Sunday, August 14, 2022

William M. Schniedewind on the Transitional Particle ועת(ה)

  

In conclusion, the relationship between the use of w’th(h) in Epigraphic Hebrew and in S[tandard]B[iblical]H[ebrew] warrants some reflection. To wit, is its regular usage as a transitional particle, essentially a paragraph divider, reflected at all in biblical literature? In addition to serving as a general lexical device to mark transition in oral discourse, a few examples recall its more formal use in letter writing. For example, we read in 1 Samuel 15:1, “Samuel said to Saul, “The LORD sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; and now [w’th], listen to the Words of the Lord.” Here the function of w’th is both transitional and metapragmatic, as in Epigraphic Hebrew. Likewise, the common use of w’th followed by the imperative šm’ “hear” seems to harken back to the messenger formula utlizied in letters (Examples of the expression w’th šm’ [of variations thereof] include Gen. 27:8; Exod. 19:5; Deut. 4:1; 1 Sam. 8:9; 15:1; 25:7; 26:19; Isa. 44:1; 47:8; Jer. 37:20; 42:18; Amos 7:16; Prov. 5:7). For example, the narrator subtly employs features of a formal messenger scene in 1 Samuel 28:21-22: “The woman came to Saul, and when she saw that he was terrified, she said to him, ‘Your maidservant has listened to you; I have taken my life in my hand, and have listened to what you have said to me. And now, you also listen [w’th šm’-n’] to your maidservant: let me set a morsel of bread before you.’” The role of w’th in letters is most explicit in 2 Kings 5:6: “He brought the letter [hspr] to the king of Israel, which read [l’mr]: And now [w’th], when this letter reaches you, know that I have sent to you my servant Na’aman, that you may cure him of his leprosy.” Similarly, we read in 2 Kings 10:1-2: “So Jehu wrote letters and sent them to Samaria, to the rulers of Jezreel, to the elders, and to the guardians of the sons of Ahab, saying [l’mr]: ‘and now [w’th], your master’s sons are with you.’” In these last two examples, the use of w’th most closely reminds us of Epigraphic Hebrew with regard to their context of written letters; it is worth noting that w’th actually follows l’mr, which is traditionally translated “saying” but is functionally a metapragmatic marker of a direct quotation. These examples indicate the awareness and probable influence of the metapragmatic use of w’t known from Epigraphic Hebrew.

 

It is clear that the usage of w’th as a paragraph divider was widespread in both Hebrew and Aramaic epistolary practice from the late Iron Age through the Persian period. Moreover, letter writing was one of the foundational exercises of a scribal apprentice; we find examples of scribal exercises in letter writing in Akkadian, Ugaritic (KTU 5.9.; 5.10; 5.11), and Epigraphic Hebrew (Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions 3.1 and 3.6). We may suppose that w’t(h) originated, as Pardee suggested, as a marker in oral discourse. Indeed, this suggestion is supported by the word’s prevalence in direct speech in biblical literature. From this, it might have been borrowed for formal use in the practice of writing letters—one of the main tasks of the scribal enterprise and one of the foundations of early scribal education. This would have bred scribal familiarity with the term. This may in turn explain why w’t(h) came to be used commonly in biblical texts. It certainly was a textual device of great familiarity to the scribes of biblical literature just as it was a regular feature in letters written in Epigraphic Hebrew. (William M. Schniedewind, “’And Now’ W’T(H): A Transition Particle in Ancient Hebrew,” in “Like ‘Ilu Are You Wise”: Studies in Northwest Semitic Languages and Literature in Honor of Dennis G. Pardee, ed. H. H. Hardy II, Joseph Lam, and Eric D. Reymond [Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 73; Chicago: The University of Chicago, 2022], 148-49)