| 22. Linguistic Exegesis The narrative opens with the vav-consecutive in vayomer {וַיֹּאמֶר | vayyōmer} ‘and he said,’ a device that advances the action. The idiom mah-li u-le-khem {מַה-לִּי וּלְכֶם | mah-lî wə-le-ḵem} ‘what is it to me and to you’ functions as a rhetorical challenge formula. The clause ki-tihyū-lî lə-sāṭān {כִּי־תִהְיוּ־לִּי לְשָׂטָן | kî-tih-yū-lî lə-sā-ṭān} employs the Qal imperfect with jussive nuance to express potential opposition, and the noun satan ‘adversary’ underscores intra-court conflict. The interrogative niphal form hă-yō-māt {הֲיוֹמַת | hă-yō-māt} ‘shall be put to death’ uses the interrogative he to frame a rhetorical question in passive voice. The double conjunction kî {כִּי | kî} first signals reason and then introduces the self-affirmation ki-hălō’ yādatî {כִּי־הֲלוֹא יָדַעְתִּי | kî-hă-lō’ yā-ḏa-tî} ‘for do I not know,’ which asserts royal authority. Repetition of ha-yôm {הַיּוֹם | ha-yôm} ‘today’ throughout the verse heightens immediacy. The English rendering follows Hebrew clause order to preserve the force and rhythm of the original. |