| 37. Linguistic Exegesis The clause opens with the conditional ve’im {וְאִם | wə-ʾim} ‘and if’, marking a diagnostic scenario. The noun phrase be’einav {בְּעֵינָיו | bə-ʿê-nāw} ‘in his eyes’ establishes the priest’s visual assessment. The perfect verb amad {עָמַד | ʿā-mǎd} indicates that the affliction hanetek {הַנֶּתֶק | han-něṯeq} ‘affliction’ remains. The conjunction vese’ar {וְשֵׂעָר | wə-sē-ʿār} ‘and hair’ with the adjective shakhor {שָׁחֹר | šā-ḥôr} ‘black’ introduces the diagnostic sign. The verb tsamach-bo {צָמַח־בּ֛וֹ | ṣā-maḥ-bō} ‘grew in it’ reports observable progression. The Niphal perfect nirpa {נִרְפָּא | nir-pā} ‘has been healed’ delivers the verdict. The adjective tahor {טָהוֹר | ṭā-hôr} ‘clean’ conveys ritual purity, reinforced by the pronoun hu {הוּא | hū} ‘it’. Finally, vetiharo {וְטִהֲר֖וֹ | wə-ti-hǎ-rô} ‘and shall pronounce him clean’ assigns kohen {הַכֹּהֵן | ha-kō-hên} ‘priest’ the authority for ceremonial declaration. This structure follows observation → diagnostic sign → verdict → ritual pronouncement. |