| 4. Linguistic Exegesis The verse moves from narration into direct court speech by opening with vayedabberu {וַֽיְדַבְּר֧וּ | vā-yə-dab-bə-rû} ‘and they spoke,’ a preterite-style verbal form that advances the storyline and introduces the speakers, hakasdim {הַכַּשְׂדִּ֛ים | ha-kaś-dîm} ‘the Chaldeans.’ The phrase aramit {אֲרָמִ֑ית | ʾă-rā-mîṯ} ‘in Aramaic’ functions as a discourse signal: it marks not merely what they said but the language setting of the royal court, preparing the reader for an extended Aramaic section. Their address begins with a vocative, malka {מַלְכָּא֙ | mal-kāʾ} ‘O king,’ followed by the fixed blessing leolmin kheyi {לְעָלְמִ֣ין חֱיִ֔י | lə-ʿol-mîn ḥe-yî} ‘live forever,’ a politeness formula that frames their request as loyal service. Two imperatival moves then drive the request: emar {אֱמַ֥ר | ʾĕmar} ‘say’ governs khelma {חֶלְמָ֛א | ḥel-māʾ} ‘the dream,’ with the indirect object expressed in servant language (including the courtly self-reference leavadakh {לְעַבְדָ֖ךְ | lə-ʿav-dāḵ}). The final clause is coordinated with û- {וּ | û-} and presents a forward-looking commitment: nekhaveh {נְחַוֵּֽא | nə-ḥaw-wēʾ} ‘we will make known,’ positioning the promised interpretation as contingent on the king first disclosing the dream. |