| 25. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the negative formula velo {וְלֹֽא | wə-lōʼ} + avo {אָב֤וּ | ā-vû} marking refusal before the indirect object lo {ל֔וֹ | lō} in the infinitive clause lishmo’a {לִשְׁמֹ֣עַֽ | li-šmə-’ā‘} “to listen.” A sequence of vav-consecutive Hiphil verbs—vayachazek {וַיַּחֲזֵ֤ק | way-ya-ħă-ẓēk} “and he seized,” vayotze {וַיֹּצֵ֥א | way-yō-ṣēʼ} “and he sent out”—propels the causative narrative. The noun pilegesh {בְּפִ֣ילַגְשׁ֔וֹ | bə-pi-lə-ḡê-šô} “concubine” signals a status below that of a wife. The Hitpael verb vayit’all’lu {וַיִּֽתְעַלְּלוּ | way-yit-’al-le-lû} with the suffix bah {בָהּ | bāh} “on her” intensifies the act of abuse, stretching through kol-halailah {כָּל־הַלַּ֙יְלָה֙ | kol-ha-lay-lāh} “all night” until ad-haboker {עַד־הַבֹּ֔קֶר | ’ad-hā-bō-qer} “until morning.” The infinitive ka’alot {כַּעֲל֥וֹת | ka-’ă-lōt} “to ascend” paired with hashachar {הַשַּֽׁחַר | ha-šă-ḥar} “the dawn” brings the sequence to daybreak. |