| 6. Linguistic Exegesis The verse is introduced by ki {כִּי | kî} ‘for’, linking the command to the larger oracle, and koh {כֹּה | kôh} ‘thus’, a conventional cue that what follows is an authoritative utterance. The speech frame amar {אָמַר | ʾāmar} with elai {אֵלַי | ʾēlay} ‘to me’ directly commissions the prophet, while Adonai {אֲדֹנָי | ʾădōnāy} as subject foregrounds sovereign authority behind the instruction. The command sequence lekh {לֵךְ | lēk} ‘go’ + haamed {הַעֲמֵד | haʿămēd} ‘cause to stand/set’ forms a chain of imperatives in which the Hiphil directs Isaiah to ensure that a watcher is installed, not merely to go himself. The object hametzapeh {הַמְצַפֶּה | hamməṣappê} ‘the watchman’ is definite and role-specific, presenting the watch as an established office within the prophetic scene. A relative clause introduced by asher {אֲשֶׁר | ʾăšer} ‘that which’ governs yireh {יִרְאֶה | yirʾeh} ‘he sees’, leaving the content open-ended: whatever comes into view becomes the matter of testimony. The final verb yagid {יַגִּיד | yaggîd} ‘let him declare’ is formally an imperfect but functions as an instruction (jussive-like), completing a tight progression of responsibility: divine directive → appointed vigilance → required public reporting. |