Are There Preterite Yiqtols in Psalm 18?

Back to Psalm 18.

Exegetical issues for Psalm 18:

Are There Preterite Yiqtols in Psalm 18?

Non-Initial Yiqtols in Psalm 18:1–20

The Form and Meaning of נִחֲתָ֥ה in Psalm 18:35

Introduction

Consider the Masoretic Text of Psalm 18:7a:

בַּצַּר־לִ֤י ׀ אֶֽקְרָ֣א יְהוָה֮

וְאֶל־אֱלֹהַ֪י אֲשַׁ֫וֵּ֥עַ

Nearly every modern Bible translation translates the yiqtol (אֶֽקְרָ֣א and אֲשַׁ֫וֵּ֥עַ) verbs with past time reference and perfective aspect. For example:

• “I called...I cried” (ESV, NIV, NRSV, NUB, JPS cf. CEV)
• “rief...schrie” (LUTH2017, NGÜ, EB, EÜ)
• “j'ai appelé...;'ai crié” (TOB, NFC)
• “invoqué...clamé” (RVR95, NVI, BTX)

This kind of translation does not fit the typical profile of the yiqtol form, which “normally indicates incomplete action...[and] a present or future tense, but a past continuous tense is possible”. Indeed, some of the ancient versions analysed the verb according to its regular profile:

• invocabo...clamabo “I will call upon...I will cry” (Jerome)
• אנא מצלי...אנא מתחנן “I was praying...I was entreating” (Targum)

There are also yiqtols throughout the psalm on which modern versions radically diverge, as in v. 4a (The verb אֶקְרָ֣א).

מְ֭הֻלָּל אֶקְרָ֣א יְהוָ֑ה

• Generic Present
  • E.g., “I call” (ESV, cf. GNT, NRSV, NJB, LUTH2017, EÜ, ZÜ, NGÜ, EB, HFA, GNB, NBS, NVS78P, PDV 2017, NFC, S21, NVI, DHH94I)
• Past Perfective
  • E.g., “I called (to)” (NET, cf. NIV, NLT, JPS, CEV, TOP, BDS)
• Future (with various modalities)
  • E.g., “I will call” (NEV, cf. REV, RVR95)

Moreover, there are yiqtols that most English translations translate as one would expect (present/future time, imperfective aspect), while some commentators understand them as past perfective .

These facts raise two important questions:

1. Does Biblical Hebrew have a yiqtol that expressed the past perfective (viz., a preterite)?
2. Would we expect to find this preterite yiqtol in Psalm 18?

Exegetically, determining the existence of preterite yiqtol will allow us to help “us sort out autobiographical, and hence past time references, from references to the psalmist's ongoing situation (present or future)”.

Argument Maps

Does Biblical Hebrew have a Preterite yiqtol?

Some scholars would maintain that Hebrew did indeed inherit a preterite yiqtol while others would not.

Biblical Hebrew has a Preterite yiqtol (preferred)

