Sei sulla pagina 1di 16

Clause Types and Textual Structure

An experiment in narrative syntax*


Eep Talstra, Amsterdam
1. Introduction
The general question of this paper is: How do various clauses and clause
types contribute to the structure of an Hebrew text? The question immediately
connected to the preceding one is: which linguistic data should one observe in
order to establish the text grammatical function of particular clauses? Should
research focus on clause types in general or on individual clauses and their
position in their context?
In recent research in Biblical Hebrew discourse one can observe a tendency to
treat clause types as more or less independent linguistic signs with an
invariable discourse function.
For example, grammatical statements can be of the type:
W-X-Qatal clauses : refer to background information in a story,
Wayyiqtol clauses : constitute the main storyline.
The implication is that information on discourse types, such as narrative or
hortatory discourse, or on elements of discourse, such as foreground or
background in principle is clear. The task of discourse grammar is then to
make rules as to how surface-text patterns would fit such theoretically predefined schemes. My question is, whether the analysis of texts according to
these rather general clause types is sufficient to understand their discourse
structure.
R.E. Longacre1, for example, formulates definitions that are important to
enter the discussion of this paper: "A narrative discourse is a cluster of clause
types which is characterized by several tense/aspect forms, among which the preterite
predominates as primary storyline but is accompanied by perfects in secondary
function ..."

Paper read at the SBL Conference in Washington, USA, November 22, 1993. I thank Mr
Dale Rabideau for comments and corrections.

R.E. Longacre, Discourse Perspective on the Hebrew Verb, in: W.R. Bodine (ed),
Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, Eisenbrauns: Winona Lake, Indiana, 1992, p. 177-189;
quotation on p. 179. Compare also statements on page 178: "The backbone or storyline
tense ... is the waw-consecutive with imperfect." and " ... a VSO clause may have a perfect when
it encodes a preparatory or resultant action. Perfects may also encode a flashback." Important is
the use of the word "encode".

Clause Types and Textual Structure

167

Similarly, F.I. Andersen2 describes how surface text patterns would fit into
categories of discourse. For example, the episode: "In Hebrew, transition to a
new episode in a story is characteristally marked by wayehi ... , followed frequently by
an episode-marginal time reference, ..." and, the paragraph: "... the onset of a new
paragraph is often marked by using an explicit noun subject ... without interrupting
the sequence of WP (wayyiqtol) clauses."
The effect is that various clause types are analysed as linguistic codes with
clear and invariable functions on discourse level. The same is clear from one
of Andersens remarks on circumstantial clauses3: "In order to stage two events
as simultaneous ... it is necessary to break the paragraph-level chain of consecutive
(WP) clauses... A circumstantial clause is dependent on a paragraph-level WP clause,
which it may precede or follow; or it may be marginal to a paragraph as a whole."
One could also compare the analysis by Alviero Niccacci in his Biblical
Hebrew Reader4, where, for example, the text of Judges 6,33-36 is presented
according to the principle: Wayyiqtol is the main story line, W - X - Qatal
represents the secondary line. Niccacci discerns three levels of discourse:
"Livello 1 = linea narrativa principale; Livello 2 = linea secondaria; Livello 3 =
discorso diretto"5.
The question to be answered, however, is whether such general statements on
clause types and their syntactic functions really fit the position they have in
the structure of a text. The text of Judges 6,33-35, mentioned by Niccacci,
exhibits a concentration of four W-X-Qatal clauses in a narrative context. In
my view, it is not possible to claim simply that the wayyiqtols are the main
story line and that the W-X-Qatals constitute a secondary line. Rather, in this
text, the wayyiqtols depend on the W-X-Qatals, as I will try to demonstrate
below.
Clearly Bible translators had difficulties in handling these clauses in a
consistent way. They show the uncertainties one has in establishing the
relationship of clause types and textual organization. What does the W-XQatal mark? Is it the same linguistic function in each case? Background
information? A new paragraph? The introduction of a new actor in a text?
Translators evidently were not inclined to deal with all of these W-X-Qatal
clauses as cases of mere background information. Some translate these clauses
as if they should be read as wayyiqtol clauses. And, conversely, wayyiqtol
clauses are sometimes translated as starting a new paragraph.
2

F.I. Andersen, The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew, (Janua Linguarum, Series Practica, vol.
231), The Hague, 1974, p 63 and 64.

op. cit. p. 65

A. Niccacci, Lettura Sintattica della Prosa Ebraico-Biblica. principi e applicazioni (Studium


Biblicum Fransiscanum Analecta 31), Jerusalem, 1991, p. 166.

