| 12. Linguistic Exegesis The law begins with the vav-conjunction ve’ish {וְאִ֗ישׁ | wə-ʾîš} ‘and a man’, introducing a casuistic statute. The relative clause asher {אֲשֶׁ֤ר | ʾă-šer} ‘who’ qualifies the subject, leading to the imperfect verb yishkav {יִשְׁכַּב֙ | yiš-kav} ‘lies down’ with the direct object phrase et-kallato {אֶת־כַּלָּת֔וֹ | ʾet kal-lā-to} ‘his daughter-in-law’. The infinitive absolute mot {מ֥וֹת | mōṯ} preceding the imperfect yumetu {יוּמְת֖וּ | yū-me-tū} intensifies the death penalty. The dual pronoun sheneihem {שְׁנֵיהֶ֑ם | šə-nē-hem} ‘the two of them’ marks shared culpability. The noun tevel {תֶּ֥בֶל | te-vel} ‘perversion’ delivers the moral rationale for the prohibition. The perfect verb asu {עָשׂ֖וּ | ʿa-sū} confirms the act’s completion, and the idiom dmeihem bam {דְּמֵיהֶ֥ם בָּֽם | də-mē-hem bam} ‘their blood upon them’ signals self-incurred judicial responsibility. English rendering shifts from verb-final Hebrew to subject-verb order and preserves the emphatic infinitive absolute structure. |