Property: Text

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Jump to: navigation, search
Showing 20 pages using this property.
P
In this verse, both '''prepositional phrases''' could be read with or without implied definite articles. The MT reads an article in the first, but not the second, in contrast with many versions.  +
'''טֻחוֹת''' may be analyzed as a passive participle or a noun, depending in large part upon its etymology. See %5B%5BThe Meaning of tukhot and satum in Ps. 51:8%5D%5D.  +
'''וּבְסָתֻם''' should be revocalized to וּבַסָּתֻם if an article is understood to be implied.  +
The Greek takes '''בְסָתֻם חָכְמָה''' as a complex construct chain "in the hidden things of wisdom," but this is a difficult reading of the prepositional phrase, and the noun חָכְמָה seems to be an expected argument of the verb תוֹדִיעֵנִי in the clause.  +
One alternative, supported by the Greek, takes '''בַטֻּחוֹת and וּבְסָתֻם''' as describing the objects of the verb תוֹדִיעֵנִי, but this wrecks havoc on the poetic structure.  +
The Syriac reads ܐܣܒܥܝܢܝ %3D תַּשְׂבִּיעֵנִי "satiate me" instead of '''תַּ֭שְׁמִיעֵנִי "make me hear,"''' based on a different reading of the graphically similar ב and מ. This makes good sense in context, but is not supported by the MT or G.  +
The Greek reads דַּכּוֹת instead of '''דִּכִּיתָ''' as an adjective modifying עֲצָמוֹת.  +
'''v. 6''' – We have glossed both לְ֭כוּ in v. 1 and בֹּ֭אוּ in the present verse as "come," forming part of the compound cohortative, "Come and do x / let us do x," despite belonging to different verbal roots in Hebrew. For this construction, לְכוּ is much more common (see the second-person imperatives in Pss 34:12; 46:9; 66:5, 16, and the first-person cohortative following—as in the present instance—in Ps 83:5) than בֹּאוּ, which does not occur elsewhere in the Psalms (though see 1 Kgs 20:33; 2 Kgs 10:25; Ezek 33:30; Joel 1:13; 4:13, and the first-person cohortative in Jer 35:11; 50:5; 51:10). It is possible that בֹּאוּ was chosen here to form the inclusio with the root בוא in the second half of the psalm (see the poetic structure).  +
According to HALOT, '''סמך''' here (as in Gen 27:37) takes two objects indicating the person supported and the instrument with which the person is supported. The syntax leaves it ambiguous whether the spirit is God's supporting spirit or the psalmist's spirit by which God supports the psalmist. Some translations (e.g., JPS 1985) prefer to read תִסְמְכֵנִי as a third-person singular jussive with רוּחַ נְדִיבָה as subject, but the context of second-person imperatives and ''yiqtols'' argues rather for the second-person reading in this clause.  +
'''נְדִיבָה''' can be taken either as a feminine adjective or an abstract noun in a construct relation with רוּחַ.  +
The syntax of this verse is difficult and contested. Most English translations along with the Masoretic vocalization and accents connect the pausal form וְאֶתֵּנָה with the preceding clause with the sense "or else I would give (it)" (as does the Old Greek). The NRSV takes it with the following noun, yielding, "if I were to give a burnt offering, you would not be pleased" (so also the Psalms Targum , which would otherwise have probably used a preposition before עלתא). This entails revocalization to the non-pausal form וְאֶתְּנָה with BHS, which also makes for more balanced poetic lines.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"' For similar conditional constructions, compare Pss 40:6; 139:18. If taken with 18a, it would stress that the psalmist would be willing to offer a sacrifice if God desired one, even though he does not. This is somewhat in tension with the thrust of the context where the psalmist does offer a spiritual sacrifice (v. 19) and looks forward to future right sacrifices (v. 21). If וְאֶתֵּנָה is taken with 18b, it would stress rather that any sacrifice the psalmist could offer would fail to please God in lieu of a broken spirit. This, then, nicely sets the stage for the psalmist's spiritual self-offering in v. 19.  +
The MT reading '''זִבְחֵי''' is in construct with the following noun, yielding "the sacrifices of God." The mismatch in number between the subject and predicate make this reading difficult. Many modern translations follow the reading זִבְחִי "my sacrifice" proposed in BHS, which then entails analyzing אֱלֹהִים as a vocative.  +
The MT reads the 2ms verb '''תִבְזֶה''', in which case אֱלֹהִים must be read as a vocative. The Greek, on the other hand, reads the 3ms verb יִבְזֶה with אֱלֹהִים as the subject of the verb.  +
The MT reads the ''qal'' imperfect 2ms verb '''תִּבְנֶה''' with God as the implied subject and the walls as the direct object. The Greek, on the other hand, reads the ''niphal'' imperfect 3fp verb וְתִבָּנֶנָה, which makes the walls the subject of a passive construction meaning "and may the walls of Jerusalem be built."  +
There is a play on words with the expression '''בא אל''' used in two very different senses in this superscription (royal audience vs. sexual intercourse).  +
The construct chain '''אֶל־בַּת־שָֽׁבַע''' is a euphemism for sexual intercourse.  +
'''רַחֲמִים''' is a plural abstract noun referring to the affectionate and sympathetic internal feeling one has towards another,'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"' which is best rendered by the singular abstract noun "compassion" in English.  +
'''פֶּשַׁע''' refers to "action by which humans or groups defy an authority or a standard of behavior."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'  +
If '''הַרְבֵּה/הֶרֶב''' is read as an imperative (or infinitive absolute), then it means to do an activity multiple times. In conjunction (i.e., hendiadys) with כבס, it means roughly "wash a lot/thoroughly." If הַרְבֵּה is read as an adverb, it modifies the verb with essentially the same intensifying meaning "wash thoroughly." The sense in context is not repeated iterations of distinct washing events, but rather repeated action within a single, thorough washing event.  +
'''עָוֹן''' refers to "a deed of deliberate wrongdoing resulting in a state of guilt which requires punishment."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'  +