Compare also Niccaccis statement: " .. waw-X-qatal (antefatto) wayyiqtol narrativo


(grado zero, linea principale della communicazione).", op. cit., p. 174

168

Eep Talstra

First, some examples of several translations made of the section Judges


6,33ff.6:
33. (W-X-Qatal)
NBG7:
Geheel Midian... hadden zich met elkander verenigd. Ze waren...
8
Bu. :
Alles Midjan ... wurden zusammengeholt ... sie schritten hinber,
RSV9:
Then all the Midianites ... came together
10
NEB : All the Midianites ... joined forces, crossed the river ...
NIV11:
Now all the Midianites... joined forces and crossed over the Jordan...
34. (W-X-Qatal)
NBG:
Toen vervulde de Geest des Heren ...
Bu.:
Und Sein Geistbraus umkleidete sich mit Gideon, ...
RSV:
But the Spirit of the Lord took possession of Gideon ...
NEB:
Then the spirit of the Lord took possession of Gideon; ...
NIV:
Then the Spirit of the Lord came upon Gideon and he blew a trumpet ...
35. (W-X-Qatal; 2X)
NBG:
Ook zond hij boden uit door geheel Manasse, ...
Ook zond hij boden uit door Aser, ...
Bu:
Boten sandte er durch all Mnasche, ...
Boten sandte er durch Ascher, ...
RSV:
And he sent messengers throughout all Manasseh;
And he sent messengers to Asher, ...
NEB:
He sent messengers all through Manasseh;
He sent messengers to Asher, ...
NIV:
He sent messengers throughout Manasseh, ...
and also into Asher, ...
36. (Wayyiqtol + NounPhrase)
NBG:
Toen zeide Gideon tot God: "Indien Gij ... wilt verlossen,
Bu.:
Gidon sprach zu Gott: "Willst du wirklich Befreier fr Jisrael werden ...
RSV:
Then Gideon said to God: "If thou wilt deliver Israel, ...
NEB:
Gideon said to God, "If thou wilt deliver Israel ...
NIV:
Gideon said to God, "If you will save Israel ...

italics:
underlining:

Hebrew clause type has been marked in some way in the text of a
translation;
no marking in a translation.

Vertaling in opdracht van het Nederlands Bijbelgenootschap, Amsterdam, 1951

Die Schriftwerke verdeutscht von MARTIN BUBER, Kln, 1962.

The Holy Bible. Revised Standard version, New York, Glasgow, Toronto, 1952/1971

10

The New English Bible, Oxford/Cambridge, 1961,1971

11

The Holy Bible. New International Version, Grand Rapids, 1973, 1978, 1984.

Clause Types and Textual Structure

169

From this overview, it can be concluded that translations neither demonstrate


much internal consistency, nor do they reflect much common insight in the
functions of the W-X-Qatal clauses in the text mentioned here.
Based on this observation, one may ask whether it would be possible to
attribute clear discourse functions to clause types. Have the translators been
unaware of the results of modern discourse analysis or do the representatives
of various models of discourse grammar promise too much?
Recently, Wolfgang Schneider, with an analysis of clauses types used at the
beginning of stories in Biblical Hebrew, has contributed to the discussion on
clause types and textual structure.12 It is important that Schneider, in line
with the distributional approach of his grammar, does not concentrate on
clause types (i.e. the verbal forms used) in general, but bases his conclusions
on the observation of various clause features of lexical and grammatical
nature. So, in actuality, he deals with subsets of clauses and their textual
effects. Continuing the inspiring discussion with Wolfgang Schneider, I will
try to add further elements to the construction of a grammar of Hebrew
discourse. In my view, two considerations are important here:
1. More parameters need to be studied than the clause type only; text
grammatical models should not deal with "clauses" as isolated linguistic signs
with a more or less invariable function.
2. The use of clauses with special syntactic features is not restricted to a special
position in a literary composition, such as the beginning of stories. As I will
try to demonstrate below, syntactic clause features function similarly on
various textual levels, including paragraphs and embedded sub-paragraphs.
In the case of W-X-Qatal clauses this means: they cannot be explained only in
terms of their function in the beginning section of a story. They represent a
generally used pattern that contributes to the structuring a text and its
composing sections. Here applies the interesting and important remark on
"discourse recursion", made by R.E. Longacre13 in his contribution to this
"Festschrift".
In my contribution, I will first analyze the short section of narrative text from
Judges 6, already mentioned, to demonstrate the function of W-X-Qatal and
depending clauses at paragraph level.
Second, I will analyze a larger narrative text where a number of W-X-Qatal
clauses are used, II Kings 9, in order to determine the effect of these clause
types in combination with wayyiqtol clauses +/- an explicit subject nounphrase at each syntactic text level.

12

W. Schneider, Und es begab sich ... Anfnge von Erzhlungen im Biblischen Hebrisch,
Biblische Notizen 70 (1993) 62-87

13

A Proposal for a Discourse-modular Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, see above, p 99f.

