| 34. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the narrative vav-consecutive vayanikhu {וַיַּנִּ֥יחוּ | wayyanniḥû} ‘and they placed,’ signaling continuation of the legal storyline. The direct object marker oto {אֹתוֹ | ʾōṯô} identifies the person detained. The prepositional phrase bamishmar {בַּמִּשְׁמָ֑ר | hammismār} ‘in custody’ combines the preposition בְּ with the noun mishmār in absolute state and definite article to specify a guarded holding place. The causal conjunction ki lo porash {כִּי לֹא פֹרַשׁ | kî lō pōrāš} ‘because it was not declared’ uses the Pual perfect to convey lack of a formal proclamation. The hyphenated interrogative mah-yeaseh {מַה־יֵּעָשֶׂ֖ה | mah-yê‘āśeh} ‘what should be done’ functions as an embedded question dependent on porash. The closing prepositional suffix lo {לוֹ | lô} marks the recipient. This clause structure preserves the Hebrew causal-interrogative order and highlights the judicial ambiguity that delays the decision. |