיר ומ יר והרע בנו נבוא הע בנו יש בנו יש בנו יש תנו יש ה ומ פ

If we say, ‘Let us enter the city,’ the famine is in the city, and we shall die there; but if we sit here, we shall also die.


d. Judg 13:23 ץלו ץחפ ץחפ ץחפ א־ חפ נו ל חיהוה להמית חל ק חל ק חל ק ה ל ק ה ומנח נו על מיד

If the LORD had meant to kill us, he would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering at our hands …

e. Gen 26:10 מעט נו כ ית ל את עש במה־ז בשכ בשכ בשכ : שכ ד העם את־אשת אח

What is this you have done to us? One of the people might easily have lain with your wife …

f. Ps 22:22 י אריה ים הושיעני מפ ניומקרני רמ ניענית ניענית ניענית ענית

Save me from the mouth of the lion! From the horns of the wild oxen you have rescued me. (cf. NASB 1999: Save me from the lion’s mouth; From the horns of the wild oxen You answer me)

As a final point, it shall be noted that the non-augmented modal reflexes of the PS *qatal(a) as well as the direct homologues of the weqatal are best documented in conditional phrases. This means that values related to hypothetical periods correspond to the most frequent modal uses of the grams, and hence, constitute their innermost functional load. Furthermore, in all the languages, the modal-future contamination (conventionalization or semantization of modal-future value) of the formations analyzed here is the most profound in the conditional environment. In this context, they usually function as clearly modal expressions with no evident taxis or aspectual value, prototypical to their input, i.e. the indicative PS *qatal(a) of the resultative path (see, for instance, the aspect and taxis-free meaning of the Arabic qatala in Haywood & Nahmad 1965:291).

In view of the presented evidence, we may affirm that the comparative data entirely support our definition of the weqatal in terms of a modal contamination (originated in real conditional phrases) of an old periphrasis built on the indicative input extended by an explicitly consecutive item. We have detected the three expected facts: first, various Semitic languages possess genetically related formations to the BH construction which display an analogous functional load (particularly, consecutive and real hypothetical ones). Second, the descendents of the non-augmented PS *qatal(a), employed in similar contexts to those in which the weqatal is met, provide analogous values to those conveyed by the Hebrew gram. And third, the modal meaning of both augmented and

THE BH WEQATAL 17

simple descendents of the PS *qatal(a) is the most generalized in real conditional phrases.18

2.3 Discourse weqatal – panchronic definition

In the previous sections, we have demonstrated that by applying the panchronic methodology it is possible to explain the discursive weqatal as a modally contaminated diachrony of an earlier consecutive expression which originated in the real hypothetical context.

Our definition was first deduced from the synchronically provided data, i.e., from the repertoire of values provided by the BH discursive weqatal. We hypothesized that the consecutive meaning, being the least reliant on the verbal form employed in introductory clauses, must reflect the initial phase. During that stage the former non-consecutive formation acquired a consecutive (contingent) value, i.e. originally external consecutive connotations were incorporated into the constructions becoming intrinsic. The real conditional apodotic (contingent) value matches the period of the first modal contamination. The initial indicative (consecutive and contingent) locution regularly employed in real apodoses assumed the particular meaning of the context (modal future) as its own. The simple future and non-contingent sense (found in explicit future and neutral environments) stems from a gradual emancipation of the expression from its original hypothetical apodotic milieu. The gram was liberated from the conditional context where it was born, preserving, however, the previously acquired prospective force. Finally, the entire range of volitional values, as well as the use in conditional protases and in purpose clauses, reflects an extension of the gram, already identified with the contingent modal function, to further modal contexts. This explanation, founded in the BH synchronically available evidence, has subsequently been corroborated by the diachronic and comparative panchrony.

