Property: Text
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
"Text" is a predefined property that represents text of arbitrary length and is provided by Semantic MediaWiki. This property is pre-deployed (also known as special property) and comes with additional administrative privileges but can be used just like any other user-defined property.
P
* While the combination '''in the morning''' (בַּבֹּקֶר) and '''at night''' (בַּלֵּילוֹת) may simply refer to "all the time," it is notable that the morning is a time for deliverance and hope in the Psalms (Pss 5:4; 30:6; 46:6; 59:17; 90:14), while night is a time of trial and testing of faith (Pss 6:7; 30:6; 91:5).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"' The prepositional phrase indicates a point in time, rather than a frequentative reading, as ''every night''.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"'
+
* See the following note from phrase-level: Note the frequentative reading in the LXX's κατὰ νύκτα "every night," rendered in the Gallican Psalter as the time frame per noctem "by night," though in the Iuxta Hebraeos as in nocte "in the night," as our preferred reading. (By extension, the action would be repeated every morning/night, even if the בְּ does not license a frequentative reading overtly, like the Greek κατά).
+
* '''שִׂמַּחְתַּ֣נִי''' ("you have made me rejoice"): The ancient versions are predictably rigid here: see the LXX's aorist ὅτι εὔφρανάς με; Jerome's perfect quoniam laetificasti me; TgPs' suffix-conjugation אחדיתני; and the Peshitta's ܚܕܝܬܢܝ. Modern European versions vary between a present ("For you make me glad by your deeds," NIV; cf. GNT, Luther2017, SG21, TOB) and present perfect ("For you, O Lord, have made me happy by your work," NET; cf. CSB, CEB, DHH, ELB, ESV, EÜ, KJV, NASB, NJPS, RVC, ZÜR), the latter of which is suitable for our analysis. The past simple (especially followed by a future in the following clause, such as the ISV's "Because you made me glad with your awesome deeds, Lord, I will sing for joy at the works of your hands"), is a dispreferred minority.
* '''אֲרַנֵּֽן''' ("I rejoice"): The ancient versions are predictably rigid here: see the LXX's future ἀγαλλιάσομαι; Jerome's future laudabo; TgPs' prefix-conjugation אביע; and the Peshitta's ܐܫܬܒܚ. Modern European versions vary between present (CEB, CJB, DHH, ELB, ESV, GNT, Luther 2017, NIV, NJPS, RVC, SG21, TOB, ZÜR) and future (CSB, EÜ, ISV, KJV, NASB, NET).
+
* Both ''qatal'' verbs in the present verse (גָּדְלוּ and עָמְקוּ) have been interpreted as statives, '''%5Bbe%5D great''' and '''%5Bbe%5D deep'''.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* Modern European versions attest to our preferred present reading of לֹא יֵדָע, i.e., '''do not know''' (CEB, CSB, KJV, NASB, NET, NIV, RVC, SG21, TOB, etc.), though the ESV ("The stupid man cannot know; the fool cannot understand this"; cf. the GNT, NJPS, the EÜ's "ein Tor kann es nicht verstehen" and the DHH's "¡Sólo los necios no pueden entenderlo!") provide explicit modality of possibility. While a plausible reading of the morphology (''yiqtol''), such an interpretation does not seem to be the most appropriate for the psalm's message, viz., that the fools are largely grouped with the wicked and will suffer the same destruction after being lured into the same godless lifestyle. It is not that they cannot know, but simply that they do not know (or perhaps do not even want to know).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* The exegetical issue, %5Bhttps://psalms.scriptura.org/w/The_Syntax_of_Ps_92:8 The Syntax of Ps 92:8%5D, contains in depth discussion of the interpretation of the verbs of this verse, which we understand to communicate general truths, rather than a past and completed event.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* We have preferred to read the ''yiqtol'' verbs in this verse as future, which is supported by all of the ancient versions (with a particularly eschatological slant in the case of Targum Psalms).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* Scholarship has also struggled with the verbal forms of both this verse and v. 12.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000020-QINU`"' Nevertheless, we understand the ''wayyiqtol'' וַתָּרֶם at the beginning of this verse to carry on the tense-aspect-modality values of the preceding finite verb, which in this case is the future ''yiqtols'' of v. 10: '''and you will lift up'''. Support for this interpretation is found in v. 12b, which reverts back to a future ''yiqtol'' (see below).