170

Eep Talstra

2. Markers of clause hierarchy


To explain the approach proposed, I leave for the moment the discussion of
clause types. It is necessary to concentrate first on recognizing the patterns of
linguistic elements and their connective effects in order to find what clause
features contribute to the position of a clause in a textual organization. This
means, the proposal is not to interpret smaller elements by positing them into
a larger, more abstract pattern frames, such as "episodes", or "paragraphs", but
to construct larger patterns which are built from smaller ones. In other words,
the approach is bottom-up rather than top-down.
If one tries to design a procedure for making proposals for syntactic text
structures, one is immediately confronted with a real mixture of linguistic
information to analyze, i.e. information of a paradigmatic, syntagmatic and
lexical type. For that reason, it is not a particular word order and verb tense
alone which constitutes the function of a clause in a textual structure. Rather
than studying sets of more or less isolated clause types, it seems more
rewarding to try to find what linguistic parameters a text syntactic analysis
should use and in what order. Therefore, the linguistic question to be
researched is: how does paradigmatic information (the set of clauses of the
same type) interact with syntagmatic information (the features of the two
clauses that are actually connected in a text)?
Relations between clauses are constituted by linguistic correspondences of
various elements: morphemes, lexical data, and morphosyntactic data.
Markers from which a reader re-composes a textual structure are, among
others:
word-level grammatical markers:
- verbs or pronouns: grammatical indicators of actors in terms of person,
number and gender
word-level lexical markers:
- conjunctions: indicators of clause relations.
- macro-syntactic
signs,
referring
the reader back to the previous level of the




 

dialogue: ,
,
or
- interrogative particles
- the
registration of lexical
patterns,
the repetition of lexemes: Cf.   ,





in Ju. 6,33ff. 
and 
in II Ki 9,16ff.
text-syntactical markers:
- topicalization: PP or NP on first position of the clause
(or directly
after the


conjunction)
for the marking of an actor, e.g. ...
in II Ki. 9,1; ...




in II Ki.9,10
 

- the presence of a NPdet (determinated Noun Phrase) for the explicit
marking of the subject (in agreement with the verb);
- the order of phrases (= the pattern of words or phrase from the first
position up to and including the verb (or the order of NP and PP in a

Clause Types and Textual Structure

171

verbless clause), e.g. - NP - Qatal, Ju 6,33 and 34;


the change of the marking of actors; 3sing. masc. (Ju. 6,34a.) --> 3sing. plur.
(Ju. 6,34b.)

in combination with quotation verbs (   ): start of direct speech section in
verse. (Ju. 6,36a.b.

This type of syntactic research concentrates on procedures for a computerassisted (re)construction of textual hierarchy. These procedures give help in
testing linguistic theories on the balance of these different parameters. The
search for a balance of distributional observations and proposals of their
communicative effects as demonstrated in the syntax part of Schneiders
Grammatik has largely influenced this project.14
The schema of Judges 6,33ff. presented below, is based on the effects of the
markers mentioned above and traced in the text. The clauses are listed with
their syntactic features (f.) and with the morphosyntactic or lexical arguments
that constitute the connection between each clause and one of the preceding
clauses. The connection (c.) itself is described by mentioning the verbal forms
involved. The result of this analysis is a proposal of a syntactic structure that
could be used for further discourse analysis.
The clause connections proposed are labeled with a code that has been
generated from internal codes in the database that are used to indicate verbal
forms, conjunctions or clause-initial prepositions.
Some codes used15:
200: parallel clauses

372: conjunction
(code:3), wayyiqtol (:7), qatal in preceding clause (:2)
322: conjunction (code:3), qatal (:2), qatal in preceding clause (:2)
64: infinitive construct, introduced by 
999: start of direct speech section
The codes are combined with an indication of the distance between the two related
clauses in the text.

14

E. Talstra, Text Grammar and Biblical Hebrew: the viewpoint of Wolfgang Schneider, in:
Journal of Translation and Textlinguistics (JOTT) 5 (1992) 269-297.

15

For an extensive list of computer-generated codes used to for a formal marking of clause
connections, see: J.A. Groves, H.J. Bosman, J.H. Harmsen, E. Talstra, User Manual Quest.
Electronic Concordance Application for the Hebrew Bible, Haarlem: Netherlands Bible
Society, 1992, p. 128f.

172

Eep Talstra

CLAUSE HIERARCHY OF JUDGES 6,33FF.


[!#"%$'& ] [!)(+*-,/. ] [...!10+243-56!879&:"%3;2=< ] [! ] Ju 06,33a----|---------|

f.: W-X-Qatal, NPdet(agreement with Verb)


[372]
[322]
(distance: -1)
[!?>A@5=& ] [! ] Ju 06,33b----|
|
f.: no NPdet; Verb with ident.pers/num/gen.
[200]
|
c.: wayyiqtol --> W-X-Qatal
|
|
(dist: -1)
[ 2A,%5B>'CD&E0%3-5 -@ ] [!F.$'& ] [! ] Ju 06,33c----|
|
f.: no NPdet; Verb with ident.pers/num/gen.
|
ident. verb.form; parallel phrase order
|
c.: wayyiqtol --> wayyiqtol
|
(dist: -3)
[7F!G5A"IHKJ-, ] [L%M-@N2 ] [L=!#L'&E$=!?> ] [! ] Ju06,34a----|----|----|
f.: W-X-Qatal, NPdet(agreement with Vb)
[372][200][372]
ident. verb.tense form; parallel phrase order
|
|
|
c.: W-X-Qatal --> W-X-Qatal (3mpl --> 3fsg)
|
|
|
|
|
(dist: -1)
[>A(4!#M-@ ] [ 5A0%J'& ] [! ] Ju06,34b----|

