21st Century Bible Hebrew -- related aspects

Now let’s go back to Genesis 41:43 where I showed that instead of a perfect aspect verb, it uses an aspectless verb.

מב וַיָּ֨סַר פַּרְעֹ֤ה אֶת־טַבַּעְתּוֹ֙ מֵעַ֣ל יָד֔וֹ וַיִּתֵּ֥ן אֹתָ֖הּ עַל־יַ֣ד יוֹסֵ֑ף וַיַּלְבֵּ֤שׁ אֹתוֹ֙ בִּגְדֵי־שֵׁ֔שׁ וַיָּ֛שֶׂם רְבִ֥ד הַזָּהָ֖ב עַל־צַוָּארֽוֹ:

מג וַיַּרְכֵּ֣ב אֹת֗וֹ בְּמִרְכֶּ֤בֶת הַמִּשְׁנֶה֙ אֲשֶׁר־ל֔וֹ וַיִּקְרְא֥וּ לְפָנָ֖יו אַבְרֵ֑ךְ וְנָת֣וֹן אֹת֔וֹ עַ֖ל כָּל־אֶ֥רֶץ מִצְרָֽיִם:

It turns out that there is a relationship between these four verb forms that lets them substitute for each other. Aspectless verbs substitute for perfect aspect when necessary, and progressive for imperfect in a very few places. So there’s some strange grammar in Genesis 11:30 about Sarah (or Sarai as she was then) that gave a few rabbis some difficulty.

ל וַתְּהִ֥י שָׂרַ֖י עֲקָרָ֑ה אֵ֥ין לָ֖הּ וָלָֽד:

Sarai must have been barren; she had no children.

Va-t’hi at the start of the verse is the feminine evidentiary epistemic and the evidence should be in narrative past. But v’lo yihyeh is a denial that X will exist in the future. There’s no other grammar to substitute for it, but because imperfect and progressive are related, you can say eyn to give the evidence for deciding that she is barren. 

But in Numbers 5: 21-22 in the laws for the sotah or suspected wife:

כא וְהִשְׁבִּ֨יעַ הַכֹּהֵ֥ן אֶֽת־הָֽאִשָּׁה֘ בִּשְׁבֻעַ֣ת הָֽאָלָה֒ וְאָמַ֤ר הַכֹּהֵן֙ לָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה יִתֵּ֨ן יְהוָֹ֥ה אוֹתָ֛ךְ לְאָלָ֥ה וְלִשְׁבֻעָ֖ה בְּת֣וֹךְ עַמֵּ֑ךְ בְּתֵ֨ת יְהוָֹ֤ה אֶת־יְרֵכֵךְ֙ נֹפֶ֔לֶת וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵ֖ךְ צָבָֽה:

כב וּ֠בָ֠אוּ הַמַּ֨יִם הַֽמְאָֽרְרִ֤ים הָאֵ֨לֶּה֙ בְּֽמֵעַ֔יִךְ לַצְבּ֥וֹת בֶּ֖טֶן וְלַנְפִּ֣ל יָרֵ֑ךְ וְאָֽמְרָ֥ה הָֽאִשָּׁ֖ה אָמֵ֥ן ׀ אָמֵֽן:

The kohen administers to the woman the oath of the alah [subpoena or summons], the kohen says to the woman, the Lord give you to/for an alah and vow among your people; at the time of the Lord putting your thigh falling and your womb wasting

Because this cursing water comes into your innards for wasting your womb and making your thigh fall; the woman says amen amen.

In verse 21 we have nofelet and tsavah, both progressive aspect. In verse 22 they’re in reverse order but it’s latsbot and lanpil.

If we had imperfect in verse 21 it would be a prediction that this would happen, but we mortals don’t know if Gd has condemned this woman and, in fact, at this point she has not yet drunk the waters, and Mishnah Sotah shows there are several things that could happen such that she never does drink.  

This uncertainty about what will happen in the next few minutes also requires that we not use perfect aspect in verse 22. It’s not just that we’re expressing a purpose, we’re envisioning that these things might actually take place, but we can’t use an aspected verb without a wrong implication one way of the other.