| 20. Linguistic Exegesis The opening particle akh {אַךְ | ʾăkh} introduces a restrictive prohibition followed by the definite hanavi {הַנָּבִיא | han-nā-vî} ‘the prophet’ as subject. A relative clause with asher {אֲשֶׁר | ʾă-šer} and the Hiphil verb yazid {יָזִיד | yā-zîḏ} conveys willful overstepping. The Piel infinitive ledaber {לְדַבֵּר | lə-ḏab-bēr} governs the noun davar {דָּבָר | dā-vār}, and bishmi {בִּשְׁמִי | biš-mî} marks invocation of divine authority. The direct object marker et {אֵת | ʾēt} links the prohibition lo-tsivitiv {לֹֽא־צִוִּיתִיו | lō-ṣî-wî-ṯî-w} to the infinitive ledaber. A second clause introduced by va-asher yedaber beshem elohim akherim {וַאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר בְּשֵׁם אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים | wa-ʾă-šer yə-ḏab-bēr bə-šēm ʾĕ-lō-hîm ʾă-ḥê-rîm} establishes an alternative forbidden speech. The verdict u-met hanavi hahu {וּמֵת הַנָּבִיא הַהֽוּא | ū-mēt han-nā-vî ha-hû} employs the vav-consecutive plus Qal perfect to impose death. The dual conditional clauses culminating in a judicial sentence underscore divine sovereignty and the necessity of prophetic fidelity. |