f.: no NPdet; Verb with diff.pers/num/gen.; Verb paral  -PP
[200] |
|
c.: wayyiqtol --> W-X-Qatal
|
|
|
(dist: -1)
[!D&O>-$-, ] [>'CG5=&D@, ] [0-56CD& ] [! ] Ju06,34c----|
|
|
f.: NPdet(agreement with verb); agreement with pron.sfx.
|
|
paral.verb.tense form; paral. phrase order
|
|
c.: wayyiqtol --> wayyiqtol
|
|
(dist: -3)
[L%M'.3;2=<%@ ] [$+24M ] [P'&D<,-243 ] [! ] Ju06,35a----|----|
|
f.: W-X-Qatal, no NPdet; X = Npnon-det
[372][200] |
ident.verb.tense form; paral. phrase order
|
|
|
c.: W-X-Qatal --> W-X-Qatal (3fsg --> 3msg)
|
|
|
(dist: -1)
[!D&O>-$-, ] [ ,6!#L ] [PIH ] [0-56CD& ] [! ] Ju06,35b----|
|
|
f.: NPdet(agreement with verb); agreement with pron.sfx.
|
|
Verb with ident.pers/num/gen.
|
|
c.: wayyiqtol --> W-X-Qatal
|
|
(dist: -2)
[...7F!2=@4C)@4!Q>-MN,'@ ] [$+24M ] [P'&D<,-243 ] [! ] Ju06,35c---------|
|
f.: W-X-Qatal, no NPdet; X = NPnon-det
[372] |
ident.verb.tense form; paral. phrase order
|
|
c.: W-X-Qatal --> W-X-Qatal (3msg --> 3msg)
|
|
(dist: -1)
[!2A5=& ] [! ] Ju06,35d----|----|
|
f.: no NPdet; pers/num/gen verb agreement with prec. PP
[ 64]
|
c.: wayyiqtol --> W-X-Qatal
|
|
(dist: -1)
[P%J-,B>-0+2 ] Ju06,35e----|
|
f.: infinitive construct + prep
|
c.: infinitive --> wayyiqtol
|
(dist. -9)
[P'&:L+2A,AL;2A, ] [7F!G5A"IH ] [>-3-,=& ] [! ] Ju 06,36a--------------|
f.: wayyiqtol; NPdet; lexical connection (prop.nm): identical actor
c.: wayyiqtol --> W-X-Qatal

Clause Types and Textual Structure

173

This textual schema may clarify the points I want to show:


1. It is important to check all parameters that constitute clause connections: the
paradigmatic features: clause type (defined as the order of phrases), determinated or not determinated noun phrases, the order of phrases, and the syntagmatic features, i.e. the morphological and lexical contrasts or correspondences
between two clauses in a text.
2. The syntactical hierarchy constructed from this information demonstrates
that clause types and their actual features can contribute to textual structure at
each textual level: the main narrative line and the embedded narrative sections
labeled as paragraphs and subparagraphs, respectively.
It is only after this first analytical procedure based on distributional data that
one should try to define more abstract, paradigmatic patterns of clause and
paragraph types with their features and their relationships. From this point, in
my view, the interaction with discourse grammar of a more functional type
can begin.
A combination and an interpretation of the formal labels for clause connections may constitute a functional or semantical labeling of the texts segmentation. What constructions one would want to label as a sentence or a
paragraph would depend on a syntactic interpretation given to the distributional encoding of the clause connections. Which means, the distributional
encoding gives room to experiment freely with categories such as paragraphs, verb rank patterns or discourse types, which may help to test the
consistency of the clause hierarchy that has been established with the help of
the clause level linguistic parameters.
For example:

;
[!#"%$'& ] [!)(+*-,/. ] [..! ..!879&:"%3;2=< ] [! ] Ju 06,33a-----|-----------|
change of actants
[dep]
[par]
[!?>A@5=& ] [! ] Ju 06,33b-----|
[par]
[ 2A,%5B>'CD&E0%3-5'@ ] [!F.$'& ] [! ] Ju 06,33c-----|

;
[7F!G5A"IHKJ-, ] [L%M-@N2 ] [L=!#L'&E$=!?> ] [! ]
change of actants
[>A(4!#M-@ ] [ 5A0%J'& ] [! ]

[!D&O>-$-, ] [>'CG5=&D@, ] [0-56CD& ] [! ]

sub-

[L%M'.3;2=<%@ ] [$+24M ] [P'&D<,-243 ] [! ]


[!D&O>-$-, ] [ ,6!#L ] [PIH ] [0-56CD& ] [! ]

sub-

[..!87F!2=@4C)@4!Q>-MN,'@ ] [$+24M ] [P'&D<,-243 ] [! ]

[P'&:L+2A, -L;2A, ] [7F!G5A"IH ] [>-3-,=& ] [! ]


re-introduction of actants

|
|
|
|
Ju 06,34a-----|-----|-----|
[dep] [par][dep]
Ju 06,34b-----|
|
|
[par]
|
|
Ju 06,34c-----|
|
|
|
|
Ju 06,35a-----|-----|
|
[dep] [par]
|
Ju 06,35b-----|
|
|
|
|
Ju 06,35c-----------|
|
.....
|
.....
|
Ju 06,36a-----------|-----|

