| 13. Linguistic Exegesis The clause kol-hanoge’a b’met b’nefesh ha-adam asher-yamut establishes a conditional scenario with the participle hanoge’a {הַנֹּגֵעַ | hannôgēa} ‘touching’ governed by the prepositional phrases b’met {בְּמֵת | bə-mēt} ‘at a dead’ and b’nefesh {בְּנֶפֶשׁ | bə-nefeš} ‘by a life.’ The vav-consecutive nifal in ve-nikhr’ta hanefesh hahi {וְנִכְרְתָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא | wə-nikhrəṯā han-nefeš hā-hîʾ} ‘and was cut off that soul’ marks the penalty. The causal clause ki mey niddah lo-zorak alav {כִּי מֵי נִדָּה לֹא־זֹרַק עָלָיו | kî mê niddāh lōʾ-zô-rāq ʿalāyw} ‘because the waters of impurity were not sprinkled upon him’ employs the Hophal perfect for divine action. The final imperfect yihyeh od tum’ato bo {יִהְיֶה עוֹד טֻמְאָת֥וֹ בֽוֹ | yi-ḥyéh ʿōd ṭumʾāṯô bô} ‘he will remain, and his impurity with him’ uses od {עוֹד | ʿōd} ‘still’ to convey ongoing state. |