or longer duration, were terminated in the past, and hence are finally concluded, viz.:
(a) Corresponding to the perfect proper in Latin and the English perfect definite, in assertions, negations, confirmations, interrogations, &c., e.g. Gn 18 then Sarah denied, saying, I laughed not (לֹא צָחַ֫קְתִּי)......; and he said, Nay, but thou didst laugh (צָחָקְתְּ); Gn 3 מִי הִגִּיד לְךָ who told thee....? Cf. 3. Also pointing to some undefined time in the past, e.g. Is 66 מִֽי־שָׁמַע כָּזֹאת who hath (ever yet) heard such a thing?
[c] Rem. In opposition to this express use of the perfect to emphasize the completion of an event, the imperfect is not infrequently used to emphasize that which is still future, e.g. Jos 1 as I was (הָיִיתִי) with Moses, so will I be (אֶֽהְיֶה) with thee; Jos 1, Ex 10, Dt 32, 1 K 2, Is 46, Jo 2, Ec 1.
[d] (b) As a simple tempus historicum (corresponding to the Greek aorist) in narrating past events, e.g. Gn 4 and Abel, he also brought (הֵבִיא), &c.; Gn 7 the waters did prevail (גָּֽבְרוּ), &c.; Jb 1 there was a man (אִישׁ הָיָה) in the land of Uz, &c.; even in relating repeated actions, 1 S 18.
[e] Rem. As the above examples indicate, the perfect of narration occurs especially at the head of an entire narrative (Jb 1; cf. Dn 2) or an independent sentence (e.g. Gn 7), but in co-ordinate sentences, as a rule, only when the verb is separated from the copulative ו by one or more words (cf. above Gn 4 and 7). In other cases, the narrative is continued in the imperfect consecutive, according to § 111 a. The direct connexion of the narrative perfect with ו copulative (not to be confounded with the perfect consecutive proper, § 112) agrees rather with Aramaic syntax (cf. Kautzsch, Gramm. des Biblisch-Aram., § 71, 1 b). On the examples (which are in many respects doubtful) in the earlier texts, see § 112 pp–uu.
[f] (c) To represent actions, &c., which were already completed in the past, at the time when other actions or conditions took place (pluperfect),[1] e.g. 1 S 28 now Samuel was (long since) dead[2]... and Saul had put away (הֵסִיר) those that had familiar spirits... out of the land. Both these statements, being as it were in parentheses, merely assign a reason for the narrative beginning at verse 6. Cf. 1 S 9, 25, 2 S 18.—Gn 20 (for the Lord had fast closed up, &c.); 27, 31, Dt 2; and in a negative statement, Gn 2 for the Lord God had not (up to that time) caused it to rain, &c. This is especially frequent, from the nature of the case, in relative, causal, and temporal clauses, when the main clause contains a tense referring to the past, e.g. Gn 2 and he rested... from all his work which he had made (עָשָׂה); Gn 7,
