Ezekiel 16:30

Show Niqqud

To the Daughter of Monument/Zion

How she has drooped to the daughter of yourself¹⁰ — a whisper of inner master of myself He Is— you controlled/domineered within your making every self eternal mighty tree the act of a woman of adultery!

Footnote:

Eze. 16:30

לבת is ל־ + בת (“to [the] daughter”), not related to לב (“heart”); the root letters ב–ת identify it as “daughter,” so the meaning is determined by the root, not by phonetic similarity.

Formerly scholars tried to read it as a feminine of לב (“heart”), comparing it to forms like לִבּוֹת (plural construct or collective of “heart”) or even forcing a “heart-of-you” sense. They isolated this into a one-off, once-occurring form. Some thought, like Brown-Driver-Briggs, that it was incorrect and needed to be "corrected" to "לִבְרִיתֵך" (which means your covenant). In all cases, no one would would translate it honestly according to what is written, but worked hard to emend the text and (magically) craft an entirely unused form for "heart" and then call it a "hapax" (single occuring) word.

Parallel forms in the Hebrew Bible:

Verse	Form	Meaning
Deut. 22:17	לְבִתְּךָ	“to your daughter”
Esther 2:7	לְבַת	“to/for a daughter”
Micah 4:8	לְבַת	“to the daughter”
Num. 30:16	לְבִתּוֹ	“to his daughter”

The form לבתך in Ezekiel 16:30 is structurally parallel to these forms. It is a fully grammatical 2nd person singular feminine construct, meaning “to your daughter”, and does not require emendation.
Scholarly bias: The traditional translation of "your heart" is made up. The proposed emendation to לִבְרִיתֵךְ (“your covenant”) reflects a preference for theological or idiomatic sense over literal reading, rather than a textual necessity. It effectively erases what the text actually says, imposing a meaning that suit interpretive assumptions rather than the Hebrew itself.
Conclusion: There is no linguistic or grammatical need to “correct” לִבָּתֵךְ. It has a plain, clear meaning, and reading it as “to your daughter” is honest, straightforward translation. When the bias is not honesty, what is it? Theological bias, historical-critical bias, prescriptive bias, cognitive/expectation bias? The insistence on emendation is more about assumed awkwardness or theological expectations than textual evidence, and in all cases, not honest. The opposite of honesty in translation is projection: reading what you think “should” be there rather than what the text actually says.

The form אמלה clearly conveys “has drooped / is languishing / fading away”, fitting the Niphal perfect 3rd feminine singular.