² tn The word order כָּל־תִּשָּׂא עָוֹן (kol tisaʾ ʿavon) is syntactically awkward. The BHS editors suggest rearranging the word order: תִּשָּׂא כָּל־עָוֹן (“Forgive all [our] iniquity!”). However, Gesenius suggests that כָּל (“all”) does not function as the construct in the genitive phrase כָּל־עָוֹן (“all [our] iniquity”); it functions adverbially modifying the verb תִּשָּׂא (“Completely forgive!”; see GKC 415 §128.e).

² tn The term כִּתְבוּנָם (kitvunam, “according to their skill”; preposition כְּ + feminine singular noun תְּבוּנָה, t^evunah + third person masculine plural suffix) is an abbreviated form of כִּתְבוּנָתָם (kitvunatam; GKC 255-56 §91.e). תְּבוּנָה means “understanding, faculty, skill” (BDB 108 s.v. תְּבוּנָה 1). It refers to a builder skillfully constructing a house (Prov 24:3), God skillfully fashioning creation (Ps 136:5; Prov 3:19), and a craftsman skillfully making an idol (Hos 13:2).

³ tc The MT vocalizes the consonants החלו as הֶחֱלוּ a Hiphil perfect third person common plural from I חָלָה (“to become sick”). However, this is syntactically awkward. The BHS editors suggest revocalizing it as Hiphil infinitive construct + third person masculine singular suffix from חָלַל (khalal, “to begin”) or Hiphil perfect third person common plural from חָלַל. For a discussion of this textual problem, see D. Barthélemy, ed., Preliminary and Interim Report on the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project, 5:240.

³ tn Heb “a woman who is loved by a companion” (אִשָּׁה אֲהֻבַת רֵעַ, ʾishah ʾahuvat reaʿ). The substantival participle אֲהֻבַת (“one who is loved”) is in apposition to אִשָּׁה (“a woman”). The genitive noun רֵעַ (“companion”) functions as the agent of the preceding construct noun: “who is loved by a companion” (אֲהֻבַת רֵעַ). Cf. NAB “a woman beloved of a paramour,” and NRSV “a woman who has a lover.”

² tn Heb “and I will do that which in my statutes you will walk.” The awkward syntax (verb “to do, act” + accusative sign + relative clause + prepositional phrase + second person verb) is unique, though Eccl 3:14 contains a similar construction. In the last line of that verse we read that “God acts so that (relative pronoun) they fear before him.” However, unlike Ezek 36:27, the statement has no accusative sign before the relative pronoun.

⁵ tn Heb “as their life is poured out.” The term בְּהִשְׁתַּפֵּךְ (b^ehishtappekh), Hitpael infinitive construct + the preposition בּ (bet), from שָׁפַךְ (shafakh, “to pour out”), may be rendered “as they expire” (BDB 1050 s.v. שָׁפַךְ), referring to the process of dying. Note the repetition of the word “pour out” with various direct objects in this poem at 2:4, 11, 12, and 19.

⁸ tn Heb “are grieved” or “are worried.” The unusual form נּוּגוֹת (nugot) is probably best explained as Niphal feminine plural participle (with dissimilated nun [ן]) from יָגָה (yagah, “to grieve”). The similarly formed Niphal participle masculine plural construct נוּגֵי (nuge) appears in Zeph 3:18 (GKC 421 §130.a). The Niphal of יָגָה (yagah, “to grieve”) appears only twice, both in contexts of sorrow: “to grieve, sorrow” (Lam 1:4; Zeph 3:18).

² tn Heb “The Lord has opened up his armory and has brought out the weapons of his wrath.” The problem of the Lord referring to himself in the third person (or of the prophet speaking on his behalf) is again raised here and is again resolved by using the first person throughout. The construction “weapons of my wrath” would not convey any meaning to many readers, so the significance has been spelled out in the translation.

¹ tn Heb “In those days and at that time, oracle of the Lord, the iniquity [or guilt] of Israel will be sought, but there will be none, and the sins of Judah, but they will not be found.” The passive construction “will be sought” raises the question of who is doing the seeking, which is not really the main point. The translation has avoided this question by simply referring to the result, which is the main point.

¹ tn Heb “We have not drunk wine all our days.” Actually, vv. 8b-9a are a series of infinitive constructs plus the negative לְבִלְתִּי (l^evilti) that explain the particulars of how they have obeyed, i.e., by not drinking wine…and by not building….” The more direct declarative statement is used here to shorten the sentence and is more in keeping with contemporary style.

