Vav Conjunction & the Vav Consecutive

This is called the “waw” or “vav” conjunction, depending upon the way you pronounce the letter – e.g., when I took Hebrew, the ו was called the “waw,” but today in more recent, Hebrew grammars, it is called the “vav.” However, regardless of how you pronounce it, it functions as the Hebrew conjunction, and its primary translation is “and,” but there are instances where it is translated as…

• “but” (e.g., “But (ו) a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground” – Genesis 2:6);
• “now” (e.g., “Now (ו) the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,” – Exodus 14:1);
• “then” (e.g., “Then (ו) the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,” – Leviticus 5:14);
• “when” (e.g., “When (ו) the woman saw that the tree was good for food,” – Genesis 3:6);
• “so” (e.g., “But the children struggled together within her; and she said, ‘If it is so, why then am I this way?’ So (ו) she went to inquire of the LORD” – Genesis 25:22).

The “vav” consecutive is the use of the “vav” in a continued narration in which either the perfect or imperfect form of a verb is beginning the narration. So, when a narration is begun with a perfect verb form, then the remaining narration is treated as a consecutive action of the initial verb, and thus, the imperfect form of a verb (which normally is translated in English by “will” with the action it represents) will be translated in the perfect as a completed action as well. And the same happens with the perfect when a narration may begin with an imperfect verb form, followed by a perfect with a “vav,” wherein that perfect is then translated with “will” attached to its translation to present a “consecutive” narration that began with the imperfect.

Thus, in the following passage in 1 Kings 12:15-16, we see a perfect verb form beginning the narration, followed by “vav” consecutives attached to imperfects, which in turn are then given a perfect, or completed translation:

¹⁵“So the king did not listen (perfect verb form that begins and leads this narration) to the people; for it was a turn of events from the LORD, that He might establish His word, which the LORD spoke through Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam the son of Nebat. ¹⁶ When all Israel saw (this is an imperfect verb following the lead of the perfect verb that began the narration) that the king did not listen to them, the people answered (imperfect verb form following the lead of perfect verb) the king, saying, "What portion do we have in David? We have no inheritance in the son of Jesse; To your tents, O Israel! Now look after your own house, David!" So Israel departed (imperfect verb form following the lead of the perfect verb) to their tents.”

However, in the following passage of Amos 2:1-2, we see the exact opposite, wherein an imperfect verb form begins the narration, followed by perfect verb forms with a “vav” consecutive attached to them in order to express a continued narration of future time:

¹ “Thus says the LORD, ‘For three transgressions of Moab and for four I will not revoke (this is the future imperfect verb that begins and leads this narration) its punishment, because he burned the bones of the king of Edom to lime. ² So I will send (this is a perfect verb form that it is translated as imperfect, or future, following the narration of the leading, imperfect verb) fire upon Moab, and it will consume (perfect verb form following the lead of the imperfect verb) the citadels of Kerioth; and Moab will die (perfect verb form following the lead of the imperfect verb) amid tumult, with war cries and the sound of a trumpet.”

Now with regard to your interpretive and exegetical analysis of such passages, just remember that both the perfect and the imperfect verb forms still carry their basic meaning even with a “vav” consecutive attached to them. Consequently, in the first passage of 1 Kings 12:15-16, the “seeing,” was something they continued “to see,” and their “answer” was a continuous “answer” to Rehoboam, and their “departure” was a continuous “departure” from the rule of Rehoboam. And the same can be said of Amos 2:1-2, in that the “sending” of the fire, the “consummation” of Kerioth, and the “death” of Moab were already completed acts in God’s sovereign purpose and judgment, even though they were not happening at that time.