| 7. Linguistic Exegesis The verse employs a triplet of Qal wayyiqtol forms (va-elekh {וָאֵלֵ֣ךְ | wā-ʾē-lēḵ} ‘and I went’, va-echpor {וָאֶחְפֹּ֗ר | wā-ʾeḥ-pōr} ‘and I dug’, va-ekkach {וָֽאֶקַּח֙ | wā-ʾə-qāḥ} ‘and I took’) to advance the prophetic action. The particle et introduces ha-ezor {הָאֵז֔וֹר | hā-ʾē-zōr} ‘waistband’ as the direct object. A relative clause uses asher {אֲשֶׁר־ | ʾă-šer} ‘that’ with Qal perfect tmanetiv {טְמַנְתִּ֣יו | təmănə-ṯîyw} ‘I had hidden it’ to situate the location. The interjection ve-hineh {וְהִנֵּה֙ | wə-hin-nēh} ‘and behold’ marks the transition to the result clause. In the result, Niphal perfect nishchat {נִשְׁחַ֣ת | niš-ḥat} ‘was ruined’ precedes the noun ha-ezor to depict utter spoilage. Finally, the negative clause lo yitslach la-kol {לֹ֥א יִצְלַ֖ח לַכֹּֽל | lōʾ yiṣ-laḥ la-kol} uses negation plus Qal imperfect to express total failure. English rendering preserves the sequential flow, relative structure, and interjective emphasis. |