| 5. Linguistic Exegesis The interrogative opening velamah {וְלָמָה | wə-lā-māh} ‘and why’ foregrounds the complaint. The Hifil perfect he’elitunu {הֶעֱלִיתֻנוּ | hē-ʿə·lī·tū·nū} ‘did you bring us up’ pairs with the infinitive lehavi {לְהָבִיא | lə·hā·ḇī·ʾ} ‘to bring’ to express purpose. The direct object otanu {אֹתָנוּ | ʾō·ṯā·nū} ‘us’ specifies the recipients. The phrase hamakom {הַמָּקוֹם | ham·mā·qôm} hara {הָרָע | hā·rāʿ} hazzeh {הַזֶּה | ha·zzēh} ‘this evil place’ employs appositive sequence for emphasis. The negator lo {לֹא | lōʾ} ‘not’ and existential particle ayin {אַיִן | ʾā·yin} ‘there is not’ intensify the sense of deprivation. The accumulative list zera {זֶרַע | zē·rāʿ} ‘seed’, te’enah {תְאֵנָה | te·’ê·nāh} ‘fig’, gefen {גֶפֶן | ge·p̄en} ‘vine’, rimon {רִמּוֹן | rim·mōn} ‘pomegranate’, mayim {מַיִם | may·yim} ‘water’ is rendered as a coordinated series in English to preserve the rhetorical build-up of scarcity. |