A number of arguments—particularly diachronic in nature—have been put forth to support the existence of preterite yiqtol in Biblical Hebrew.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"} 
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2 
===
[Preterite yiqtol]: Biblical Hebrew had a preterite yiqtol.
  +<Inheritance>: Biblical Hebrew could have inherited the preterite yiqtol (<yaqtul) from its proto-Canaanite ancestor. 
   +<Amarna Canaanite>: Amarna Canaanite preserves the preterite yaqtul (<yaqtul).
    +<yaqtul vs. yaqtulu>: In Amarna Canaanite, yaqtul forms expressing a past perfective semantics are contrasted with yaqtulu forms expressing present/future continuous semantics (Rainey 1971, 96–102 :A:).
     +[yaqtul vs. yaqtulu in Amarna]: “I have heeded (išteme) the words which the king, my lord, sent to his servant, ‘Guard you comissioner and guard the cities of the king, your lord.’ Now I am guarding and now I am heeding (ištemu)...” (EA 292:17–24; Rainey and Schniedewind 2015 :M:).
     -<Overlap with yVqattal>: If yaqtul (preterite) contrasted with yaqtulu (present/future continuous) then the latter would overlap with yVqattal (also present/future continuous) forms in the corpus (Muraoka and Bosworth 1973, 171 :A:). #dispreferred
      <_<Apparent Overlap>: The overlap of yaqtulu and yVqattal is only apparent, not real.
       +<yVqattal not West Semitic>: Most geminated forms (yVqattal) in the El-Amarna corpus are not a genuine part of the Canaanite verbal system, but rather hybrid verbs: Akkadian stems with West Semitic morphology (Rainey 1975, 473 :A:).
        +<Glossing Akkadian with Canaanite>: In one illustrative correspondence, a hybrid form (Akkadian stem + WS morpheme) is glossed with a genuine WS (non-geminated) form.
         +[Canaanite Glossing example]:“Now it is I who am cultivating (er-ri-šu / aḫ-ri-šu) in the town of Shunem” (EA 365:14; Rainey and Schniedewind 2015 :M:).
    -<Akkadianism>: The use of yaqtul is merely an Akkadianism that occasionally appears in the letters. #dispreferred
     +<Qatala and yaqtul at Byblos>: In the letters from Byblos, qatala for simple/present perfect far outnumbers yaqtul for the same use (Moran 2003, 49 :M:). #dispreferred
      <_<Narrow Corpus>: Outside of the letters from Byblos, yaqtul regularly contrasts with yaqtulu for past perfective vs. present/future continuous semantics, respectively (Rainey 1971 :A:).
  +<-n vs. -h suffixes>: In Biblical Hebrew, third-person object suffixes with energic nun (e.g., -enhū, ennū, enhā) distinguish imperfective yiqtol from preterite yiqtol, which takes third-person object suffixes without energic nun (e.g., -ehū, -ehā).
   +<Canaanite energic nun>: Biblical Hebrew inherited indicative energic nun from proto-Canaanite -un(n)V,  (not from the Arabic energic -an(na); see Blau 1978 :A:), and Amarna Caananite witnesses to an indicative energic nun associated with present/future continuous forms (Moran 2003, 50–52 :M:).
    +[Canaanite energic nun example]: E.g., “What can I say (aḳb(b)una) to my serfs?” (EA 85:11–12); “What can I do (īpušuna)?” (EA 122.49); “Why dost thou not reply (tutēruna) to me?” (83.7–8) (Moran 2003, 51 :M:).
