| 5. Linguistic Exegesis The verse presents antithetic parallelism between two clauses. The first clause uses mayim {מַ֣יִם | măyim} ‘waters’ modified by amuqim {עֲ֭מֻקִּים | ămūqîm} ‘deep’ to form a vivid metaphor for hidden counsel. This phrase equates to etzah {עֵצָ֣ה | ʿêṣâ} ‘counsel’ located belev {בְלֶב־ | bə-lev} ‘in-heart’ of ish {אִ֑ישׁ | ʾîš} ‘a man’. Contrastingly, the second clause begins with veish {וְאִ֖ישׁ | wə-ʾîš} ‘but a man’ of tevunah {תְּבוּנָ֣ה | təbûnâ} ‘understanding’, who performs the verb yidlennah {יִדְלֶֽנָּה | yîdlennâh} ‘draw it out’. The feminine pronominal suffix on yidlennah refers back to etzah, creating cohesion. The imagery of drawing water from depth underscores the process of uncovering concealed thoughts, highlighting the value of discernment. |