| 49. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with hinneh-zeh {הִנֵּה־זֶה | hînnēh-zeh} ‘behold this’ as a discourse marker. The nominal clause pairs the copula hāyāh {הָיָה | hāyāh} ‘was’ with the abstract noun ʿăvōn {עֲוֺן | ʿăvōn} ‘iniquity’. The construct chain sivʿat-leḥem {שִׂבְעַת־לֶחֶם | sivʿat-leḥem} ‘abundance of bread’ denotes surplus provision, and väšalvaṯ haššeqeṭ {וְשַׁלְוַת הַשְׁקֵט | väšalvaṯ haššeqeṭ} ‘prosperity of ease’ links calm with complacency. The repeated hāyāh locates these conditions with lah {לָהּ | lah} ‘to her’ and välivnōtehā {וְלִבְנוֹתֶיהָ | vä-livnōtehā} ‘and to her daughters’. The negative Hiphil hiḥzîqâ {הֶחֱזִיקָה | hiḥzîqâ} ‘she strengthened’ plus lōʾ {לֹא | lōʾ} ‘not’ introduces withheld support toward väyaḏ-ʿānî {וְיַד־עָנִי | väyaḏ-ʿānî} ‘hand of the poor’ and väʾevyōn {וְאֶבְיוֹן | väʾevyōn} ‘and needy’. The asyndetic listing and singular distributive verbs underscore collective guilt and social neglect. |