| 9. Linguistic Exegesis bayom hahu {בַּיּ֨וֹם הַה֜וּא | bə-yôm ha-hûʼ} ‘in that day’ functions as a temporal marker introducing future judgment. The imperfect yiḥyû {יִהְי֣וּ | yiḥyû} predicates identity for ʻārê māʻuzzō {עָרֵ֣י מָעֻזּ֗וֹ | ʻārê māʻuzzō} ‘cities of his stronghold’. The comparison kaʻăzûvat haḥōreš {כַּעֲזוּבַ֤ת הַחֹ֙רֶשׁ֙ | kaʻăzûvat haḥōreš} ‘like a forsaken thing of the forest’ and wə-hāʼāmîr {וְהָ֣אָמִ֔יר | wə-hāʼāmîr} ‘and the topmost branch’ uses a construct chain with vav coordination. The relative clause ʼăšer ʻāzəvû {אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָזְב֔וּ | ʼăšer ʻāzəvû} ‘which they forsook’ governs the causal mip̄nê bənê yisrāʼēl {מִפְּנֵ֖י בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל | mip̄nê bənê yisrāʼēl} ‘because of the sons of Israel’. The final wə-hāyəṯā šəmāmâ {וְהָיְתָ֖ה שְׁמָמָֽה | wə-hāyəṯā šəmāmâ} ‘and it will become desolation’ presents the outcome. English word order preserves Hebrew chaining and vav-consecutive syntax for theological emphasis. |