| 28. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the metaphorical noun etseb {עֶ֨צֶב | ʿe-ṣev} ‘earthenware vessel’ paired with parallel participles nivzeh {נִבְזֶ֜ה | niv-zeh} ‘despised’ and nafutz {נָפ֗וּץ | na-futz} ‘broken’, establishing contempt toward Coniah. The conditional im {אִם־ | im} ‘if’ introduces a protasis with keli {כְּלִי | ke-lî} ‘vessel’, negated by ein {אֵ֥ן | ’ên} ‘there is not’ before chefets {חֵ֖פֶץ | ḥê-p̄eṣ} ‘delight’ governed by bo {בּ֑וֹ | bō} ‘in him’. The interrogative madua {מַדּ֤וּעַ | maddû-aʿ} ‘why’ leads to two successive passive perfects in the hofal stem, hutlu {הֽוּטֲלוּ֙ | hûṭ-lū} ‘were cast out’ and vehushleku {וְהֻ֨שְׁלְכ֔וּ | wə-ḥuš-lə-ḵū} ‘were thrown’, with subjects hu {ה֣וּא | hû} ‘he’ and vezaro {وְזַرְע֔וֹ | wə-zā-rāʿ-ô} ‘and his seed’. The clause al-ha-aretz asher loyadu {עַל־הָאָ֖רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־יָדָֽעוּ | ʿal-hā-’ā-reṣ ’ă-šer lō-ya-ḏā-‘û} ‘upon the land which they did not know’ frames the result clause, highlighting involuntary exile. |