The diachronic studies show that the weqatal indeed has originated in an analytical periphrasis composed by the PS *qatal(a) (a resultative diachrony – originally atemporal and indicative) and an independent lexical item which explicitly provided the (coordinative-)consecutive

18 In my opinion, modal meanings of the BH non-augmented qatal cannot lead to

the conclusion whereby the weqatal and the qatal synchronically constitute the

same gram as argued by Cook (2002) because – as will be demonstrated in the

second part of the paper (Andrason 2012) – the evolutionary path along which

the weqatal followed was distinct from the trajectory of the qatal (for the

criticism of the model posited by Cook 2002 see Andrason 2011).


connotations and which linked the element *qatal(a) to a preceding portion of speech and/or text (this corresponds to the idea of contingency). This periphrastic resultative contingent sequence was first generalized in real apodoses where it acquired simple future meaning, modally coloured by the hypothetical context in which it appeared. The loss of the anterior value was explained as a regular case development whereby resultative expressions employed in the future time frame abandon their taxis (resultative, anterior or perfect) connotations. As far as this input construction is concerned, we have observed that it is compatible with all the values, either temporal (future and present) or modal (real hypothetical and volitional) offered by the weqatal.

Likewise, the comparative evidence confirms the definition of the BH gram in terms of a modal contamination. The formations which morphologically parallel the weqatal in other Semitic languages (Amarna, Ugaritic, Phoenician-Punic and Arabic) demonstrate a similar functional load being predominantly employed in real conditional apodoses with the future temporal sense. Moreover, structural properties of these constructions have enabled us to identify them with different but successive stages of the formal grammaticalization of the original expression: from the analytical discontinuous phase, through a more regular positional fixation, towards a transformation into a purely synthetic category. Similarly, the characteristics of the simple PS *qatal(a) and its non-augmented successors positively verify our thesis. In particular, we have noted that the non-augmented reflexes of the PS *qatal(a) are extensively employed with modal and prospective force in the entire Semitic family. The modal value is profoundly grammaticalized in conditional periods where the gram – an old resultative expression – has lost its taxis and aspectual content being entirely identified with the explicit modal context in which it appeared. This functional similarity between the weqatal (and its homologues in other Semitic languages) on the one hand, and the modal qatal (and non-augmented descendents of the PS *qatal(a)) on the other hand, demonstrates that the first one is a regular example of the grammaticalization and modal contamination of the simple PS *qatal(a) in modal environments and its gradual transformation into an independent category with a contextually motivated meaning adopted as its own.

All the evidence enables us to posit a complete definition of the discursive weqatal. From the panchronic perspective, all the values of the formation should be explained as successive stages of the development of

THE BH WEQATAL 19

the PS qatal(a) during which the non-augmented resultative gram turned into a new autonomous conjugation. First, one is dealing with a lexical contextualization of the simple PS *qatal(a) by the (coordinative-) consecutive particle which in Biblical Hebrew appears as we-. This particle having the meaning of “and then, and so” necessarily linked the PS *qatal(a) to events expressed in preceding phrases imposing its semantic dependency (contingency). This phase is reflected in the consecutive and contingent meaning of the weqatal. At the next stage, the analytical periphrasis *wa + *qatal(a) suffered a profound modal contamination originated by its extensive use in real conditional apodoses – this stage is suggested by a real apodotic and thus contingent modally tinted future meaning of the BH formation. Furthermore, in accordance with a common evolutionary pattern whereby future resultatives and perfects may lose their original taxis value developing into simple temporal expressions, the prospective modal weqatal is employed with no resultative force available. Finally, due to its increased grammaticalization and identification with the concept of the contingent modality (as well as because of the universal semantic proximity between futures and moods), the weqatal was extended and generalized in other dependent modal contexts incorporating volitional (imperative, cohortative, and jussive), protetic and final meanings. Moreover, the intense association of the gram with the idea of real prospectivity, and thus futurity, justified its emancipation and consequently the use with the simple non-contingent future value outside the original real conditional context.

