| 12. Linguistic Exegesis The clause opens with the Hifil participle makah {מַכֵּה | makkēh} ‘one who strikes’, functioning as an indefinite generic subject introducing a legal case. It is followed by the noun ish {אִישׁ | ʾîš} ‘man’, marking the victim. The vav-consecutive perfect va-met {וָמֵת | wâ-mēṯ} ‘and he dies’ sequences the protasis and its factual outcome, underscoring direct causality. The noun mot {מוֹת | mōṯ} ‘death’, serving as an infinitive of result, foregrounds the outcome before the judgment. Finally, the Hifil imperfect yumat {יוּמָת | yû-māṯ} ‘he shall be put to death’ forms the apodosis, employing a judicial passive construction. This protasis–apodosis pattern without an overt conditional marker is characteristic of casuistic legislation, and placing mot before yumat amplifies the severity of the sanction. |