174

Eep Talstra

On the basis of these data, it is possible to propose "tentatively" a number of


syntactic functions and sections and to label them "" or "sub-". For example,
if one assumes that the formal codes [200] and [322], indicating parallel verbal
forms, establish syntactic relations of equal level, and the formal code [372] a
syntactic relation of dependency, the effect in terms of discourse grammar
would be as follows:
features

label or function

W-X-Qatal + NPdet:
W-X-Qatal - NPdet:

, change of actants
introduction of background information; it becomes
a sub- when continued by a wayyiqtol
, (re-)introduction of actants
continuation

wayyiqtol
wayyiqtol

+ NPdet:
- NPdet:

Though the labels background and foreground are still applicable, they do
not indicate absolute levels of the narrative. The W-X-Qatal of verse 33, for
example, opens a background paragraph with respect to the preceding part of
the story. The sequence of wayyiqtols refers to foreground, though only
within the paragraph just started. Background and foreground therefore, are
to be interpreted with reference to the level of the story line one is actually
reading, which need not always be the main story line.
For this reason, I think that Niccacci, in his narrative syntax, should allow for
more embeddings in a story than only a main story line and background
information. In Judges 6,33ff, it can be concluded from the absence of new
subject noun phrases that the wayyiqtols are secondary to the W-X-Qatal
clauses and do not imply a return to the main story line. One can still hold
that the wayyiqtols constitute a story line, but deriving its level cannot come
from the clause type (wayyiqtol) alone. The lexical and morphological
information on clause hierarchy has to be used also.16

16

Compare, however, Niccaccis comments (in The Syntax, p. 48) on a similar construction
in I Samuel 28,3, where the wayyiqtols in between of two W-X-Qatal clauses are seen as
continuation of the background information rather than a shift back to the main level of
the story. Niccacci says that "This is a exception". I would suggest that this is a normal
situation.

Clause Types and Textual Structure

175

3. II Kings 9. An example of a larger composition.


The analysis of the syntax of II Kings 9 is an attempt to apply the proposals
derived from Judges 6 to a larger text. The choice for this chapter has been
made because, here, we also find a considerable number of W-X-Qatal clauses
and again substantial differences among translators. Sometimes these clauses
are treated as part of the main narrative line, sometimes they are translated as
circumstantial, sometimes as background information in pluperfect, but
without much consistency.
Some examples:17
II Ki.09,1 W - X - Qatal
[P'&#,=&D@=.LR&?.#@+3 ] ["%$-,-2 ] [ ,B>-0 ] [( ,=&D@=.L ) 5AM%&G2A, ] [! ]
NBG:
De profeet Elia riep een van de profeten en zeide tot hem:
Bu.:
Schon aber hatte Elischa der Knder einen der Jungknder gerufen, hatte zu
ihm gesprochen:
NEB:
Elisha the prophet summoned one of the company of prophets
NIV:
The prophet Elisha summoned a man from the company of (...)
RSV:
Then Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of the prophets.
II Ki.09,11 W - X - Qatal
[!D&?."-,S&:"4@5T2A, ] [ ,'UA& ] [ ,6!#L'& ] [! ]
NBG:
Daarna kwam Jehu naar buiten ( ... ) en een hunner zeide tot hem:
Bu.:
Als Jehu nun wieder bei den Dienern seines Herrn drauen war, sprach man
zu ihm:
NEB:
When Jehu rejoined the kings officers, they said to him:
NIV:
When Jehu went out to his fellow officers , ...
RSV:
When Jehu came out to the servants of his master, ...
II Ki.09,14 Wayyiqtol + NPdet
[P/>'!D&V2A, ] [...( W'(+MA!#L'&X7Y@ ) ,6!#L'& ] [>-M0%J'& ] [! ]
NBG:
Aldus smeedde Jehu, de zoon van Josafat, de zoon van Nimsi, een
samenzwering tegen Joram.
Bu.:
So brachte Jehu Sohn Jehoschafats Sohns Nimschis eine Verknotung gegen
Joram zusammen.
NEB:
Then Jehu son of Jehoshaphat, son of Nimsi, laid his plans against Jehoram,
NIV:
So Jehu son of Jehoshapat, (...) conspired against Joram.
RSV:
Thus Jehu the son of Jehoshafat, (...) conspired against Joram.
II Ki.09,16 Wayyiqtol + NPdet
[ ,6!#L'& ] [@%<6>4& ] [! ]
NBG:
Toen besteeg Jehu zijn wagen en ging naar Jizrel.
Bu.:
Jehu fuhr ab, er machte sich auf den Gang nach Jesreel.
NEB:
He mounted his chariot and drove to Jezreel.
NIV:
Then he got into his chariot and rode ...
RSV:
Then Jehu mounted his chariot, and went ...
II Ki.09,16 W - X - Qatal
[P/>'!D&EJ-, ] [J=!G,B>2 ] ["/>4& ] [(L%"=!#L'&EZ+243 ) L'&9C#$-, ] [! ]
NBG:
En Ahazia, de koning (...), was gekomen om Joram te bezoeken.
Bu.:
Achasja Knig von (...) aber war herabgereist, nach Joram zu sehen.
NEB:
and Ahaziah king of Judah had gone down to visit him.
NIV:
and Ahaziah king of Judah had gone down to see him.
RSV:
And Ahaziah king of Judah had come down to visit Joram.
17

italics:
underlining:

the Hebrew clause type has been marked somehow in the translation;
no marking in the translation.