   +[-n vs. -h suffixes in Hebrew]: He found him (יִמְצָאֵ֙הוּ֙) in the steppe land, and in the howling waste of the desert; he continually encircled him (יְסֹֽבְבֶ֙נְהוּ֙); He instructed him (יְב֣וֹנְנֵ֔הוּ); He protected him (יִצְּרֶ֖נְהוּ) as the apple of his eye. As an eagle stirs up its nest, flutters over its young, he spread out his wings; he took him (יִקָּחֵ֔הוּ); he bore him (יִשָּׂאֵ֖הוּ) on his pinions. The Lord along was leading him (יַנְחֶ֑נּוּ), and there was no foreign god with him. He mounted him (יַרְכִּבֵ֙הוּ֙) upon the high plateaus of the earth (Deut 32:10–13) (Rainey 1986, 15 :A:).
  +<wayyiqtol>: Preterite yiqtol is the form used in wayyiqtol forms, thereby giving them preterite semantics.
   -<Morphological Problems>: Positing wayyiqtol < original short yiqtol produces morphological difficulties. #dispreferred
    +<Long wayyiqtols>: Some wayyiqtols are visibly long (Robar 2013, 23–24 :A:). #dispreferred
     +[Long wayyiqtols example]: “And you made (וַתַּעֲשֶׂה) other gods” (I Kgs 14:9). #dispreferred
    +<Long perfective yiqtols>: There are long yiqtols used in narratives with past perfective semantics (Robar 2013, 24 :A:). #dispreferred
     +[Long perfective yiqtol example]:“Then Solomon built (אָז יִבְנֶ֨ה)...” (I Kgs 11:7). #dispreferred
    +<Short but not preterite/jussive>: We find “yiqtol forms that are short but neither wayyiqtol in form nor jussive or preterite in semantics, thus showing no affinities at all with (original) yaqtul” (Robar 2013, 24 :A:). #dispreferred
     +[Short but not preterite/jussive example]:“When she arrives (וִיהִ֣י כְבֹאָ֔הּ) she will pretend to be someone else” (NIV). #dispreferred
    -<Different Source>: The wayyiqtol is simply a short variant within a present/future paradigm consisting both of a long/short yiqtol, not a reflex of Proto-Cannanite preterite yaqtul (Robar 2013 :A:). #dispreferred 
    +<NENA Parallel>: In the NENA dialect of Barwar, the base of the present/future paradigm has a short and long variant (qaṭəl and ʾi-qaṭəl, respectively), the former of which marks a relative present tense, like Biblical Hebrew wayyiqtol (see Khan 2008, 570–84; 590 :G:; Robar 2013, 32 :A:). #dispreferred
     +[NENA Parallel example]: “She went down and also ate (ʾaxlàla) another one” (Khan 2008, 570 :G:; translation Robar 2013, 32 :A:). #dispreferred
  +<Names>: In Biblical names, a qatala (> BH qātal; typically associated with preterite semantics) element looks as if it had taken over the function of an earlier yaqtul (> BH yiqtol) element (Bejon, p.c.), suggesting that the latter constituted instances of preterite yiqtol.
   +<Doublets in early/late books>: The same name will appear in a late book with a qatala element as in an earlier book with a yaqtul element (Bejon, p.c.).
    +[Doublets in early/late books example]: E.g., פְּתַֽחְיָ֥ה “Petaḥiah (viz., ‘The Lord opened’)” (Ezra 10:23) vs. יִפְתָּ֣ח “Jephtah (viz., ‘He opened’, cf. יִפְתַּח־אֵ֥ל ‘'El opened’ in Josh 19:27)” (Judg 11:1).
   +<Fientive qatala in Numbers>: There are not really any names with non-stative qatala elements in Genesis, but plenty of names with non-stative (viz., fientive) qatala elements after Israel returns from Egypt (Bejon, p.c.).
    +[Fientive qatala in Numbers example]: E.g., אֶלְיָסָ֖ף “Eliasaph (viz., ‘God added’)” (Num 2:14); אֶלְעָזָר “El'azar (viz., ‘God has helped’)” (Num 3:2).

