| 28. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with a paratactic sequence in vetsela {וְצֵלַ֡ע | wə-ṣē-lāʿ} ‘and Zelah’, haʾelef {הָאֶ֜לֶף | hā-ʾe-lef} ‘the Eleph’, and vehayevusi {וְהַיְבוּסִ֨י | wə-hay-vu-sî} ‘and the Jebusite’, followed by the predicative marker hîʾ {הִ֤יא | hîʾ} ‘it is’ which identifies yerûšālayim {יְרוּשָׁלִַ֙ם֙ | yə-rū-šā-layim} ‘Jerusalem’. The construct chain gibbəʿāṯ qiryāṯ ʿărîm {גִּבְעַת קִרְיַת עָרִים | gib-bə-ʿāṯ qi-ryā-ṯ ʿā-rîm} links the proper names Gibeah and Kiriath with the generic term “cities.” The numeral arbaʿ-ʿeśrē {אַרְבַּֽע־עֶשְׂרֵ֖ה | ar-baʿ-ʿeś-rē} ‘fourteen’ quantitatively modifies ʿărîm, which is then extended by wə-ḥaṣərêhên {וְחַצְרֵיהֶ֑ן | wə-ḥa-ṣə-rê-ˀ hên} ‘and their villages.’ The demonstrative zōṯ {זֹ֛את | zōṯ} ‘this’ signals the subsequent noun phrase naḥălāt bənê binyāmîn ləmispəḥōṯām {נַֽחֲלַ֥ת בְּנֵֽי־בִנְיָמִ֖ן לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָֽם | na-ḥă-lāt bənê bin-yā-mîn lə-miš-pə-ḥō-ṯām} ‘inheritance of the sons of Benjamin for their clans.’ Hebrew employs construct relationships and coordination to convey the territorial allotment, while English uses coordinated noun phrases and appositions to maintain clarity and flow. |