This explanation of the discursive weqatal – coinciding with the diachronic models offered by Moran (1950:31-34), Smith (1991:12-15), Rainey (1996:358-363) and Peled (1992:12) and, to a certain degree, Cook (2002:227-228) – assures not only the functional continuity and homogeneity of the gram in Biblical Hebrew, but it also guarantees its relation with the PS *qatal(a) (and its non-augmented successors) which without any doubt constitutes the actual source of the Hebrew gram. In consequence, the panchronic vision connects the weqatal with its Proto-Semitic input. All this complex development may be illustrated by the following figure (Figure 1):


INPUT: *qatal(a) indicative and atemporal

RESULTATIVE PATH CONTEXTUALIZATION = PERIPHRASIS WITH THE waw WEQATAL

QATAL

*wa + qatal(a) > BH weqatal consecutive contingent meaning

MODAL CONTAMINATED PATH

1ST MODAL CONTAMINATION EMANCIPATION

REAL CONDITIONAL APODOSIS real apodotic modality future

contingent future

2ND MODAL CONTAMINATION = SPREAD

OTHER MODAL CONTEXTS contingent modality:

imperative, jussive, cohortative

protases and purpose clauses

Figure 1: Panchronic explanation of the discursive weqatal

From the typological perspective, in the Semitic family one may find cases where grams from contingent clauses having incorporated a linking particle as a part of its morphology were emancipated from dependent to independent positions. Moreover, in respect of the functional progress of such emancipated constructions they show a regular development from modality to futurity. The two processes match the evolution of the weqatal during which the contingent modally tinted gram became acceptable in non-contingent main clauses with simple future meaning.

In Mesopotamian qəltu Modern Arabic (Tuzlagözü) dialect, the Standard Arabic subjunctive yaqtula from dependent purpose clauses preceded by the introductory subordinate particle li ل “in order that, so that” (as in qultuhu li-yadrusa “I told him to learn [lit. so that he may learn]”) was reanalyzed as a future tense in main clauses, e.g. lēr �ō “he will go” (Jastrow 1978:303-304). Similarly, the Modern Standard Arabic purpose conjunction h�atta '() “to that, in order that” (qālaya h�atta ašraba “he told me to drink [lit. that I may drink]”) was agglutinated to the contingent modality (subjunctive) yaqtula and transposed to main clauses giving the rise to a future tense (Mardin) ta’ašrab and (Jewish ‘Aqra) tašrab “I will drink” (Jastrow 1978:302-303 and 1990:65). Similar development may be observed within the Ethiopic group in Tigrinya and Tigré (Rubin 2005:39-40). Finally, if – as may be deduced from Leslau

THE BH WEQATAL 21

(1941:91) – the morpheme kə derives from the particle ’ənka “so, then, therefore”, Tigrinya would offer a highly similar pattern of the derivation to that posited from the BH weqatal, built on a consecutive particle and a verbal form (cf. that other scholars, e.g. Cohen 1924:71 and Rubin 2005:39-40, relate the rise of the kə future in Tigrinya to purpose clauses which means in turn that the evolution equals the above-described development in Mesopotamian Arabic dialects).

3. NARRATIVE WEQATAL

Having explained the discursive weqatal we may now proceed to the analysis of its narrative counterpart. As we have previously indicated, the gram in the narration indicates explicative subordinated activities forming the background of the narrative story. In this usage, the formation provides a clear past time reference accompanied by the aspectual iterative-durative nuance.

It must be recalled that the discursive weqatal does not explicitly convey the idea of the anterior taxis or the perfective aspect. The gram, either in its modal or future sense, is aspectually and taxis neutral. In other words, the relevant semantic information provided by the weqatal in the discourse corresponds to the concepts of prospectivity and modality (as previously mentioned, both are related) and not to those of anteriority and perfectivity (as do the non-augmented *qatal(a) and its indicative successors). Consequently, the iterative-durative connotations of the narrative weqatal do not clash with the taxis-aspectual content of its discursive homologue.

We have also affirmed that since the PS *qatal(a) is one of the two items which composed the original periphrasis, the weqatal necessarily derives from the Proto-Semitic resultative diachrony reflecting its gradual contextualization and contamination. According to the linguistic typology, resultatives during the process of modal contamination with a high frequency receive in non-discursive environments (narrative: past and unreal) an imperfective reading loosing, at the same time, their original taxis and aspectual load (i.e. they do not follow the regular resultative path). This phenomenon may clearly be observed in Romance languages during their evolution from Latin. Latin included in its verbal repertoire a pluperfect amāveram “I had loved”. The construction originally expressed the anterior taxis (and the perfective) meaning. However, due to the phenomenon of modal contamination (namely, because of its notorious use in conditional phrases and modal subordinated contexts), it acquired


