Raw Grammar References Data

Library Entries Read

1. seal-command-syntax-daniel.md (CRITICAL)

Full comparative overview of four Daniel sealing constructions: - Dan 8:26: Single imperative (satham) + definite object + no explicit terminus - Dan 12:4: Dual imperative pair (satham + chatham) + two objects + explicit terminus (ad eth qets) - Dan 12:9: Dual passive participle pair (setumim + chatumim) + definite subject + same terminus - Dan 9:24: Infinitive of purpose (la-chatom) + double object (chazon + nabi)

Includes semantic distinction table (satham = blocks access; chatham = authenticates + closes), the eth qets terminus analysis, and contrast with Isa 8:16 and Isa 29:11.

2. dan-8-26.md

Full clause analysis: (1) Authentication NmCl: mar'eh ha-erev we-ha-boqer... emeth hu; (2) Asyndetic relative: asher ne'emar; (3) Imperative: we-attah setom he-chazon; (4) Causal NmCl: ki le-yamim rabbim.

Threefold ki-formula inclusio (vv.17, 19, 26). Mar'eh/chazon distinction within same verse. Four interpretive options for "many days" catalogued without adjudication.

3. dan-12-4-sealing.md

Full five-clause analysis: WXIm / Voct / WIm0 / ZYqX / WYqX. Dual verb construction (satham = conceal content; chatham = authenticate document). Two distinct objects (debarim / sepher). Post-terminus coda (shuwt rabbim + tirbeh ha-da'ath) — both yiqtol imperfective forms supporting progressive rather than instantaneous reading. Three interpretive options for "sealed until time of end" catalogued.

4. dan-12-9-sealing.md

Five-clause angelic reply. Shift from active imperative (12:4) to Qal passive participle (12:9). Agency suppressed. ki-causal ground for dismissal-formula lek. The sealed state is temporally bounded and null at terminus. Four positions on whether 1290/1335 fall inside or outside the sealed corpus catalogued.

5. dan-9-24-27.md

Six le + infinitive construct purpose-clauses under Niphal nechtakh. la-chatom chazon we-nabi = authentication sense, not concealment. Hapax nechtakh (only here in MT). Full word-by-word parsing of all four verses.

6. dan-12-7-11-12.md

Oath formula (le-mo'ed mo'adim wa-chetsi). Morphological analysis of mo'adim (plural, not dual — tradition settles on "2" by arithmetic correspondence with 1260/42). The 1290 and 1335 day-counts use yamim (standard counter), contrasting with Dan 8:14's erev boqer (apocalyptic symbolic counter).

7. asyndetic-noun-pair.md

Dan 8:14's erev boqer = compound unit (two absolute-state nouns without conjunction, article, or construct). Dan 8:26's ha-erev we-ha-boqer = anaphoric title (articles + conjunction break the compound fusion). Dan 9:24's shavuim shivim = cognate-pluralized counter.

8. dan-10-1.md

Resolution of the biyn chain: u-biyn et ha-dabar (Qal.Perf.3ms — completed understanding). Niphal niglah = divine passive ("a thing was revealed"). The word emeth recurs: we-emeth ha-dabar ("and truth [was] the word").

9. imperative-mood.md

Hebrew imperative: 2nd person only, positive only. No negative imperative — prohibitions use lo + imperfect (categorical) or al + imperfect (situational). Rev 22:10's me sphragises maps to the al + imperfect pattern (immediate prohibition), not the lo + imperfect pattern (categorical). The Greek aorist subjunctive prohibition is the functional equivalent.

10. apocalyptic-time-unit-grammar.md

Counted-unit displacement: ordinary yamim replaced by non-standard substitutes (erev boqer, shavuim, iddan/mo'ed). The lexical choice signals symbolic register. Dan 12:11-12 DO use yamim but embedded in full apocalyptic register (sealing frame sustains symbolic context).