| 5. Linguistic Exegesis The narrative employs the vav-consecutive wāyōmer {וַיֹּ֤אמֶר | wāyōmer} to introduce direct royal speech, followed by the imperative lēk {לֵ֤ךְ | lēk} demanding action amid crisis. Construct phrases ʾel-kōl-maʿyanê hammayyim {אֶל־כָּל־מַעְיְנֵ֣י הַמַּ֔יִם | ʾel-kōl-maʿyanê hammayyim} “to all springs of the waters” and kōl-hanəḥālîm {כָּל־הַנְּחָלִ֑ים | kōl-hanəḥālîm} “all the streams” create parallel objectives for the search, reflecting a comprehensive strategy during famine. The particle ʾûlay {אוּלַ֣י | ʾûlay} signals uncertainty, leading into the cohortative Niphal nimṣāʾ {נִמְצָ֣א | nimṣāʾ} “we may find.” The Piel ūnəḥayyê {וּנְחַיֶּה֙ | ūnəḥayyê} “and we may preserve alive” takes direct objects “horse and mule,” while the negative wəlōʾ nakhriṯ mēhabbehēmāh {וְל֥וֹא נַכְרִ֖ית מֵהַבְּהֵמָֽה | wəlōʾ nakhriṯ mēhabbehēmāh} expresses intent to avert livestock destruction. English renders these modal and directive forms with “may find” and “Travel throughout” to maintain Hebrew emphasis on scope and preservation. |