in the past time frame an explicit modal value functioning nowadays in Modern Spanish as the subjunctive amara (cf. that it is extensively used in syntactically depending contexts where it comments on main events). Usually, the gram appears in conditional protases (6.a), but may also be found in apodoses (6.b). As a modal formation, it has entirely lost its initial resultative (perfect) meaning as well as any perfective connotations; it has turned into an imperfective being able to describe durative and iterative activities (6.a and 6.c). An identical process of the transformation of an old modal perfect or perfective gram (a manifestation of the resultative path), in the past time context, into an imperfective category can be detected during the history of the Latin form amāvissem. This original pluperfect (resultative in the past) subjunctive evolved into the imperfective subjunctive in Spanish, Portuguese and French. The Portuguese (6.d) and French (6.e) examples show, furthermore, that the gram (originally a modal pluperfect) may equal in modern times an imperfective indicative past (Cunha & Cintra 1984:471; Mauger 1968:256).

(6) a. Si me amaras de verdad, me creerías. Si estuvieras aquí conmigo todos los días, sabrías quién soy.

If you really loved me, you would believe me. If you were here with me every day, you would know who I am

b. Si lloviera, lo agradeciera muchísimo (Gómez 1998:155) I would be very grateful if it rained

c. Quisiera pedirte un favor (Gómez 1998:155) I want (would like) to ask you a favour

d. Todos los domingos, chovesse ou fizesse sol, estava eu lá (Cunha & Cintra1984:471)

Every Sunday, both when it rained and when the sun shined, I was there

e. Qu’il vînt chaque jour, c’est certain (= il venait) (Mauger 1968:256)

He used to come every day, it is sure

The same transformation might have occurred in Biblical Hebrew. A resultative gram which gradually underwent a modal contamination, in the narrative context, in the past time frame, evolved into a depending (commenting and background) category aspectually marked as

THE BH WEQATAL 23

imperfective. This change reflects a direct modalization of the original *wa + qatal(a) at an early stage of its functional development.

However, the transposition of the *wa + qatal(a) to the narrative context could also have happened at later periods once the gram had acquired prospective modally tinted meaning in the discourse sphere. As noticed in the previous section, the grammaticalization of the weqatal certainly began in conditional real apodoses in the discourse and only from there the construction was generalized in other environments. This original context straightforwardly imposed a prospective and modal reading of the input periphrasis. When the prospective (but not explicit future19) modal meaning became inherent, the gram spread to narrative and past situations. There, obligatorily preserving its already inbuilt nature, it expressed prospective-modal past events corresponding to the past future category of Indo-European languages. According to the evolutionary typology, past modal-prospectives may develop into imperfective categories (Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994:156-158; Joosten 2002:57-58; Notarius 2008:41-42). Consequently, the imperfective value of the narrative past weqatal would have stemmed from a frequent aspectualization of the past modal-prospectives. This scenario is highly likely since in Biblical Hebrew we have identified examples where the narrative weqatal displays past prospective modal meanings (cf. examples 12.a and 12.b provided in the first, previously published, part of the study). These uses panchronically correspond to intermediate stages of the process during which the prospective-modal, originally discursive, formation is expanded to the narrative sphere and subsequently generalized as an imperfective past.

In fact, the two explanations do not have to be understood as contradictory and mutually excluding. To the contrary, both developments may have taken place combining their forces in transforming the original resultative diachrony *qatal(a) employed as a part of a periphrastic prospective modally coloured expression *wa+qatal(a) into an imperfective narrative past gram. Furthermore the two proposals equally show that the narrative weqatal is entirely compatible with the discursive variant, viz., the two weqatals are products of a typologically common

19 If the weqatal was a deictic future tense, it could not have been used in the past

time frame. Future tenses, if they are authentic tenses, cannot appear with the

past reference. This is possible with prospective grams which may be

employed in any temporal sphere. In a similar way, past tenses never occur in

the future time frame while anterior grams frequently do so.


and well documented phenomenon, a modal contamination of originally resultative grams.

