| 7. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the interrogative mah {מַה | māh} ‘what’ introducing a communal dilemma. The verb na‘aseh {נַעֲשֶׂה | na‘ăśeh} ‘shall we do’ in the qal imperfect first person common plural conveys ongoing deliberation. The prepositional phrase lanotarim {לַנּוֹתָרִים | lānōṭārīm} ‘those who remain’ uses a niphal participle to highlight passive survival. The phrase lənāšīm {לְנָשִׁים | lənāšīm} ‘for wives’ bookends the need for marital provision. The clause va’anakhnu nishba‘nu ba-Yahweh {וַאֲנַחְנוּ נִשְּׁבַעְנוּ בַּיהוָה | va’ănāḥnū nišbā‘nū ba-Yahweh} employs a niphal perfect to signal a completed oath before the divine name Yahweh, establishing a binding legal obligation. The infinitive chain ləvilṭî tet-lāhem {לְבִלְתִּי תֵּת־לָהֶם | ləvilṭî tēṯ-lāhem} combines negative particle and infinitive construct to express prohibition. The final mibnoteinu lənāšīm {מִבְּנוֹתֵינוּ לְנָשִׁים | mibbənōṯênū lənāšīm} ‘from our daughters for wives’ restates the parties affected. Hebrew word order places the oath rationale after the dilemma, mirroring ancient legal narrative structure. |