Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Yaakov Stein" <yaakov_s AT rad.com>]

> I may have answered my question by asking it, as I didn't think of the
interrogative H- until writing this message, 
> and it looks like that may be the answer. What do you all think?

Karl 

Yes, while the sentence structure is somewhat awkward,
it would seem that the only sensible way to parse it is
what the classic commentators did.

Try first saying H)DM (C H&DH ?  That works.

Now try H)M )DM (C H&DH )$R YB) MPNYK BMCOR ?
That's OK too.

Now, one of the meanings of KY, according to a famous Rashi explanation
(which itself is an extension of an earlier explanation of Reish
Lakish),
is )M or )$R. Rashi brings examples for this use, such as
KY TOV H(C LM)KL which he interprets as equivalent to )$R TOV H(C LM)KL.

So by adding the KY at the beginning, we negate the need for the )$R in
the middle,
and this forces the future YB) to become an infinitive.

Yaakov (J) Stein