Hi Avrahom,

I assume you mean that, for example, if there is an Esnachta, that is a good enough stop to start a new subject. But I don't exactly understand your question. Let's say, in the first verse in the Torah, do we say that "Bereishis Bara Elokim" is one subject, and then "Es ha'Shamayim v'Es ha'Aretz" is another subject, because of the Esnachta? Obviously not.

So what do you mean when you say the Ta'amim can support a subject change in one verse? In the verse in Shmuel it is even worse trup-wise. The trup separates "v'Ner Elokim Terem Yichbeh u'Shmuel Shochev," where there is an Esnachta. Then the verse says, "b'Heichal Hash-m Asher Sham Aron ha'Elokim," but the Gemara cuts out the words "u'Shmuel Shochev" and expounds them separately.

In our case, too, in the second half of the verse which the Gemara wants to slice, both halves need to use the word in the end, "Yikachu." Both phrases, "Ki Im Besulos mi'Zera Bnei Yisrael" and "veha'Almanah Asher Tiheyeh Almanah mi'Kohen," need the last word "Yikachu." So even if there is a basis to explain the verse with two subjects, grammatically this is a great Chidush.

It seems that this kind of learning is closer to Derash than Peshat. It is a kind of mix, since what we know from the Halachos in the Chumash that these Pesukim cannot work out as they are written, we assume the Navi knew that everyone won't understand these Pesukim as they are written and wrote two Halachos in one.

I hope this helps,

Aharon Steiner