Biblical Hebrew does not have a Preterite yiqtol

There are reasons—particularly synchronic in nature—to doubt the existence of preterite yiqtol in Biblical Hebrew.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"} 
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2 
===
[No preterite yiqtol]: Biblical Hebrew does not have a preterite bare yiqtol. #dispreferred
 +<Synchronic morphology>: Regardless of historical origins, the morphological distinction between qatal and yiqtol makes it unlikely that yiqtol was ever understood by speakers as preterite synchronically (see Niccaci 2006, 252, 261 :A:; cf. Zevit 1988, 27 :A:). #dispreferred
  +<Other explanations for preterite yiqtol>: Yiqtols commonly analyzed as preterite have synchronically consistent solutions. #dispreferred
   +<Ellipsis>: Clause-initial yiqtols in past contexts should be analyzed as being preceded by an elided pronoun (Niccacci 2006, 261 :A:). #dispreferred
    +<Normal value of yiqtol>: Assuming an elided element before yiqtol (x+yiqtol) would maintain the  the usual value (imperfective) and function (background information) of yiqtol in BH (Niccacci 2006, 261 :A:). #dispreferred
    +<Verbal Context>: “...Clear cases of x-yiqtol constructions are attested indicating repetition/habit/ explication/description in the axis of the past, in parallelism with wayyiqtol and qatal forms...” (Niccacci 2006, 261 :A:). #dispreferred
     +[Verbal Context example]: “When the Most High portioned out the inheritance to the nations, when he separated the children of men, he would fix (יַצֵּב֙) the boundaries of the nations...” (Deut 32:8 translation Niccacci 2006, 261n.24). #dispreferred
   +<Historical present>: Many non-wayyiqtol prefix forms that seem preterite may actually be past continuous or present-future continuous, otherwise “the language would then be uneconomical” (Zevit 1988, 30 :A:). #dispreferred
    +[Historical present example]: E.g., “His mother makes/would make (תַּעֲשֶׂה) a small robe for him...” (1 Sam. 2:19). #dispreferred
    -<Not in accordance with the facts>: Some instances of non-wayyiqtol prefixed conjugations do not lend themselves to some sort of imperfective reading (JM §113n.17 :G:).
   +<Opposition of forms>: “Looking at the system of BH as a whole, rather than assigning a particular semantic sense to each distinctive form, we might entertain the possibility that in those places where the context is not a guide to tense, aspect, or mode, sense is determined not on the basis of forms but on the basis of the contrast or opposition of form” (Greenstein 1988, 14 :A:). #dispreferred
    +[Opposition of forms examples]: “He spoke (וַיְדַבֵּ֣ר wayyiqtol for narrated past) to her: ‘When I was speaking (אֲ֠דַבֵּר yiqtol for durative)  to Naboth the Jezreelite, I said (וָאֹ֣מַר wayyiqtol, continuing the tense) to him...” (1 Kgs 21:6; translation Greestein 1988, 16 :A:). #dispreferred
    -<Absolute values needed for anchoring>: If all the verb forms were relative to each other, then it would be impossible to establish an initial time/aspect reference.
 +<אז + long yiqtol in the past>: In past-tense contexts we find long yiqtol (from yaqtulu) following אָז “then” instead of the “preterite” short yiqtol, as we would expect (Cohen 2021, 36–37 :A:). #dispreferred
  +[אז + long yiqtol in the past example]:  אָ֣ז יָשִֽׁיר־מֹשֶׁה֩ “And then Moses...sang” (Exod 15:1 ESV); 
  אָ֣ז יִבְנֶ֤ה יְהוֹשֻׁ֙עַ֙  “At that time...Joshua built” (Josh 8:30 ESV);  אָ֣ז יַבְדִּ֤יל מֹשֶׁה֙ “Then Moses set apart...” (Deut 4:41 ESV). #dispreferred

Would we expect to find Preterite yiqtols in Psalm 18?

If there was indeed a preterite yiqtol in Biblical Hebrew, some would argue that Psalm 18 is not the kind of text where we would expect to see it, whereas others argue that it is.

Psalm 18 Qualifies for Preterite yiqtol (preferred)

The arguments that Psalm 18 qualifies for preterite yiqtol are bound up with the question of the date of the text of Psalm 18's composition.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"} 
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false