176

Eep Talstra

II Ki.09,24 W - X - Qatal
[J%M04@ ] [!#"'& ] [ ,-243 ] [ ,6!#L'& ] [! ]
NBG:
Maar Jehu omklemde de boog...
Bu.:
Jehu aber hatte seine hand schon voll am Bogen ...
NEB:
Jehu seized his bow and ...
NIV:
Then Jehu drew his bow and shot ...
RSV:
And Jehu drew his bow with his full strength ...
II Ki.09,27 W - X - Qatal
[L-,B> ] [(L%"=!#L'&EZ+243 ) L'&9C#$-, ] [! ]
NBG:
Toen Ahazia, de koning van Juda, dat zag,
Bu.:
Kaum sahs Achasja Knig von Jehuda, floh er auf dem Weg ...
NEB:
When Ahaziah king of Judah saw this, he fled ...
NIV:
When Ahaziah king of Juda saw what had happened ...
RSV:
When Ahaziah the king of Judah saw this ...
II Ki.09,29 W - X (PP) - Qatal [L%"=!#L'&V2A5 ] [L'&9C#$-, ] [Z+243 ] [...] [L/>-[N5\J%$-,\JI.M-@ ] [! ]
NBG:
Ahazia nu was koning geworden over Juda in het elfde jaar van Joram de zoon
van Achab.
Bu.:
Die Knigschaft ber Jehuda aber hatte Achasja im elften Jahr der Jahre
Jorams Sohns Achabs angetreten.
NEB:
In the eleventh year of Jehoram son of Ahab, Ahaziah became king over
Judah.
NIV:
(In the eleventh year ... Ahaziah had become king of Judah.)
RSV:
In the eleventh year ... Ahaziah began to reing over Judah.
II Ki.09,30 Wayyiqtol + NPdet
[L+2A,%5B>'CD& ] [ ,6!#L'& ] [ ,6!)@A& ] [! ]
NBG:
Jehu kwam te Jizrel.
Bu.:
Als Jehu nach Jesreel kommen sollte ...
NEB:
Jehu came to Jezreel.
NIV:
Then Jehu went to Jezreel.
RSV:
When Jehu came to Jezreel ...
II Ki.09,30 W - X - Qatal
[L-5A3%M ] [ 2=@4CD&#, ] [! ]
NBG:
Toen Izebel dit vernomen had,
Bu.:
... und Isabel es hrte,
NEB:
Now Jezebel had heard what had happened;
NIV:
When Jezebel heard about it,
RSV:
..., Jezebel heard of it, ...
II Ki.09,31 W - X - Qatal
[>+5AM-@ ] [ ,'@ ] [ ,6!#L'& ] [! ]
NBG:
Toen Jehu de poort binnenkwam, riep zij:
Buber:
Wie Jehu ins Tor kam, sprach sie:
NEB:
As Jehu entered the gate, she said:
NIV:
As Jehu entered the gate, she ...
RSV:
And as Jehu entered the gate, she said ...

As was the case with Judges 6, 33ff., it is not possible to read this text linearly.
It is not just a sequence of wayyiqtol clauses, i.e. a main story line, only
interrupted now and then by a number of W-X-Qatal or similar clauses. The
changes of clause types and the pattern of actants create a textual hierarchy
that can be established with the help of various linguistic markers present in
the surface text.
The use of explicit noun phrases in wayyiqtol clauses shows great variation. For
example, in verse 11 - 13, one sees it only once whereas, in verse 14 - 16, the
combination of wayyiqtol and a corresponding NPdet (]+^_N` ) is used three

Clause Types and Textual Structure

177



times. The repetition of the identical NPdet (


) in the wayyiqtol clauses of
verses 14,15, 16,30 constitute the main line of the story, which, in itself, is a
sub-story dependent on the first line, the W-X-Qatal in verse 1. (See the
grammatical structure presented below.)
The W-X-Qatal clauses are not just a repeated interruption of the main
sequence of wayyiqtol clauses, rather they have a clear structuring effect in
combination with the presence or absence of determinated NPs for subject. I
would propose, therefore, to differentiate between Schneiders description18
of W-X-Qatal clauses: "Vorhang auf! Spot an!" and a shorter definition: "Spot
an". "Spot an" applies to cases where no new actor or subject noun phrase is
being introduced whereas, "Vorhang auf! Spot an!" applies to the cases where
an actor is (re)introduced.

a

Compare verse 30f., where we find 
and   (re-)introduced as the
main actors in the text following the report of Jehus entering the city in verse
30. After their introduction we find no further NPdet marking an explicit
subject up to the end of the section in verse 37. So the entire section can be
read as a sub-paragraph to the Wayyiqtol clause that opens verse 30. Similarly
one could argue from verse 1, where, in the first W-X-Qatal clause, we find
Elisha reintroduced, that this makes the entire chapter 9 a separate paragraph
that should be read as a continuation of II Kings 8,25. This is, in fact, what
Buber does in his translation.
It seems possible to find more consistency in the translation of several clause
types when specific syntagmatic clause features are included. The following
translations, therefore, are proposed:
- "Now X had ..." for W-X-Qatal clauses that introduce a new actant or a new
combination of actants (verse 1, 16, 30, etc.).
- "And when X had ..."
for W-X-Qatal clauses where preceding actors are reintroduced (verse 11 and 31, possibly also verse 27).
- "Then X did ..." for Wayyiqtol clauses (re-)introducing an actor in the
storyline.


