< Previous | Contents | Next >
VIEW OF HEBREW TENSES AS SEEN IN THE NEW TRANSLATION.
THE HEBREW has only two tenses, which, for want of better terms, may be called "Past" and "Present".
The "past" is either perfect or imperfect, e.g., 'I "lived" in this house five years,' or 'I "have lived" in this house five years;' this distinction may and can only be known by the context, which must in all cases be viewed from the writer's standing-point.
In "every" other instance of its occurrence, it points out either--
1) "A gentle imperative", e.g., "Lo, I have sent unto thee Naaman my servant, and thou "hast" recovered him from his leprosy;" see also Zech. 1.3 &c; or
2) "A fixed determination" that a certain thing shall be done, e.g., "Nay, my lord, hear me, the field "I have given" to thee, and the cave that is in it; to thee "I have given" it; before the eyes of the sons of my people "I have given" it to thee; bury thy dead;" and in the answer, "Only--if thou wouldst hear me--"I have given" the money of the field."
The "present" tense--as in the Modern Arabic, Syriac, and Amharic, the only living remains of the Semitic languages--besides its proper use, is used rhetorically for the future, there being no grammatical form to distinguish them; this, however, causes no more difficulty than it does in
English, Turkish, Greek, Sanscrit, &c., the usages of which may be seen in the Extracts from the principal grammarians.
In "every" other instance of its occurrence, it points out "an imperative", not so gently as when a preterite is used for this purpose, nor so stern as when the regular imperative form is employed, but more like the infinitive, Thou art "to write" no more; thou "mayest" write no more.
The present participle differs from the present tense just in the same manner and to the same extent as "I am writing, or, I am a writer," does from, "I write, or, I do write."
THE ABOVE VIEW of the Hebrew tenses is equally applicable to all the Semitic languages, including the Ancient and Modern Arabic, the Ancient and Modern Syriac, the Ancient and Modern Ethiopic, the Samaritan, the Chaldee, and the Rabbinical Hebrew--not one of which is admitted to have the Waw Conversive.
It may be added, that all the "Teutonic" languages--fourteen in number--agree with the "Semitic" in rejecting a future tense; the futurity of an event being indicated either by auxiliary verbs, adverbs, and other particles, or by the context.
12 "And God saith, This "is" the token of the covenant that "I am making" between Me and you, and every living creature that "is" with you, for generations age-during; 13 My bow I "have" given in the cloud, and it "hath" been for a token of a covenant between Me and the earth; 14 and it "hath" come to pass, in "My sending" a cloud over the earth, that the bow "hath been" seen in the cloud, 15 and I "have" remembered My covenant, that "is" between Me and you, and every living creature of all flesh, and the waters "become" no more a deluge to destroy all flesh."
Verse 12. And God saith.] The present tense is used, according to the almost universal custom of the Hebrews, &c., to bring up the narrative to the present time. The conjunction "and" has no special or logical significance, but is used simply to break the abruptness of the opening sentence, as the Hebrews scarcely ever allow a verb in the present or past tense to commence a sentence, especially in prose, without some other word preceding it; the only other way would have been to put the nominative before the verb, but this, though occasionally used, is not agreeable to Hebrew taste.
This (is) the token.] The Hebrew substantive verb is, in the present tense, very frequently omitted; in the past tense, it is very rarely, if ever, omitted.
That I am making, lit. giving.] The participle is more strikingly expressive of present action than if the present tense had been employed.
That (is) with you.] The present tense of the substantive verb is understood as above, according to the "unus loquendi".
V.13. My bow I have given in the cloud.] The past tense here is used to express a "fixed "determination" that the circumstance mentioned is undoubtedly to take place; most unwarrantably does the Common Version translate as a present, 'I do set;' while the theory of the "Waw conversive" has no place here, since there is no "Waw" to work on.
And it hath become.] The fixed determination is here continued from the preceding clause; on no grammatical principle can it be rendered present, much less future, as it is in the Common Version; the Waw here can have no converting power, there being no future preceding it to rest on, as the rules of "Waw conversive" imperatively demand.
V.14. It hath come to pass--the bow hath been seen--I have remembered]--though rendered future in the Common Version, are all past, being preceded by pasts, and are to be explained by the same principle--of expressing the certainty of a future action by putting it in the past, owing to the determination of the speaker that it must be.
The only remaining verb in the 15th verse is correctly put in the present tense; the speaker, going forward in thought to the period when the events alluded to take place, declares graphically that 'the waters "become" no more a deluge to destroy all flesh.'