Supposed “Conversive” Imperfects and Perfects in the Aramaic Texts from Qumran
A Critical Evaluation of Claimed and Implied Occurrences
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21586258 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kasper Siegismund (0000-0001-5982-3229, University of Copenhagen Biblical Studies Section, Faculty of Theology https://dx.doi.org/87027 Copenhagen Denmark, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 32 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 133-168 |
| Publication date | 2025-03-12 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Dead Sea Discoveries (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0929-0761 • E-ISSN: 1568-5179 |
| Publisher | Walter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.1163/15685179-bja10062 |
| OpenAlex | W4408421774 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 2 |
This article discusses the phenomenon of “conversive” (or “consecutive”) verb forms in the Aramaic documents from Qumran. A number of scholars have argued that cases of Hebrew-style “conversive” imperfects ( wayyiqtol s) occur as Hebraisms in the Aramaic texts. In other cases, modern translations of Aramaic imperfect forms with the conjunction “and” as simple past tense imply that the translators must have interpreted the forms according to classical Hebrew usage. Similarly, the complement of wayyiqtol in the classical Hebrew system, the “conversive” perfect ( weqatal ), has been argued to be present in the Aramaic material, or—more often—its presence seems to be implied when perfect forms with the conjunction “and” are rendered as future tense. The article provides a detailed and critical discussion of the occurrences claimed or implied by various scholars and concludes that the corpus in fact contains no unambiguous cases of the phenomenon
Archaeology · Biblical studies · Dead Sea Scrolls · Hebrew Bible · Jewish studies · Judaism · Linguistics · Ancient Near East History · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Historical and Linguistic Studies · History · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|