The construction with + time marker in verse 22 hardly can be seen as


indicating a new episode as Andersens definition19 predicts.
Here again, one cannot define an episode on the basis of one clause type
alone. If one could use the label episode for a number of paragraphs where
we find a continuation of an identical patterns of actants and, where no new
indication of time or place is presented where these actors interact, then, from

18

art. cit., p. 70ff.

19

See the introduction of this article and ftn. 2

178

Eep Talstra

verse 16 - 30 "he drove away to go to Jizreel" - "then he came to Jizreel", we


would have one episode
that is structured by the acts of the explicitly


mentioned subject: 
. Verse 22, where the actors, already present in this
episode, meet and are re-introduced, would then mark a major paragraph
break, not an episode.
The syntactical schema below does not present the entire grammatical
structure the text of II Kings 9, but only those verses from which the
conclusions on the larger textual structure are drawn. Translations for a
number of clause types and clause features are based on the proposals
mentioned above. Determinated Noun phrases marking the subject of a clause
are underlined. Unmarked subjects are indicated with: [ /
0 ].
4. Conclusion
A combination of clause-level features can be analyzed as marking divisions
and subdivisions in a text but, not the clause types defined solely by reference
to the verbal forms. It is not possible to take a clause type in itself as a marker
of a paragraph or an episode. The marking of the subdivisions of a text is a
more complicated procedure, depending on both syntagmatic (clause type)
and on paradigmatic data (verbal forms, pronominal references, lexical
connections). Background and foreground reference is of a relative nature: it is
valid within the boundaries of a paragraph only.
Functional labels should be applied on the basis of distributional data.

179

Clause Types and Textual Structure

II Kings 9. Grammatical structure


vs. 1 10
W X Qatal "Now Elisha had sent .."

[bN`]`#cNda_e`Ydfcg ] [hji]jk ] [ ]jlAm ] [( ]`#cNd_ ) npo`fkj] ] [^ ] 9,01


[^k ] [ /
0 ] [ lAg]` ] [^ ] 9,01

vs. 11 13
W X Qatal "And when Jehu came back .."
sub
[^G`Ddah]q`fhNc nrkj] ] [ ]sj` ] [ ]+^_N` ] [^ ]

9,11
9,11

vs. 14 15
wayyiqtol + NPdet "Then Jehu made a conspiracy against .."

[bl6^G`tkj] ] [..( uNvoj^_N` w:c ) ]+^f_N` ] [ lAoxmjyN` ] [^ ]

9,14

[^k ]

[ /
0 ] [ lAg]` ] [^ ]

(vs. 14)
W X Qatal + Ptc. "Now Joram had been .."
sub
[hnjk%z{y|gl=c ] [ l4gjo ] [_N`f_ ] [bl6^G` ] [^ ]

9,14
9,15
9,15

[ ]+^_N` ] [ l4g]` ] [^ ]
[bp~ovd ] [
o ` ] [
b ] ]

9,15
9,15

[ ]+^_N` ] [c~ l=` ] [^ ]


[_kj]jnjl6G` ] [ /
0 ] [}k` ] [^ ]
[_|gjo ] [c~o ] [bl=^G` ] [`G~ ]

9,16
9,16
9,16

[(}kpg_ ) bl6^_N` ] [co` ] [^ ]


[bN`G~g_wGg ] [ k|]jnjl=#`#c ] [ ]N
v lAyj_k ]

vs. 15
wayyiqtol + NPdet "Then Jehu said .."

vs. 16
wayyiqtol + NPdet "Then Jehu drove away .."

(vs. 16)
W X Qatal "Now Ahazia had come .."
sub
[hl=` ] [(_jh^_N` }kpg ) _`:i] ] [^ ]

9,16

[ /
0 ] [ ]jl=` ] [^ ]

9,17
9,17

}kpg ) bl6^_N` ] [ ]s|` ] [^ ]

9,21

vs. 17 21
W X Ptc. "The watchman was standing.."
sub-
[( kj]jnjl6G`#c ) k|h-zg_rkjn ] [h|gn ] [_pv|s _ ] [^ ]
[ ]+^_N`ynNvoy] ]
[(_jh^_N`

}kpg )^_N`:i] / ^ / ( kj]jl4`

180

Eep Talstra

vs. 21 29
Wayyiqtol Prep + Infin "The moment Joram saw Jehu .."

