Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / Ancient Hebrew / The Wayyiqtol as 'Pluperfect': When and Why

The Wayyiqtol as 'Pluperfect': When and Why

What it is about

Normally a wayyiqtol moves the story forward, and a pluperfect ("had done") is said with a qatal after a fronted element. Collins asks whether a wayyiqtol alone, with no preceding qatal, can mean a pluperfect. He surveys Driver (who allowed it only at the start of a section), Waltke–O'Connor, Martin, Baker and Buth's "unmarked temporal overlay", and concludes that it can, when at least one of three conditions holds: (1) an anaphoric expression points back to an event already told; (2) the logic of the referents requires the event to precede the previous one; (3) the verb opens a section or paragraph. Applied to two disputed verses, the reading is rejected for 1 Sam 14:24 and accepted for Gen 2:19 (the animals "had been formed").

Ideas

For Mova

I1–I2 apply to the event chain built from the trees (the world reading of the Torah, and the wayyiqtol mainline in 09-discourse.md §1). I3 is a test set; I4 goes into The verb under wayyiqtol.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.53751/001c.30401

@article{collins1995wayyiqtol,
  title = {{The Wayyiqtol as 'Pluperfect': When and Why}},
  author = {Collins, C. John},
  journal = {Tyndale Bulletin},
  year = {1995},
  doi = {10.53751/001c.30401},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.53751/001c.30401}
}

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/hbo-1995-collins-wayyiqtol-pluperfect-why/