===
[Psalm 18 fit for preterite yiqtol]: Psalm 18 is the type of text where we would expect to find preterite yiqtol.
 +<Psalm 8>: Psalm 8, which is also attributed to David, appears to have preterite yiqtols.
  +[Preterite yiqtols in Psalm 8]: “And you caused him to lack being a heavenly being by a little, and you crowned him (תְּעַטְּרֵהוּ) him with honour and majesty. You caused him to rule (תַּמְשִׁילֵהוּ) that which your hands made” (Psa 8:6–7).
 +<Psalm 18 as archaic>: “There is some degree of unanimity among scholars that Ps 18 is ancient, to be dated in the eleventh or tenth century b.c...” (Craigie 2004, 172 :C:).
  +<Superscription>: The superscription of Psalm 18 attributes the psalm's composition to King David (lived c. 1000 B.C.).
   +[Superscription of Psalm 18]: NET “For the music director; by the Lord's servant David (לְעֶ֥בֶד יְהוָ֗ה לְדָ֫וִ֥ד)...” (Psa 18:1).
  +<Affinity with established archaic poems>: “The literary associations with Exod. 15, Hab. 3, Deut 32 and 33, Micah 7 and Psalm 144, point to a relatively early date for the composition of the Psalm” (Cross 1975, 129 :M:).
   +<Theophanic imagery>: The theophany imagery in vv. 8–16 is to be grouped with similar imagery in commonly accepted archaic Hebrew poems (e.g., The Song of Deborah, the Blessing of Moses, the Song of Miriam, etc.) (Cross 1975, 126 :M:).  
  +<Orthography>: The orthography of the original composition suggests an early date. 
    +<Relationship to 2 Samuel 22>: Psalm 18 clearly has a genetic relationship to 2 Samuel 22.
    +<2 Samuel 22 Orthography>: Certain spellings of 2 Sam 22 “reflect a text written in the dialect of Israel, the Northern Kingdom, and...must therefore antedate the destruction of Samaria (722 B.C.)” (Cross 1975, 125 :M:).
       +<Contraction of diphthongs>: In 1 Sam 22, the treatment of contracted diphthongs as un-written vowels suggests an archaic profile (cf. Cross 1975, 125 :M:).
        + [Contraction of diphthongs]: E.g., משׁעי mošʿī ‘my saviour’ and תשׁעני tošiʿēni ‘you save me’ (2 Sam 22:3) vs. מושעי mawšʿī and תושׁעני tawšiʿēni; מקשׁי moqšē “snares of” (2 Sam 22:6) vs מוקשי mawqšē; משׁפטו mišpaṭīw ‘his judgements’ (2 Sam 22:23 ktiv) vs. משפטיו mišpaṭayw.
       +<Defective spelling>: The defective spellings in 2 Sam 22 suggest an archaic profile.
        +<Later plene spelling>: “There is now considerable evidence to show that biblical orthography passed through a late phase of extremely full writing" (Cross 1975, 126 :M:).
         +<The Great Isaiah Scroll>: The use of plene spellings in the 1QIsaa “is itself an indication of the Scroll's relatively late date” (Kutscher 1974, 5 :M:).
 +<Preterite yiqtol as Archaic>: Preterite yiqtol, if it existed, would have been a feature of archaic biblical Hebrew (see Notarius 2013, 310-313 :A:).
  +<Preterite yiqtol in archaic texts>: The identification of most preterite yiqtols is restricted to agreed-upon archaic texts.
    +[Preterite yiqtol in archaic texts example]: He found him (יִמְצָאֵ֙הוּ֙) in the steppe land, and in the howling waste of the desert; he continually encircled him (יְסֹֽבְבֶ֙נְהוּ֙); He instructed him (יְב֣וֹנְנֵ֔הוּ); He protected him (יִצְּרֶ֖נְהוּ) as the apple of his eye. As an eagle stirs up its nest, flutters over its young, he spread out his wings; he took him (יִקָּחֵ֔הוּ); he bore him (יִשָּׂאֵ֖הוּ) on his pinions. The Lord along was leading him (יַנְחֶ֑נּוּ), and there was no foreign god with him. He mounted him (יַרְכִּבֵ֙הוּ֙) upon the high plateaus of the earth (Deut 32:10–13) (Rainey 1986, 15 :A:).
  +<Names>: In Biblical names, a qatala (> BH qātal; typically associated with preterite semantics) element looks as if it had taken over the function of an earlier yaqtul (> BH yiqtol) element (Bejon, p.c.), suggesting that the latter constituted instances of preterite yiqtol.
   +<Doublets in early/late books>: The same name will appear in a late book with a qatala element as in an earlier books with a yaqtul element (Bejon, p.c.).
    +[Doublets in early/late books example]: E.g., פְּתַֽחְיָ֥ה “Petaḥiah (viz., ‘The Lord opened’)” (Ezra 10:23) vs. יִפְתָּ֣ח “Jephtah (viz., ‘He opened’, cf. יִפְתַּח־אֵ֥ל ‘'El opened’ in Josh 19:27)” (Judg 11:1).
   +<Fientive qatala in Numbers>: There are not really any names with non-stative qatala elements in Genesis, but plenty of names with non-stative (viz., fientive) qatala elements after Israel returns from Egypt (Bejon, p.c.).
    +[Fientive qatala in Numbers example]: E.g., אֶלְיָסָ֖ף “Eliasaph (viz., ‘God added’)” (Num 2:14); אֶלְעָזָר “El'azar (viz., ‘God has helped’)” (Num 3:2).

