| 2. Linguistic Exegesis The line opens with hechakam {הֶֽחָכָ֗ם | heḥākām} ‘a wise man?’ where the prefixed interrogative he marks a rhetorical question that challenges whether such speech fits wisdom. Two imperfect verbs, yaaneh {יַעֲנֶ֥ה | yaʿăneh} ‘will answer’ and viymalle {וִֽימַלֵּ֖א | wiy-mallēʾ} ‘and will fill’, form a balanced poetic parallel: responding and filling are paired to portray speech as something taken in and internalized. The construct chain daat-ruach {דַֽעַת־ר֑וּחַ | daʿat-ruaḥ} ‘knowledge of wind’ presents “knowledge” as belonging to “wind,” creating an ironic image of insubstantial, ungraspable content; the syntax intentionally lets the metaphor define the quality of the “knowledge.” The second colon intensifies the critique: kadim {קָדִ֣ים | qādim} ‘east wind’ evokes a harsh, desiccating wind, so “filling” with it is self-defeating rather than nourishing. Bitno {בִּטְנֽוֹ | biṭnô} ‘his belly’ functions metonymically for the inner life from which words and impulses arise, reinforcing that such speech is not merely mistaken but internally driven emptiness. English renders the two cola as coordinated rhetorical questions to preserve the accusatory force and parallelism of the Hebrew poetry. |