³ tn The usage of the preposition בּ (bet) to introduce the material from which something is made in Exod 38:8 and 1 Kgs 15:22 should lay to rest the rather forced construction that some (like J. Bright, Jeremiah [AB], 121) put on the variant כַּחֹמֶר (kakhomer) found in a few Hebrew mss. Bright renders that phrase as an elliptical “as clay sometimes will.” The phrase is missing from the Greek version.

¹ tn The Greek version is likely right in interpreting the construction of two perfects preceded by the conjunction as contingent or consequential here, i.e., “and when they say…then say.” See GKC 494 §159.g. However, to render literally would create a long sentence. Hence, the words “will probably” have been supplied in v. 12 in the translation to set up the contingency/consequential sequence in the English sentences.

¹ tn The form for “queen” (מְלֶכֶת [m^elekhet]), occurring 5 times in Scripture and all in Jeremiah, is not the expected construct form (מַלְכַּת [malkat]). It is as though the Masoretes wanted to read with “heaven” the word for “work” (מְלֶאכֶת [m^eleʾkhet]), i.e., the “hosts of,” a word that several Hebrew mss read and an understanding the LXX reflects. The other ancient and modern versions generally, however, accept it as a biform for the word “queen.”

³ tn Or perhaps, “but they were unable to attack it.” This statement sounds like a summary of the whole campaign. The following context explains why they were unable to defeat the southern kingdom. The parallel passage (2 Kgs 16:5; cf. Num 22:11; 1 Sam 17:9 for a similar construction) affirms that Syria and Israel besieged Ahaz. Consequently, the statement that “they were not able to battle against them” must refer to the inability to conquer Ahaz.

² tn Heb “Why are you still beaten? [Why] do you continue rebellion?” The rhetorical questions express the prophet’s disbelief over Israel’s apparent masochism and obsession with sin. The interrogative construction in the first line does double duty in the parallelism. H. Wildberger (Isaiah, 1:18) offers another alternative by translating the two statements with one question: “Why do you still wish to be struck that you persist in revolt?”

¹ tn The phrase חוּט הַשָּׁנִי (khut hashani, “thread of scarlet”) is a genitive construct with the genitive functioning adjectivally. This phrase is used three times in classical Hebrew to denote a scarlet colored “thread” or “cord” (Josh 2:18; Song 4:3; 11 QT 49:3) (HALOT 296-97 s.v. חוּט; DCH 3:170-71 s.v. חוּט). This is a comparison of sight, describing the color and shape of her lips.

¹ tn Like the preceding line, this is a case of emblematic parallelism. An illustrative simile appears in the A-line (object of the comparison) and the subject of comparison appears in the B-line. The particles כֵּן…כְּ (k^e…ken, “like…so”) form an emphatic comparative construction (e.g., Ps 123:2); cf. IBHS 641-42 §38.5a.

³ tn The construct phrase דִּבְרֵי אֱמֶת (divre ʾemet, “words of truth”) is a genitive of content (“words containing truth”) or an attributive genitive (“truthful words”). Depending upon the vocalization of וכתוב, the phrase functions in one of two ways: (1) as direct object of וְכָתוֹב יֹשֶׁר (v^ekhatov yosher) “and he accurately wrote truthful words”; or (2) in apposition to וְכָתוּב יֹשֶׁר (v^ekhatuv yosher) “and what is written uprightly, namely, truthful words.”

⁵ tn The Hebrew phrase בַּעַל הַכְּנָפַיִם (baʿal hakk^enafayim, “possessor of wings”) is an idiom for a winged creature, that is, a bird (e.g., Prov 1:17; see HALOT 143 s.v. בַּעַל A.6; BDB 127 s.v. בַּעַל 5.a). The term בַּעַל (“master; possessor”) is the construct governing the attributive genitive הַכְּנָפַיִם (“wings”); see IBHS 149-51 §9.5.3b.

⁴ tn Heb “for no one sees sleep with their eyes either day or night.” The construction גַםכִּי (ki gam) expresses a concessive sense: “even though” (e.g., Ps 23:4; Prov 22:6; Eccl 4:14; Isa 1:15; Lam 3:8; Hos 8:10; 9:16); cf. HALOT 196 s.v. גַּם 9; BDB 169 s.v. גַּם 6; 473 s.v. כִּי 2.c.