+
* As in v. 11 above, we understand the initial ''wayyiqtol'' וַתַּבֵּט to carry on the future event time of v. 11: "'''will look'''."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* The ''yiqtol'' verbs throughout vv. 13-15 are best understood as future, in light of the message of the psalm and as supported by the ancient and most modern translations.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* Is '''הַ֥לְלוּ יָ֨הּ׀''' a clause ("praise Yah") or a single-word exclamation ("Hallelujah!")? In the MT, הַלְלוּ יָהּ is treated as two words; sometimes הַלְלוּ and יָהּ are joined by maqqef, and, when they are not, each word receives its own accent (e.g., Ps. 111:1 - הַ֥לְלוּ יָ֨הּ ׀). The division of הַ֥לְלוּ יָהּ into two words suggests (though it does not require) that the words are understood as a clause: "praise Yah." By contrast, the LXX does not translate הַלְלוּ יָהּ as a clause, but rather transliterates הַלְלוּ יָהּ as an exclamation: Αλληλουια (cf. Revelation 19: Αλληλουια; Jerome: Alleluia; Targum: הללויה; so HALOT). In the DSS, הללו יה is sometimes written as two words (e.g., 4QPsf ''Apostrophe to Judah'') and sometimes as one (e.g., 4QPsd, 4QPse), though sometimes it is difficult to tell. In the Babylonian manuscript EC1 (Ps. 106:48), הללויה is written clearly as a single word.
:If הללויה was added by the final editors of the psalter'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"', not too long before the LXX was translated, then it should probably be interpreted as the LXX understood it: as a single-word exclamation.
:Even if הללויה is understood as a single word exclamation, it seems unlikely that it would have completely lost its original sense ("praise Yah!"). For this reason, we have diagrammed it as a complete clause, even though it probably functions (''illocution'') as an exclamation.
* The verbs '''יָרֵא''' and '''חָפֵץ''' could be either participles that modify אִישׁ adjectivally (as in Prov. 28:14— אַשְׁרֵ֣י אָ֭דָם מְפַחֵ֣ד תָּמִ֑יד) or ''qatal'' verbs that modify אִישׁ as asyndetic relative clauses (as in Prov. 3:13—אַשְׁרֵ֣י אָ֭דָם מָצָ֣א חָכְמָ֑ה). The morphology is ambiguous. The parallel in v. 5 ( טֽוֹב־אִ֭ישׁ חוֹנֵ֣ן וּמַלְוֶ֑ה) might support reading a participle here (so probably LXX, Peshitta, Targum). In either case, there is no real difference in meaning.
* The second half of v. 1 might be an independent clause (cf. LXX), but the correspondence of חָפֵץ to יָרֵא suggests that חָפֵץ, like יָרֵא, syntactically modifies אִישׁ (so e.g., %5Bhttps://archive.org/details/origenhexapla02unknuoft/page/266/mode/2up?view%3Dtheater Symmachus%5D: ος τας εντολας αυτου θελει σφοδρα; so most modern translations).
* The prepositional phrase ''בָּאָרֶץ''' probably modifies גִּבּוֹר adjectivally, as suggested by the word order and the prosodic structure (see MT accents). Cf. the phrase גִּבֹּר בָּאָרֶץ in Gen. 10:8. (Contrast the interpretation of the Peshitta, in which the phrase was probably understood adverbially: ܢܗܘܐ ܚܝܠܬܢ ܙܪܥܗ ܒܐܪܥܐ܂).
* It is not clear whether '''גִּבּוֹר''' is an adjective or a noun.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"' If זַרְעוֹ is a collective (seed>>descendants), then גִּבּוֹר is an adjective ("his descendants will be mighty"). If, however, זַרְעוֹ refers to a singular offspring (seed>>descendant/child), then גִּבּוֹר can be read as a noun.
* The grammar of '''v. 2b''' is difficult. There are at least three options.
** vV 2b is an independent clause in which דּוֹר יְשָׁרִים is the subject and יְבֹרָךְ is the predicate. E.g., NIV: "the generation of the upright will be blessed" (cf. LXX, Jerome, NLT, ESV, NRSV, NET, LUT, ELB, EÜ, ZÜR).
** The noun phrase דּוֹר יְשָׁרִים in v. 2b is in apposition to גִּבּוֹר in v. 2a, and יְבֹרָךְ is an asyndetic relative clause. E.g., "His descendants will be mighty in the land, a generation of upright people (who will be) blessed" (cf. NEB, JPS85; so Rashi %5Bדור ישרים אשר יבורך יהיה זרעו%5D). But the phrase גִּבּוֹר בָּאָרֶץ is probably not a collective (cf. Gen. 10:8).
