| 29. Linguistic Exegesis The verse is a compact nominal summary introduced by zeh {זֶה | zèh} ‘this,’ pointing back to the preceding description of the wicked person’s end. The phrase khelesq-adam rasha {חֵלֶק־אָדָם רָשָׁע | ḥēleq-ʾāḏām rāšāʿ} forms a construct relationship (“portion of a man”) followed by an attributive adjective functioning substantivally (“wicked”), identifying the recipient of the allotted outcome. Two parallel prepositional phrases, meElohim {מֵאֱלֹהִים | mēʾĕlōhîm} ‘from God’ and meEl {מֵאֵל | mēʾēl} ‘from El,’ frame the couplet and stress divine source and authority. The vav on venakhalat {וְנַחֲלַת | wə-naḥălaṯ} coordinates a second, synonymous line (“inheritance”), reinforcing the distribution motif with legal-family language. The construct chain venakhalat imro {וְנַחֲלַת אִמְרוֹ | wə-naḥălaṯ ʾimrô} is rendered to reflect that the inheritance is defined by a spoken determination; the pronominal suffix in ʾimrô {אִמְרוֹ | ʾimrô} ‘His utterance’ naturally points to the immediately invoked deity, so English capitalizes His to preserve the theological force of an authoritative divine pronouncement. The shift from Elohim to El retains the Hebrew’s rhetorical intensification: the same God is named with a title emphasizing judicial governance and then with a title emphasizing might. |