| 4. Linguistic Exegesis The dialogue pivots on the vav-consecutive wayyōmer {וַיֹּ֣אמֶר | wayyōmer} marking each speaker turn. The question opens with Maddûa‘ {מַדּ֣וּעַ | Maddûa‘}, intensified by the demonstrative kākâh {כָּכָה | kākâh} and adjective ḏāl {דַּ֤ל | ḏāl}, depicting the prince’s frailty. The paired babbōqer {בַּבֹּ֣קֶר | babbōqer} serves as an idiom of repeated occurrence. The Hiphil taggîḏ {תַּגִּ֣יד | taggîḏ} invites a confession, followed by the pronominal suffix lī {לִ֑י | lī}. Amnon’s reply introduces the direct object marker ’et {אֶת־ | ’et} before Tāmār {תָּמָ֗ר | Tāmār}, and the construct chain ’ăḥôt Aḇšālōm ’āḥî {אֲחוֹת אַבְשָׁלֹם אָחִי | ’ăḥôt ’Aḇšālōm ’āḥî} defines the familial relation. |