4. FINAL CONCLUSION

Applying the panchronic method, we have demonstrated that the weqatal is not an amalgam of chaotic unrelated and contradictory functions. Quite the reverse, it becomes a functionally homogenous and rational phenomenon, a single diachronic path – a modal contaminated trajectory which originated in the use of the contingent consecutive expression in apodotic milieu. This means that the BH weqatal and the BH qatal are panchronically (and hence also synchronically) two different phenomena. The former, as explained, corresponds to a modal contamination of contingent periphrasis in the apodotic environment (and to its subsequent spread and emancipation), while the latter is defined as a resultative path (Cook 2002:215). On the other hand, the non-augmented qatal may also provide determined modal values. As a modal category, it is most frequently employed in conditional real or irreal (or counterfactual) periods, especially in protases. Yet again one is dealing with a contaminated modality. Nevertheless, modal uses of the simple qatal do not reflect the same modal contamination as that detected in the case of the weqatal. In respect of the qatal, the contamination most probably originated in protases (cf. the extended use of indicative grams in conditional protases in Indo-European languages). Moreover, the modal qatal – contrary to the weqatal – does not derive from an explicit consecutive and contingent expression. These two facts suggest that the weqatal and the modal qatal may not be defined as products of the same path.

However, even though our explanation leads to the conclusion that the weqatal – being a product of a profound grammaticalization and functional evolution – should be understood as an independent category in the BH verbal system, it still connects the rise and characteristics of the discursive and narrative weqatal with its indisputable source, the simple PS *qatal(a). The two BH conjugations – even though synchronically and panchronically distinct and autonomous – are to be explained as two (or three) diachronic paths which one and the same original expression has followed. Namely, the non-augmented variant (i.e. the simple PS *qatal(a)) developed in accordance with principles of the resultative path (cf. Cook 2002:215) (as well as protetic modal path in case of the modal qatal) while the extended variant (PNS *wa + qatal(a)) evolved following

THE BH WEQATAL 25

the modal contamination path of contingent expression in apodotic context. In that way, the values offered by the qatal and the weqatal (either indicative or modal) appear as compatible and coherent, i.e. all the meanings offered by the weqatal are expectable, required by and consistent with the modal contamination of the original resultative input *qatal(a) (Figure 4).

RESULTATIVE PATH AND MODAL CONTAMINATED PATH (PROTETIC)

PS * QATAL(A) QATAL

(NARRATION AND DISCOURSE)

MODAL CONTAMINATED PATH (CONTINGENT APODOTIC)

WE- + WEQATAL

CONSECUTIVE PERIPHRASIS (NARRATION AND DISCOURSE)

Figure 4: The panchronic model of the weqatal

In conclusion, we can affirm that all of the orthodox synchronic definitions of the weqatal which identify the gram with a tense, an aspect or a mood are, to some extend, correct. They emphasize one of the possible universal domains which the formation panchronically pass through. Nevertheless, all these models, in order to preserve their scientific validity, must necessarily be understood as complementary, i.e. they should harmonize instead of conflict. The weqatal certainly provides temporal, aspectual and modal meanings. However, the construction may not be equated with one universal verbal domain. It is not exclusively a future tense, a contingent mood or an imperfective aspect. Such definitions always lead to a simplification of the real picture. The weqatal is a panchronically ordered amalgam of all of these values, i.e. it is a diachronic evolution which connects the spheres of mood, tense and aspect.

Likewise, the three major schools of which the first one equates the gram with the qatal, the second defines it as an equivalent of the yiqtol, and the third sees in the formation an autonomous category, are partially acceptable. In Biblical Hebrew, the weqatal is without doubt an independent and fully grammaticalized form, i.e., a new conjugation with a particular and stable shape and with its own functional load distinct from those of the qatal and yiqtol. The construction, however, derives from the non-augmented PS *qatal(a) of the resultative path which


surfaces in Biblical Hebrew as the qatal. Furthermore, as previously explained, the modal contamination originated in conditional apodoses, frequently introduced by protases which included the verb in the yiqtol (Moran 1950:65; Smith 1991:6-8 and 12-15). Thus, the real protetic yiqtol overtly marked the future time reference of the entire conditional period setting the weqatal in a well defined temporal (and modal) frame. Yet again, the three theories may be combined if they are viewed from the panchronic perspective as representing subsequent stages of one and the same development, viz. a modal contamination of the originally atemporal and indicative resultative input.

