The Grammar and Meaning of Ps 92:11b

Argument Maps

1sg Passive

The verb read in the MT as בַּ֝לֹּתִ֗י is understood as an intransitive, and thus middle/passive reading, "I am anointed."

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Qal בלל]: The verb בַּ֝לֹּתִ֗י is an intransitive qal: "I am anointed." (Delitzsch 1877, 69 :C:; Radak :C:).
 + <Supporting argument>: Arguments are presented as colored boxes. If an argument supports the preferred conclusion, then it is green. If it supports a dispreferred conclusion, then it is orange. The green arrow connecting this argument to the conclusion shows that the argument supports the conclusion.
  + [Evidence for supporting argument]: Evidence is presented as a white box with a colored outline. This piece of evidence supports an argument which supports the conclusion.
  <_ <Undercutting argument>: This is an undercutting argument. To undercut a claim is to say, "Yes, that may be true, but it does not support your argument because..." In other words, undercutting arguments do not refute the claim being made; instead, they undermine the claim of its supporting value. #dispreferred
 - <Refuting argument>: This argument is connected to the conclusion with a red arrow because it refutes the conclusion. In other words, this argument says, "The conclusion is not true, because..." This argument is orange because it does not align with the preferred conclusion. #dispreferred
  + [Evidence for refuting argument]: This is evidence for the refuting argument. It has a green arrow because it supports the refuting argument. It has an orange outline because it is being used to support a view that is not preferred. #dispreferred

2sg Active

The verb בַּ֝לֹּתִ֗י should be emended to read בַּלֹּתַנִי as a 2ms qatal with a 1cs suffix, "You anointed me."

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Conclusion]: The conclusion of the argument map is presented as a white box with a colored outline. If the conclusion is preferred (i.e., if the creator of the argument map agrees with the conclusion), then the outline is green (as here).
 + <Supporting argument>: Arguments are presented as colored boxes. If an argument supports the preferred conclusion, then it is green. If it supports a dispreferred conclusion, then it is orange. The green arrow connecting this argument to the conclusion shows that the argument supports the conclusion.
  + [Evidence for supporting argument]: Evidence is presented as a white box with a colored outline. This piece of evidence supports an argument which supports the conclusion.
  <_ <Undercutting argument>: This is an undercutting argument. To undercut a claim is to say, "Yes, that may be true, but it does not support your argument because..." In other words, undercutting arguments do not refute the claim being made; instead, they undermine the claim of its supporting value. #dispreferred
 - <Refuting argument>: This argument is connected to the conclusion with a red arrow because it refutes the conclusion. In other words, this argument says, "The conclusion is not true, because..." This argument is orange because it does not align with the preferred conclusion. #dispreferred
  + [Evidence for refuting argument]: This is evidence for the refuting argument. It has a green arrow because it supports the refuting argument. It has an orange outline because it is being used to support a view that is not preferred. #dispreferred

"My horn" elided

The verb בַּ֝לֹּתִ֗י needs no emendation, but as the standard transitive use of qal בלל, elides "my horn" (קַרְנִ֑י) of the previous clause as its object.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Conclusion]: The conclusion of the argument map is presented as a white box with a colored outline. If the conclusion is preferred (i.e., if the creator of the argument map agrees with the conclusion), then the outline is green (as here).
 + <Supporting argument>: Arguments are presented as colored boxes. If an argument supports the preferred conclusion, then it is green. If it supports a dispreferred conclusion, then it is orange. The green arrow connecting this argument to the conclusion shows that the argument supports the conclusion.
  + [Evidence for supporting argument]: Evidence is presented as a white box with a colored outline. This piece of evidence supports an argument which supports the conclusion.
  <_ <Undercutting argument>: This is an undercutting argument. To undercut a claim is to say, "Yes, that may be true, but it does not support your argument because..." In other words, undercutting arguments do not refute the claim being made; instead, they undermine the claim of its supporting value. #dispreferred
 - <Refuting argument>: This argument is connected to the conclusion with a red arrow because it refutes the conclusion. In other words, this argument says, "The conclusion is not true, because..." This argument is orange because it does not align with the preferred conclusion. #dispreferred
  + [Evidence for refuting argument]: This is evidence for the refuting argument. It has a green arrow because it supports the refuting argument. It has an orange outline because it is being used to support a view that is not preferred. #dispreferred

"My old age"

The word בַּ֝לֹּתִ֗י is not a finite verb at all, but an infinitive construct with a 1cs suffix from the root בלה, functioning as the object with the verb of the previous clause, "you lift up" (וַתָּ֣רֶם), elided.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 
[Conclusion]: The conclusion of the argument map is presented as a white box with a colored outline. If the conclusion is preferred (i.e., if the creator of the argument map agrees with the conclusion), then the outline is green (as here).
 + <Supporting argument>: Arguments are presented as colored boxes. If an argument supports the preferred conclusion, then it is green. If it supports a dispreferred conclusion, then it is orange. The green arrow connecting this argument to the conclusion shows that the argument supports the conclusion.
  + [Evidence for supporting argument]: Evidence is presented as a white box with a colored outline. This piece of evidence supports an argument which supports the conclusion.
  <_ <Undercutting argument>: This is an undercutting argument. To undercut a claim is to say, "Yes, that may be true, but it does not support your argument because..." In other words, undercutting arguments do not refute the claim being made; instead, they undermine the claim of its supporting value. #dispreferred
 - <Refuting argument>: This argument is connected to the conclusion with a red arrow because it refutes the conclusion. In other words, this argument says, "The conclusion is not true, because..." This argument is orange because it does not align with the preferred conclusion. #dispreferred
  + [Evidence for refuting argument]: This is evidence for the refuting argument. It has a green arrow because it supports the refuting argument. It has an orange outline because it is being used to support a view that is not preferred. #dispreferred

Research

Translations

Ancient

• LXX: καὶ ὑψωθήσεται ὡς μονοκέρωτος τὸ κέρας μου καὶ τὸ γῆράς μου ἐν ἐλαίῳ πίονι.
  • "And my horn will be exalted like a unicorn's, and my old age with thick oil."
• Symmachus: ... ἡ παλαίωσίς μου ὡς ἐλαία εὐθαλἠς.
  • "... my old again [is] as thriving oil."
• Gallican Psalter: et exaltabitur sicut unicornis cornu meum et senectus mea in misericordia uberi
  • "But my horn shall be exalted like that of the unicorn: and my old age in plentiful mercy."
• Iuxta Hebraeos: et exaltabitur quasi monocerotis cornu meum et senecta mea in oleo uberi
  • "And my horn will be exalted as an ox and my old age in rich oil."
• Peshitta: ܘܨܒܥܬܢܝ ܒܡܫܚܐ ܡܒܣܡܐ
  • "you have sprinkled me with fragrant oil."
• Targum: רביתא יתי במשח רבותא רטיבא דזית עבוף
  • "you have anointed me with the fresh oil of a luxuriant olive."

Modern

1sg Passive

• I shall be anointed with fresh oil (KJV; cf. CEB, CSB, ISV, NASB, NET, NIV, NJPS, REB)
• je suis arrosé avec une huile fraîche (SG21; cf. BDS, NBS, NVSR, TOB)
• mit frischem Öl bin ich überschüttet (EÜ)

2sg Active

• you have poured over me fresh oil (ESV; cf. CJB, GNT, NABRE, NJB, NRSV)
• tu verses sur moi une huile parfumée (PDV; cf. NFC)
• y sobre mí verterás aceite fresco (RVA; cf. DHH)
• und salbst mich mit frischem Öl (Luther 2017; cf. ELB, ZÜR)

References

92:11