A good suggestion. The LXX, Codex B, shows a relative pronoun followed by
a finite verb 3rd person singular. Codex A has a functional equivalent:
the masculine singular nominative article + participle. In both manuscripts
it is clear that )nky is **not** considered the subject of the verb h(lyty.
Judg. 6:8 ... )nky h(lyty )tkM mmcryM ...
The syntax of in the LXX suggests that )nky is outside of the following
clause. This certainly permits (not requires) )nky to be a fronted
constituent functioning pragmatically as a focus marker.
I am not following any particular theory here, I am being eclectic :-)
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.