Having reached the objective of the paper – i.e. having demonstrated that the uses and values of the weqatal may be viewed as manifestations of a single coherent phenomenon – does not imply that our panchronic research has been concluded. In the two articles, we have provided a consistent dynamic definition which accommodates all superficially chaotic and heterogeneous qualities of the gram. Doing so, we have treated functions displayed by the gram as equally important, totally ignoring differences in their frequency. This procedure was necessitated by principles of the dynamic description whereby all meanings (either common or rare) reflect stages of a path. Thus, their relevance for determining a trajectory is equal. On the other hand, we are aware of the fact that – in accordance with evolutionary rules – the synchronic weight of values of a construction is not identical. Some uses are infrequent or peripheral: these are meanings which previously were typical (they correspond to more original phases) or, on the contrary, which have not been generalized yet, but which are expected to become central at posterior historical époques (they reflect more advanced stages). In between these two extremes, one can situate standard or core values: these are the most frequent uses, entirely grammaticalized and generalized. The determination of such a distributional pattern of meanings conveyed by the weqatal constitutes the future research plan of the author. Only when the statistical data establish the exact weight of each of the qualities of the gram, the picture of its panchronically defined but synchronically viewed state will be complete.

THE BH WEQATAL 27

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aartun, K 1978. Textüberlieferung und Vermeintliche Belege der Konjunktion pV im Alten

Testament. UF 10, 1-13.

Andrason, A 2010a. The Panchronic yiqtol. Functionally Consistent and Cognitively Plausible.

JHS 10(10), 1-63.

Andrason, A 2010b. Expressions of Futurity in the Vilamovicean language. Spil Plus 40, 1-10.

Andrason, A 2011. The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Light of Grammaticalization: The

Second Generation. HS 52, 352-383.

Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: With Westminster Hebrew Morphology. Electronic edition.

1996. Stuttgart: German Bible Society.

Bucellati, G 1962. An Interpretation of the Akkadian Stative as a Nominal Sentence. JNES

27(1), 1-12.

Bybee, J, Perkins, R & Pagliuca, W 1994. The Evolution of Grammar. Chicago: The

University of Chicago Press.

Cohen, M 1924. Le système verbal sémitique et l’expression du temps. Paris: Imprimerie

Nationale.

Cook, J A 2002. The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System: A Grammaticalization Approach. PhD

dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Cook, J A 2008. The Vav-Prefixed Verb Forms in Elementary Hebrew Grammar. JHS 8(3), 2-

16.

Cunha C & Cintra, L F 1984. Nova gramática do português contemporâneo. Lisboa: Edições

J. Sá da Costa.

Dillmann, A 1907. Ethiopic Grammar. Enlarged and Improved by C. Bezold. Trans. J A

Crichton. London: Williams and Norgate (reprint 1974).

Danecki, J 1994. Gramatyka języka arabskiego. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Akademickie

Dialog.

Dahood, M 1966. Psalms I: 1-50 (AB 16). Garden City & New York: Doubleday.

Długosz-Kurczakowa, T & Dubisz, S 2003. Gramatyka historyczna Jezyka Polskiego.

Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Iniwersyttu Warszawskiego.


Fassberg, S & Hurvitz, A (eds) 2006. Biblical Hebrew in its Historical Semitic Setting.

Jerusalem & Winona Lake: The Hebrew University Magnes Press & Eisenbrauns.

Garr, R W 2004. Dialect Geography of Syria-Palestine 1000-586 B.C.E. Winona Lake:

Eisenbrauns.

Geller, E 1994. Jidysz – język śydów polskich. Warszawa: PWN.

Gómez, L Torrego 1998. Gramática didáctica del español. Madrid: Ed. S.M.

Haywood, J A & Nahmad, H M 1965. A New Arabic Grammar. London: Lund Humphries.

Huehnergard, J 2005. A Grammar of Akkadian. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.

Huehnergard, J 1987. “Stative”, Predicative Form, Pseudo-Verb. JNES 46(3), 215-232.

