| 36. Linguistic Exegesis The adverb kim`at {כִּמְעַט | kim-mə-ʿaṯ} ‘a little’ modifies the verb ya`avor {יַעֲבֹר | ya-ʿa-vôr} ‘he will cross’ in a finite clause expressing near-future intent. The sequence `avdekha et ha-yarden {עַבְדְּךָ אֶת־הַיַּרְדֵּן | ʿa-vde-khā ʾeṯ ha-ya-rḏēn} uses the accusative marker et {אֶת | ʾeṯ} with ha-yarden {הַיַּרְדֵּן | ha-ya-rḏēn} as the direct object, while the second et {אֵת | ʾēt} introduces a prepositional phrase with ha-melekh {הַמֶּלֶךְ | ha-me-leḵ} ‘the king’. The conjunction ve-lamah {וְלָמָּה | vә-lā-mā} ‘and why’ signals a rhetorical question. In yigmeleni {יִגְמְלֵנִי | yig-me-le-nî}, the Qal imperfect with suffix conveys a personal plea. The demonstrative ha-zot {הַזֹּאת | ha-zōṯ} ‘this’ emphasizes specificity. English SVO order mirrors the Hebrew VSO to maintain clarity and preserve emphasis on the question of repayment. |