Hebrew Form Guide

וַיְלַמְּדֵ֣הוּ (way·lam·mə·ḏê·hū) in Isaiah 40:14: Conjunctive waw | Verb - Piel - Consecutive imperfect - third person masculine singular | third person masculine singular

וַיְלַמְּדֵ֣הוּ (way·lam·mə·ḏê·hū) in Isaiah 40:14

Source Word

וַיְלַמְּדֵ֣הוּway·lam·mə·ḏê·hūConjunctive waw | Verb - Piel - Consecutive imperfect - third person masculine singular | third person masculine singular

Isaiah 40:14 row 8 anchors the second H3925 token to Who imparted knowledge to Him, not to the earlier paths-of-justice clause.

How The Form Affects Interpretation

Who imparted knowledge to him moves from justice to knowledge and denies a second possible source from which the Lord might have learned. The BSB fronts Who imparted knowledge for natural English, while the suffix still marks the Lord as the hypothetical recipient within the rhetorical question.

How To Communicate It

Keep the two row positions separate, identify knowledge as this token's content, and read both questions together as a denial of any instructor over the Lord.

What Not To Say

  • Grammatical form should serve context, not override it.
  • Do not merge two same-form tokens into one witness or infer a teacher from participant roles that function inside a negative rhetorical sequence.
  • The surface forms and morphology match, but token position and clause complement distinguish the occurrences.
  • The form does not repeat the first token without distinction, narrate an actual teacher, or make the Lord a learner.

What Does The Label Mean?

Profile

Hebrew-verb

Part of Speech

Verb

Form Label

Conjunctive waw | Verb - Piel - Consecutive imperfect - third person masculine singular | third person masculine singular

Stem

Piel

Aspect

ConsecImperf

Person

Third

Gender

Masculine

Number

Singular

State

Not applicable

Attached Prefixes

Waw conjunction

Suffix

Third person masculine singular

Aspect Note

In the verse's later knowledge question, waw joins this Piel verb to the interrogative movement. Who supplies an imagined instructor only for the sake of the question, and the object suffix points to the Lord; the expected answer remains no one.

Verse Role

This second H3925 occurrence focuses the rhetoric on knowledge and reinforces that the Lord's understanding is not acquired from another.

What The Form Does In This Verse

Attached To

The renewed question Who imparted knowledge to him after the paths-of-justice question

Governed By

The verse's escalating denial that any counselor supplied the Lord with justice, knowledge, or understanding

Role In The Phrase

This second H3925 occurrence focuses the rhetoric on knowledge and reinforces that the Lord's understanding is not acquired from another.

What It Is Not Doing

The form does not repeat the first token without distinction, narrate an actual teacher, or make the Lord a learner.

How Much The Form Matters Here

Interpretive Weight

High: The repeated form advances Isaiah's rhetoric from justice to knowledge and underscores the Lord's unborrowed understanding.

Syntax Profile

In the verse's later knowledge question, waw joins this Piel verb to the interrogative movement. Who supplies an imagined instructor only for the sake of the question, and the object suffix points to the Lord; the expected answer remains no one.. This second H3925 occurrence focuses the rhetoric on knowledge and reinforces that the Lord's understanding is not acquired from another.. Attached to the renewed question Who imparted knowledge to him after the paths-of-justice question. Governed by the verse's escalating denial that any counselor supplied the Lord with justice, knowledge, or understanding. The form does not repeat the first token without distinction, narrate an actual teacher, or make the Lord a learner.

Reader Question

What distinguishes the second teaching form in Isaiah 40:14? It asks who imparted knowledge to the Lord, while the earlier form asks who taught him the paths of justice; both questions expect no one.

Translation Effect

Direct: The BSB fronts Who imparted knowledge for natural English, while the suffix still marks the Lord as the hypothetical recipient within the rhetorical question.

Where Caution Is Needed

The surface forms and morphology match, but token position and clause complement distinguish the occurrences. Who imparted is rhetorical and does not posit an actual source of the Lord's knowledge.

Fallacies To Avoid

The later Isaiah 40:14 knowledge token used as proof that the Lord learned from another: Do not merge two same-form tokens into one witness or infer a teacher from participant roles that function inside a negative rhetorical sequence. the second taught form collapsed into the first so that its distinct knowledge clause disappears: Keep "Who imparted" connected to וַיְלַמְּדֵ֣הוּ, row 8, and the full Isaiah 40:14 clause.

How The Interpretation Is Derived

Textual Witness

Isaiah 40:14 row 8 anchors the second H3925 token to Who imparted knowledge to Him, not to the earlier paths-of-justice clause.

Lexical Identity

This row 8 H3925 witness is the knowledge-imparting question, distinct by token position and complement from the row 5 paths-of-justice question.

Grammar In Context

In the verse's later knowledge question, waw joins this Piel verb to the interrogative movement. Who supplies an imagined instructor only for the sake of the question, and the object suffix points to the Lord; the expected answer remains no one.

Passage Meaning

Isaiah 40:13-14 declares the Lord's incomparable wisdom through rhetorical questions that leave him without counselor or instructor.

Canonical Fit

Within Isaiah's comfort proclamation, the Creator's unborrowed knowledge grounds trust in his rule; the claim should remain tied to the surrounding contrast with creatures and nations.

Communication Use

Keep the two row positions separate, identify knowledge as this token's content, and read both questions together as a denial of any instructor over the Lord.

Do Not Derive

Do not merge two same-form tokens into one witness or infer a teacher from participant roles that function inside a negative rhetorical sequence.