Hopper, P & Traugott, E 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jastrow, O 1978. Die mesopotamisch-arabisch qəltu-Dialekte. Band I: Phonologie und

Morphologie. Wiesbaden: Steiner.

Jastrow, O 1990. Der arabische Dialekt der Juden von ‘Aqra und Arbīl. Wiesbaden:

Harrassowitz.

Jean, C F & Hoftijzer, J. 1965. Dictionnaire des inscription sémitiques de l’ouest. Leiden:

Brill.

Johnson, B 1979. Hebräische Perfect und Imperfect mit vorangehendem we. Lund: Gleerup.

Joosten, J 2002. Do the Finite Verbal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Express Aspect? JANES 29,

49–70.

Joosten, J 2006. The Disappearance of the Iterative WEQATAL in the Biblical Hebrew Verbal

System, in: Fassberg, S & Hurvitz, A (eds) 2006, 125-147.

Kienast, B 2001. Historische Semitische Sprachwissenschaft. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz

Verlag.

Krahmalkov, C R 1986. The QATAL with Future Tense Reference in Phoenician. JSS 31, 5-10.

Krahmalkov, C R 2001. A Phoenician-Punic Grammar. Leiden: Brill.

Lambdin, T O & Huehnergard, J 1998. The Historical Grammar of Classical Hebrew: An

Outline. Cambridge: Unpublished course handout.

Leslau, W 1941. Document tigrinya. Paris: Klincksieck.

THE BH WEQATAL 29

Lipiński, E 2001. Semitic Languages Outline of a Comparative Grammar. Leuven, Paris,

Sterling: Uitgeverij Peeters en Departement Oosterse Studies.

Mallon E D 1982. The Ugaritic Verb in the Letters and Administrative Documents. PhD

dissertation, The Catholic University of America, Washington.

Mauger, G 1968. Grammaire pratique du français d’aujourd’hui: langue parlée, langue

écrite. Paris: Hachette.

Moran, W L 1950. A Syntactical Study of the Dialect of Byblos as Reflected in the Amarna

Tablets. PhD dissertation, John Hopkins University. Ann Arbor & London: University

Mircrofilms International..

Moran W L 1961. The Hebrew Language in its Northwest Semitic Background, in: Wright, G

E (ed.). The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Essays in Honor of William Foxwell

Albright. Garden City & New York: Doubleday, 59-84.

Moran, W L 2003. Amarna Studies: Collected Writings (eds J. Huehnergard & Sh. Izre’el).

Winona Lake Indiana: Eisenbrauns.

Notarius, T 2008. Prospective Weqatal in Biblical Hebrew: Dubious Cases or Unidentified

Category? JNSL 31(1), 39-55.

Pardee, D 1977. A New Ugaritic Letter. Bibliotheca Orientalis 34, 3-20.

Parker, S B 1967. Studies in the Grammar of the Ugaritic Prose Text. PhD dissertation, John

Hopkins University. Ann Arbor & London: University Mircrofilms International.

Peled, Y 1992. Conditional Structures in Classical Arabic. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

Rainey, F 1996. Canaanite in the Amarna Tablets. Vol. II. Morphosyntactic Analysis of the

Verbal System. Leiden: Brill.

Rowton, M B 1962. The Use of the Permansive in Classic Babylonian. JNES 21(4), 233-303.

Rubin, A 2005. Studies in Semitic Grammaticalization. Harvard Semitic Studies: Eisenbrauns.

Sivan, D 2001. A Grammar of the Ugaritic Language. Leiden: Brill.

Smith, M S 1991. The Origins and Development of the Waw-Consecutive: Northwest Semitic

Evidence from Ugaritic to Qumran. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns.

The Holy Bible New Revised Standard Version. 1989. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

The Holy Qur-án. Containing the Arabic Text with English Translation and Commentary; by

Maulvi Muhammad Ali. 1920. Lahore: Ahmadiyya Anjuman-i-isháat-i-islam.


Tropper, J 2002. Ugaritisch. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag.

Waltke, B K & O’Connor, M 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake:

Eisenbrauns.

Watson, W G E 1990. The Particle P in Ugaritic. Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici 7, 75-86.

Wright, W 1967. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.