Just curious (hesitantly, as that often “kills the cat”) about how certain morphological tags get assigned in logos.
Very soon beginning students of biblical Hebrew are introduced to the possible confusion of )Et [or )et-] 1, direct object marker[D.O.M.]/often left untranslated, sometimes considered an emphatic particle and )Et [or )et-] 2, preposition, “with, against, etc.” [That ambiguity is resolved sometimes with a suffixed pronoun and distinct vocalization.]
In Micah 5.14 [15 in EVV], my initial impulse, from the common word order [VincludingS-O-prep ph] and taking nAqAm, “(a)vengeance/vindication” as the D.O., was to read et-) 2, preposition, “with/against (the nations).”
Before noticing that the reverse interlinear [ri] morphology and many resources in my logos library likewise did so, I read Waltke's Micah commentary where he takes it as an emphatic [D.O.M.] particle, )et- 1, and referenced his Intro to BH Syntax to that effect (albeit translating as “against,” based on understanding the V + first O as idiomatic for “I-will-avenge-my-sovereignty”).
I thought perhaps I might find similar syntax cited in some of my lexicons via the Exeg. Guide [EG] (and did in Dict. of Classical Hebrew/DCH). As to my Qs, the EG initially lists both options for this word in this verse.
But it also lists the meaning as “with,” )et- 2, for most of my resources, even though in most of those Micah 5.14[15] is not listed under that section (or under either) in those lexicons.
Q#1: How did logos come up with that assignation if this verse is not cited there in those resources? Did it simply reproduce the ri morphology tag if the books do not specifically cite this verse under either 1 or 2?
Q#2. For the Dict. Of Classical Hebrew [DCH], EG assigns )et- 1 [I] “object marker” [and similarly for the abridged Concise Dict. Of Classical Hebrew], despite DCH specifically listing Mic 5.14 under )et- 2 [II]? How is this an accurate representation of those resources and how did logos make that assignation, even contrary to the ri morphology tag as well?
"Curiouser and curiouser."
Btw: EG also erroneously links )et- to )at “you” (2fs) personal pronoun in Pelt, Miles V. Van. Biblical Hebrew: A Compact Guide.Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012, i.e., linking to the entry below )Et/)et- 1, D.O.M. [ )Et/)et- 2 "with" is somewhat awkwardly (as less frequent in BH) listed in turn above that line in that compact guide.]
