² tn The clause uses the infinitive construct with the preposition ל (lamed) preposition. The clause would be a result clause in this sentence: “Why have you brought us here…with the result that we will all die?”

¹ tn The verb is the Hiphil infinitive construct with a ל (lamed) preposition from the root יָצָא (yatsaʾ, “to bring out”). The use of the infinitive here is epexegetical, that is, explaining how they caused the people to murmur.

¹ tn The form is לָתֵת (latet), the Qal infinitive construct with the lamed preposition. The infinitive here is explaining the preceding verbs. They are not to increase or diminish the amount “in paying the offering.” The construction approximates a temporal clause.

¹ tn The construction is an infinitive construct with the preposition ל (lamed). The form simply means “for anointing,” but it serves to express the purpose or result of their inheriting the sacred garments.

² tn This form is a Piel infinitive construct with the preposition ל (lamed). It literally reads “for filling the hands,” the idiom used throughout this chapter for ordination or installation. Here too it has a parallel use of purpose or result.

³ tn The initial command is the direct imperative (לֶךְ, lekh) from the verb הָלַךְ (halakh). It is followed by the preposition ל (lamed) with a pronominal suffix (לְךָ, l^ekha) emphasizing the subject of the imperative: “you leave.”

⁵ tn Heb “so that the Lord God might live [there].” Many take the infinitive construct with ל (lamed) as indicating purpose here, but it is unclear how the offering of tribute enables the Lord to live in Zion. This may be an occurrence of the relatively rare emphatic lamed (see HALOT 510-11 s.v. II לְ, though this text is not listed as an example there). If so, the statement corresponds nicely to the final line of v. 16, which also affirms emphatically that the Lord lives in Zion.

⁵ sn At once the man’s feet and ankles were made strong. Note that despite the past lameness, the man is immediately able to walk. The restoration of his ability to walk pictures the presence of a renewed walk, a fresh start at life; this was far more than money would have given him.

⁶ tn Grk “and the crippled.” Normally crippled as a result of being maimed or mutilated (L&N 23.177). Καί (kai) has not been translated here and before the following category (Grk “and the blind and the lame”) since English normally uses a coordinating conjunction only between the last two elements in a series of three or more.

¹ tc The MT reads לַגֹּלָה (laggolah, “as a captive”) with the preposition לְ (lamed) denoting essence/identity. On the other hand, 4QpNah reads בגולה (“as a captive”) with the preposition בְּ (bet) denoting essence/identity (“as a captive”). The LXX’s αἰξμάλωτος (aixmalōtos, “as a prisoner”) does not reveal which preposition was the original.

² tn The preposition לְ (lamed) probably functions in an emphatic asseverative sense, suggested by D. L. Christensen, “The Acrostic of Nahum Reconsidered,” ZAW 87 (1975): 22. This explains the preceding statement: the Lord is good to his people (1:7a) because—like a fortress—he protects them in time of distress (1:7b).

⁶ tn Or “comes from the Lord.” For similar uses of the preposition lamed (לְ, l^e) to convey a sort of ownership in which the owner does, or may by right do, something, see Lev 25:48; Deut 1:17; 1 Sam 17:47; Jer 32:7-8.

⁴ tn The verb הִזִּילוּהָ (hizziluha) is generally understood as a rare form of Hiphil perfect third person common plural + third person feminine singular suffix from I זָלַל (zalal, “to despise”): “they despise her.” This follows the I nun (ן) pattern with daghesh (dot) in zayin (ז) rather than the expected geminate pattern הִזִילּוּהָ (hizilluha) with daghesh in lamed (ל) (GKC 178-79 §67.l).

¹⁰ tn Following the verb הָיָה (hayah, “to be”), the preposition ל (lamed) designates a transition into a new state or condition: “to become” (BDB 512 s.v. לְ 4.a; e.g., Gen 2:7; 1 Sam 9:16; 15:1).

¹ tn Heb “the works of your hands.” Here the phrase is qualified by the epexegetical ל (lamed) + infinitive, לְקַטֵּר (l^eqatter, “by sacrificing [to other gods]”). For further discussion on the use of this phrase see the translator’s note on 25:6.

³ tn Heb “For this city has been to me for a source of my anger and my wrath from the day they built it until this day, so as remove it.” The preposition לְ (lamed) with the infinitive (Heb “so as to remove it”; לַהֲסִירָהּ, lahasirah) expresses degree (cf. R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 37, §199, and compare usage in 2 Sam 13:2).

¹ tn Heb “to make known your name to your adversaries.” Perhaps the infinitive construct with preposition לְ (lamed) should be construed with “come down” in v. 1a, or subordinated to the following line: “To make known your name to your adversaries, let the nations shake from before you.”

² tn Heb “don’t lift them up.” The idiom “lift up” (נָשָׂא with לְ, nasaʾ with preposition lamed) can mean “spare, forgive” (see Gen 18:24, 26). Here the idiom plays on the preceding verbs. The idolaters are bowed low as they worship their false gods; the prophet asks God not to “lift them up.”

¹ tn The preposition ל in אֲשֶׁר לִשְׁלֹמֹה (ʾasher lishlomoh) has been taken as: (1) authorship: “which is written by Solomon.” The lamed of authorship (also known as lamed auctoris) is well attested in Hebrew (see GKC 421 §130.b), particularly in the Psalms (e.g., Pss 18:1; 30:1; 34:1; 51:1; 52:1; 54:1; 56:1; 57:1; 59:1; 60:1; 63:1; 72:1); (2) dedication: “which is dedicated for Solomon.” The lamed of dedication is attested in Ugaritic psalms dedicated to Baal or about Baal (CTA 6.1.1 = UT 49.1); or (3) topic: “which is about/concerning Solomon.” The lamed of topic is attested in Hebrew (e.g., 1 Chr 24:20) and in Ugaritic, e.g., lbʿl “About Baal” (CTA 6.1.1 = UT 49.1). The ל is most likely denoting authorship. The ל followed by a name in the superscription of a poetic composition in the OT, usually (if not always) denotes authorship. Just as the superscription לְדָוִד (l^edavid) claims Davidic authorship within the Psalter, the heading claims Solomonic authorship. Whether or not this attribution is historically reliable or simply a matter of Jewish tradition is debated in scholarship, just as the Davidic superscriptions in the Psalter are debated (see study note on the word “Song” in the superscription).

⁴ sn As C. H. Toy puts it, the fool is a “proverb-monger” (Proverbs [ICC], 474); he handles an aphorism about as well as a lame man can walk. The fool does not understand, has not implemented, and cannot explain the proverb. It is useless to him even though he repeats it.