באדין עלין - באין היו לפניו, אמר אנה ולא אמר אמרית, כי גם הוא נכון בלשון וכמוהו אני הגבר ראה ונשאר אני כי אומלל אני, כי הוא פתח. [Daniel 4:4] Then came in (בֵּאדַ֣יִן עׇלִּ֗ין): [Meaning,] they were coming in before him. I said (אָמַ֤ר אֲנָה֙): [Nebuchadnezzar uses the phrase] “I said” (אָמַ֤ר אֲנָה֙ - amar ana) and not [the standard conjugated past tense form] “I said” (אָמְרִית - amrit). For this [construction, using the Aramaic participle amar with the explicit pronoun ana] is also correct/valid in the language. And similar [examples in Hebrew showing valid structures where the pronoun is used explicitly alongside the verb or descriptor for emphasis or clarity] are: “I am the man who has seen affliction” (אֲנִ֤י הַגֶּ֙בֶר֙ רָאָ֣ה עֳנִ֔י - Ani ha-gever ra’ah oni) [from Lamentations 3:1, where the explicit pronoun “I” (Ani) begins the clause, linking the subject directly to the following descriptive phrase]; and [phrases such as] “and I remained/was left” (וְנֵֽאשְׁאַ֖ר אָ֑נִי - v'ne'eshar ani) [quoting Ezekiel 9:8, where the explicit pronoun “I” (ani) follows the standard inflected verb ne'eshar (“I remained”), reinforcing the subject], “for I am faint” (כִּֽי־אֻמְלַ֣ל אָ֑נִי - ki umlal ani) [quoting Psalms 6:3, where the descriptive adjective/participle “faint” (umlal) is followed by the explicit pronoun “I” (ani), directly linking the state to the subject]. Because it [the form amar ana, using the participle with the pronoun] serves to introduce [the speech/narrative] (כִּי הוּא פֶּתַח - ki hu petach).