Psalm 18 does not Qualify for Preterite yiqtol

Psalm 18's qualifications for preterite yiqtol can be questioned on linguistic grounds.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"} 
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false

===
[Psalm 18 unfit for preterite yiqtol]: Psalm 18 is not the type of text where would expect to find preterite yiqtol. #dispreferred
 +<Preterite yiqtol as Archaic>: Preterite yiqtol, if it existed, would have been a feature of archaic biblical Hebrew (see Notarius 2013, 310-313 :A:). #dispreferred
 +<Psalm 18 not archaic>: Psalm 18 is not an archaic poem. #dispreferred
  +<Late features>: Psalm 18 has “six linguistic forms that have been argued in older scholarship to be features of Late Biblical Hebrew” (Young 2017, 109 :A:). #dispreferred
   + [Late features]: “Nun of מִן unassimilated (18:4, 49); pluralisation (18:22, 48); absence of cohortative (18:38; cf. 2 Sam. 22:38); עַל instead of another preposition (18:42); וֹתֵיהֶם - ((in) 18:46); preference for verb suffixes 31 to 1 (18:2, 5 (x2), 6 (x2)...)” (Young et al. 2008, 1:134n.74 :M:). #dispreferred
   <_<Other factors>: Other factors than linguistic features can determine the period of a text's composition, such as literary style and affinity with other older texts.

Conclusion (B)

There is very compelling evidence that languages very close to Hebrew had a preterite prefix form that was morphologically short. That Hebrew inherited this form is typically supported by the distribution of energic nun and the yiqtol element in wayyiqtol. While the latter piece of evidence is open to debate, we find the consistency of energic nun‘s distribution compelling. Additionally, some evidence regarding names is beginning to emerge that seems to suggest the qatal verb-form took over the functions of an older yiqtol form. There are some yiqtols in past contexts that some would want to read with some kind of imperfective aspects, but this does not necessarily detract from clear instances where past perfective semantics are called for.

Given the existence of preterite yiqtol, would we expect to find it in Psalm 18? It is agreed that preterite yiqtol would be more likely to show up in a text of archaic provenance. There are linguistic features (e.g., spelling) of Psalm 18//2 Samuel 22 to suggest its composition at an early date, but the linguistic argument is not decisive. However, Psalm 18//2 Samuel 22 have clear literary affinities with texts that scholars agree are archaic in nature.

For these reasons we accept the existence of preterite yiqtol in BH and consider Psalm 18 as a text where we would expect to find said preterite yiqtol.

Research

Translations

Ancient

V. 4a

LXX

ἐπικαλέσομαι

I will call

Jerome (Iuxta Hebraica)

invocabo

I will call upon

Targum

אנא מצלי

I am praying

Peshitta

ܐ݁ܩܪܐ

I call/will call

V. 7a

LXX

ἐπεκαλεσάμην...ἐκέκραξα

I called (aorist)...I cried (aorist)

Jerome (Iuxta Hebraica)

invocabo...clamabo

I will call upon...I will cry

Targum

אנא מצלי...אנא מתחנן

I was praying before...I was entreating

Peshitta

ܩ݁ܪܝܬ...ܩ݁ܪܝܬ

I called...I called

Modern

V. 4a

Generic Present

• “I call” (ESV, GNT)
• “I call upon” (NRSV)
• “I call to” (NJB)
• “Ich rufe” (LUTH2017, EÜ, ZÜ cf. NGÜ, EB)
• “Wenn ich...rufe” (HFA, GNB)
• “Je m'écrie” (NBS, NVS78P)
• “Je fais appel à lui” (PDV2017)
• “Dès que je l'appelle” (NFC)
• “Je crie” (S21)
• “Invoco” (NVI)
• “Llamo” (DHH94I)