[`f_N` ] [^ ]
[ ]+^_N`y] ] [ bl6^_N` ] [ y+^]jl4~ ]
[ /
0 ] [ lAg]` ] [^ ]

9,22
9,22
9,22

[^G`fhN` ] [bl6^_N` ] [}pv_` ] [^ ]


[ /
0 ] [-df` ] [^ ]
[^_N`:i]rkj] ] [ /
0 ] [ lAg
] ` ] [^ ]

9,23
9,23
9,23

(vs. 24 26)
W X Qatal "Now Jehu had taken the bow .."
sub
[y|oxmNc ] [^hN` ] [ ]jkpg ] [ ]+^f_N` ] [^ ]

9,24
9,24

[wYza_ryN`#c}lAh ] [ 0
/ ] [-df` ] [^ ]
[ ]+^_N` ] [^G`lAi] ] [j
hl=` ] [^ ]

9,27
9,27
9,27

[b|o ] [ 0
/ ] [y|gp` ] [^ ]
[_|gkpoj^l=` ] [^G`fhNcxn ] [^y] ] [^#c~ l'` ] [^ ]

9,27
9,28

9,29

vs. 30 37
Wayyiqtol + NPdet "Then Jehu arrived at Jizreel .."

[_kj]jnjl6G` ] [ ]+^_N` ] [ ]-^Gcj` ] [^ ] -

9,30

[^G`njl6w:`#c ] [bl6^_N`y] ]

[ /
0 ] [}N` ] [^ ]

(vs. 27 - 28)
W X Qatal "And when Ahashia had seen it .."
sub
[_]jl ] [(_jh^_N` }kpg ) _`:i] ] [^ ]

(vs. 29)
W X (PP) Qatal "In the eleventh year .. Ahaziah had become king .."
sub
bl6^G`k ] [_-do ] [_l4nyjij]y-doc ] [^ ]

[_jh^_N`tkjn ] [ _`:i] ] [}kpg ] [(c i]qw:c )

(vs. 30)
W X Qatal "Now Jezebel had heard it .."
sub

[_npgjo ] [ kc|G`] ] [^ ]
[_N`Ddf`n ] [}^vpc ] [ /
0 ] [b|xy ] [^ ]

9,30
9,30

[b^kpo ] [_ ] [ /
0 ] [ lAg]|y ] [^ ]
[w)^k|ij_kj] ] [^#D` dv ] [ /
0 ] [ ]p` ] [^ ]

9,31
9,31
9,32

(vs. 31)
W X Qatal "and when Jehu had entered the gate .."
sub
[ l-nNoc ] [ ]c ] [ ]+^_N` ] [^ ]

Clause Types and Textual Structure

181

Literature
F.I. Andersen,
The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew,
(Janua Linguarum, Series Practica, vol. 231), The Hague, 1974
B.L. Bandstra,
Word Order and Emphasis in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: Syntactic Observations on Genesis 22
from a Discourse Perspective, in: Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, W. Bodine (ed.), Winona Lake,
1992, p. 109 - 124
W. Gesenius, E. Kautzsch,
Hebrische Grammatik,
Leipzig, 1909-28
J.A. Groves, H.J. Bosman, J.H. Harmsen, E. Talstra,
User Manual Quest. Electronic Concordance Application for the Hebrew Bible, Haarlem: Netherlands
Bible Society, 1992
P. Joon, T. Muraoka,
A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Subsidia Biblica 14/1-2), Rome, 1991
R.E. Longacre,
Discourse Perspective on the Hebrew Verb
in: W.R. Bodine (ed), Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, Eisenbrauns: Winona Lake, Indiana, 1992, p.
177-189
R.E. Longacre,
Joseph, a Story of Divine providence: A Text Theoretical and Textlinguistic Analysis of Genesis 37 and 3948, Winona Lake, Indiana, 1989
T. Muraoka,
Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew, Jerusalem/Leiden, 1985
J.A. Naud,
A syntactical Analysis of dislocations in Biblical Hebrew, Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages
16 (1990) 115-130
A. Niccacci,
A neglected point of Hebrew Syntax: yiqtol and position in the sentence,
Studium Biblicum Franciscanum, Liber Annuus 37 (1987) 7-19
A. Niccacci,
Letture sintattica della Prosa Ebraico-Biblica. Principii e applicaztioni (Studium Biblicum Franciscanum
Analecta 31), Jerusalem, 1991
W. Schneider,
Und es begab sich .. Anfnge von Erzhlungen im Biblischen Hebrisch, Biblische Notizen 70
(1993) 62-87
E. Talstra,
Towards a Distributional Definition of Clauses in Classical Hebrew, EThL 63 (1986) 95-105
E. Talstra,
"Text Grammar and Computer. The Balance of Interpretation and Calculation", in: Actes du
Troisime Colloque International Bible et Informatique: "Interprtation, Hermneutique, Expertise",
Tbingen 28-31 aout 1991 (Paris / Genve 1992) p.135-149
E. Talstra,
Text Grammar and Biblical Hebrew: the viewpoint of Wolfgang Schneider, in: Journal of
Translation and Textlinguistics (JOTT) 5 (1992) 269-297.
B. Waltke - M. OConnor
Biblical Hebrew Syntax
Winona Lake, 1991.

Potrebbero piacerti anche