| 4. Linguistic Exegesis The verse begins with the vav-consecutive formulaic response marker wayyaqam {וַיָּקָם | wayyāqām} ‘and he rose’, which functions here as “answered” rather than indicating literal movement. The noun phrase hakohen {הַכֹּהֵן | hakōhēn} ‘the priest’ is connected by the preposition el {אֶל | ʼel} ‘to’ to the proper noun david {דָּוִד | dāwīd} ‘David’, marking him as the addressee. The following vav-consecutive imperfect wayyomer {וַיֹּאמֶר | wayyōmer} ‘and he said’ introduces the content of his reply. Within the speech, lo {לֹא | lōʼ} ‘not’ negates li-lechem {לִי־לֶחֶם | li-leḥem} ‘to me bread’, indicating lack of ordinary provisions. The term ha-cholim {הַחֹלִים | ha-ḥōlîm} ‘common bread’ is countered by ella {אֶלָּא | ʼellāʼ} ‘except’, restricting the available bread to la-kohanim {לַכֹּהֲנִים | la-kōhānîm} ‘for the priests’ alone (le-vaddam {לְבַדָּם | lə-vaḏḏām} ‘alone’). The conditional im {אִם | ʼim} ‘if’ and the Niphal perfect nishmeru {נִשְׁמְרוּ | nišmərû} ‘they have kept themselves’ impose a purity requirement upon ha-gebarim {הַגְּבָרִים | ha-ḡəḇārîm} ‘the men’. |