| 7. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with ki {כִּי | kî} ‘for’, marking an explanatory ground for the observation that follows. The existential yesh {יֵשׁ | yēš} ‘there is’ introduces a verbless clause whose focus is the existence of tiqvah {תִּקְוָה | tiqvâ} ‘hope’ for la'ets {לָעֵץ | lā-ʿēṣ} ‘for the tree’, using lamed to express advantage (“for the tree”). A conditional protasis begins with im-yikkaret {אִם־יִכָּרֵת | ʾim-yiqqārēt} ‘if it is cut down’, where the Niphal highlights the tree as the affected object of an external act. The apodosis is advanced by ve'od {וְעוֹד | wə-ʿôḏ} ‘and still/yet’, which adds persistence in spite of the cutting, and by yakhalif {יַחֲלִיף | yaḥălîp̄} ‘it will sprout again’, a Hiphil that presents renewal as a decisive reversal of loss. The final clause, ve-yonakto lo tekhdal {וְיֹנַקְתּוֹ לֹא תֶחְדָּל | wə-yōnaq-tô lōʾ teḥdāl} ‘and its shoot will not cease’, shifts to the tree’s continuing “offspring” as the subject (feminine), with negation fronting the durability of regrowth. English keeps the conditional sequence (cut down → sprout again → not cease) to preserve the proverb-like reasoning and the climactic emphasis on ongoing renewal. |