| 18. Linguistic Exegesis The vav-consecutive on vedarashu {וְדָרְשׁ֥וּ | wə·dār·šû} ‘and they shall investigate’ signals a continuation of the legal directive. The definite participle hašōp̄əṭîm {הַשֹּׁפְטִים | ha·šō·p̄ə·ṭîm} ‘the judges’ functions as the subject. The infinitive absolute hētēḇ {הֵיטֵ֑ב | hē·tēḇ} intensifies the verb, conveying the need for thorough examination. Wə·hinnēh {וְהִנֵּ֤ה | wə·hinnēh} ‘and behold’ introduces the conditional revelation. The construct chain ʿēd·šeqer {עֵֽד־שֶׁ֙קֶר֙ | ʿēd·šeqer} ‘false witness’ defines the type of testimony under scrutiny, followed by šeqer {שֶׁ֖קֶר | še·qer} ‘falsehood’ as the specified offense. The perfect verb ʿānāh {עָנָ֥ה | ʿā·nāh} ‘has testified’ denotes completed action, and the prepositional phrase bᵉ·ʾaḥîw {בְאָחִֽיו | bə·ʾa·ḥîw} ‘against his brother’ identifies the injured party. The Hebrew framing and repetition of falsehood create emphasis on judicial precision and communal trust. |