Past Perfective

• “I called to” (NET, NIV)
• “I called on” (NLT, JPS)
• “I prayed” (CEV)
• “J'ai appelé” (TOB)
• “quand je l'ai appelé” (BDS)

Future (with various modalities)

• “I will call” (NEV)
• “I shall call” (REV)
• “Invocaré” (RVR95)

V. 7a

Past Perfective

• “I called...I cried” (ESV, NIV, NRSV, NJB, JPS cf. CEV)
• “I called...I cried out” (NET)
• “I called...I called” (GNT)
• “I cried out...I prayed” (NLT)
• “I cried...I called” (NEB)
• “I cried...and called” (REB)
• “rief...schrie” (LUTH2017, NGÜ, EB, EÜ)
• “schrie...rief” (HFA, GNB)
• “j'ai appelé...j'ai crié” (TOB, NFC)
• “j'invoquai...je lançai” (BDS)
• “j'ai fait appel...j'ai crié” (PDV2017, S21)
• “invoqué...clamé” (RVR95, NVI, BTX)
• “llamé...pedí” (DHH94I)

Generic Present

• “rufe...schreie” (ZÜ)
• “j'invoque...j'appelle” (NBS)
• “j'invoque...Je crie” (NVS78P)

Secondary Literature

Blau, J. 1978. “כינויי נסתר ונסתרת ב-נ’ ובלעדיה בעברית המקרא [Pronominal Third Person Singular Suffixes with and without N in Biblical Hebrew].” Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies 14: 125–31.

Cohen, Ohad. 2021. “Then Sang Moses – a Situation Based Approach to the Understanding of ‘ʔaz Yiqtol’ in Biblical Hebrew.” Hebrew Studies 62: 33–54.

Greenstein, Edward L. 1988. “On the Prefixed Preterite in Biblical Hebrew.” Hebrew Studies 29: 7–17.

Khan, G. 2008. The Neo-Aramaic Dialect of Barwar. Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 1. The Near and MIddle East. Leiden: Brill.

Moran, William L. 2003. Amarna Studies: Collected Writings. Edited by John Huehnergard and Shlomo Izre’el. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. https://brill.com/display/title/38279.

Muraoka T. and Bosworth C.E. 1973. “Review of Israel Oriental Studies, Vol. 1.” Journal of Semitic Studies 18 (1): 169-174. https://doi.org/10.1093/jss/XVIII.1.169-b.

Niccacci, Alviero. 2006. “The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry.” In Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting: Typological and Historical Perspectives, edited by Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz, 247–68. Publication of the Institute for Advanced Studies, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem 1. Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press.

Notarius, Tania. 2013. The Verb in Archaic Biblical Poetry: A Discursive, Typological, and Historical Investigation of the Tense System. Leiden: Brill.

Rainey A.F. 1971. “Verb Forms with Infixed -t in the West Semitic el-Amarna Letters.” Israel Oriental Studies 1:86–102.

Rainey A.F. 1975. “Morphology and the Prefix-Tenses of West Semitized El 'Amara Tablets.” UF 7:395–426.

Rainey,A. F. 2015. The El-Amarna Correspondence: A New Edition of the Cuneiform Letters from the Site of El-Amarna Based on Collations of All Extant Tablets. Edited by William M. Schniedewind. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill.

Robar, Elizabeth. 2013. “Wayyiqol as an Unlikely Preterite.” Journal of Semitic Studies 58 (1): 21–42.

Young, Ian. 2017. “Starting at the Beginning with Archaic Biblical Hebrew.” Hebrew Studies 58: 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1353/hbr.2017.0005.

Young, I., Rezetko R. and Ehrensvärd M. 2008. Linguistic Dating of Biblical Texts. 2 vols. London: Equinox.

Zevit, Ziony. 1988. “Talking Funny in Biblical Henglish and Solving a Problem of the Yaqtúl Past Tense.” Hebrew Studies 29: 25–33.

References

18:4 7 Approved