340 DAVID ARMITAGE (μymr yerQ) is specified, and in the parallelism with yn[yv/h in the ie n ˆ " ie i first part of v. 22 23. For these reasons, the translation “rescue” is acceptable if yntyi"ˆ and μymr yerQm are taken to be syntactically i : n[ ie n ˆ " i linked, with the wild oxen (in parallel with the lion in the first half of the verse) symbolizing threat 24. Critical to interpretation of yntyi"ˆ in Ps 22,22 is the construal of i : n[ its qatal form. The Hebrew conjugations have generally been viewed as grammaticalizing either tense or aspect. In tense based systems the qatal form is understood as primarily expressing past time 25. In aspect based systems it is viewed as perfective, in the sense of ‘viewing a situation as a whole’ 26. Whilst the use of per- fective verbs is often correlated with referencing of past situations, there is no necessary correspondence; “whole situations” may be referenced which are past, present, or indeed future 27. yityi"ˆ in Ps 22,22 has often been interpreted as a perfective verb n : n[ with past time reference. Following the Masoretic accentuation, it can be placed in direct relationship to μymr yerQm 28 : “Save me from ie n ˆ " i the mouth of the lion; from the horns of the wild oxen you have rescued me!” A variation on this approach is to construe yntyi"ˆ as i : n[ perfective but to dissociate it from the clause that it follows, taking There are a number of other instances in which forms derived from hn[ 23 are found in close association with form derived from [vy, notably Ps 20,7 and Ps 60,7. Equivalent approaches are taken by (for example) the New Revised 24 Standard Version, the Nouvelle Edition Geneve, the Luther Bibel, and the Spanish Reina-Valera Update (1995). An alternative approach is taken by M.J. DAHOOD, Psalms 1-50 (AB ; Garden City, NY 1966) I, 142. He proposes that a different homonym of hn[ meaning “conquer” or “triumph” is in view here. A usage similar to this is also identified in DCH (hn[ v. 2 : “cause to triumph, grant victory”); the examples suggested do however seem to make acceptable sense when “answer” is used. A recent defence of the tense based position is found in M.F. ROGLAND, 25 Alleged Non-past Uses of Qatal in Classical Hebrew (Studia Semitica Neerlandica ; Assen 2003) 131-132. B.K. WALTKE – M.P.O’CONNOR, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew 26 Syntax (Winona Lake, IN 1990) 480. Cf B. COMRIE, Aspect. An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect 27 and Related Problems (Cambridge 1976) 66. Cf M. BOULTON, “Forsaking God: a theological argument for Christian 28 lamentation ”, SJT 55 (2002) 67; HEINEMANN, “Exposition”, 299. See also New Revised Standard Version, King James Version, English Standard Version.