** v. 2b is an independent clause in which דּוֹר יְשָׁרִים adverbially modifies the verb יְבֹרָךְ (preferred). E.g., "in the generation of the upright he will be blessed" (so Peshitta: ܘܢܬܒܪܟ ܒܕܪܐ ܕܙܕܝܩ̈ܐ܂; Targum: בדר תריציא יתברך). This view works well in the context of the psalm. The "man" is the topic of the psalm and so is the most probable subject of the 3ms verb יְבֹרָךְ. The whole of v. 4, then, is about this man's legacy. The first half of the verse talks about his offspring, and the second half of the verse talks about him being blessed in a (future) generation.
+
* On the form '''לָעַד'' and the ''qametz'' under ל, see GKC 102i. Compare לָנֶצַח.
+
* On the syntax of v. 4, see %5B%5BThe Syntax and Subject(s) in Ps. 112:4%5D%5D.
* The adjective '''לַיְשָׁרִים''' is probably definite, even though the ''yod'' has no ''dagesh'' (cf. BHRG 8.2.5. ''Qenemlui letters'') (cf. Ps. 33:1; Prov. 2:7). If it were indefinite, then we would expect לִישָׁרִים (cf. Ps. 125:4).
+
* Some translations treat '''v. 5b''' as an independent clause. E.g., NASB: "He will maintain his cause in judgment" (cf. LXX: οἰκονομήσει...; PIH: dispensabit... Targum: יסובר; NGÜ, ELB). It seems more likely, however, especially in light of the parallel with v. 1, that v. 5b is a relative clause that continues to describe the אִישׁ in v. 5a. E.g., ESV: "It is well with the man who deals generously and lends; who conducts his affairs with justice") cf. Symmachus: αγαθος ανθρωπος χαριστικος και κιχρων, οικονομων τα πραγματα αυτου μετα κρισεως; parallel with v. 1; Peshitta, which translates יכלכל as a participle coordinate with the previous participles: ܛܒ ܗܘ ܓܒܪܐ ܕܡܪܚܡ ܘܡܘܙܦ܂ ܘܡܣܝܒܪ ܡ̈ܠܘܗܝ ܒܕܝܢܐ܂; so Baethgen 1904, 342; so NIV, NLT, ESV, NET, GNT, LUT, EÜ, GNB, ZÜR; cf. GKC 116x).
* The '''כִּי''' in v. 6 probably "grounds or explains the טוב in v. 5."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"'
+
* Whereas the MT vocalizes בטח as a participle '''בָּטֻחַ''' (cf. Peshitta %5Bܬܟܝܠ-adjective%5D, Symmachus: αμεριμνος, Targum: רחיץ; cf. Isa. 26:3), the LXX has an infinitive (ἐλπίζειν<בְּּּטֹחַ?).'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* The construction '''פִּזַּ֤ר׀ נָ֘תַ֤ן''' may be a verbal hendiadys (cf. GKC 120h, "פזר%3Dplentifully"). If this is correct, then the ''lamed'' prepositional phrase modifies both verbs (cf. Peshitta, which adds a conjunction: ܒܕܪ ܘܝܗܒ ܠܒܝܫ̈ܐ܂).
* On the form '''לָעַד'' and the ''qametz'' under ל, see GKC 102i. Compare לָנֶצַח.
+
* For the phrase '''אַשְׁרֵי־אִישׁ''', see the notes on %5Bhttps://psalms.scriptura.org/w/Psalm_1_Semantics Psalm 1%5D.
+
* The verb '''חפץ''' is usually accompanied by a ''beth'' preposition which indicates the object of delight.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
+
* The word '''גִּבֹּור''' refers to "a human being... who is renowned for his characteristics, such as physical strength, power, bravery, skill, wealth, good character, or a combination thereof." It is associated with kingship, and is often applied to kings (cf. Ps. 45:4; Ps. 24:8 %5B// מלך%5D; Ps. 33:16 %5B// מלך%5D; Dan. 11:3 %5Bמֶלֶךְ גִּבֹּור%5D). The phrase גבור בארץ occurs only elsewhere in Gen. 10:8//1 Chron. 1:10, where it describes Nimrod, who, though he is not called a "king" (מלך) is said to have had a "kingdom" (ממלכה). Although it is possible, in this instance, that the word גבור is describing Nimrod's greatness as a hunter and not as a king ''per se'' (cf. the phrase גִבֹּר־צַיִד in the following clauses), it's more likely that גבור בארץ is a general description of his greatness as a ruler (cf. Ges-18 "Gewaltherrscher auf Erden") and that skilled hunting is but one manifestation of his greatness/kingship—"to be a great hunter... was a claim associated with royal status."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"' Thus, the use of גבור (singular!) in Ps. 112 is one indication that the "man" in this psalm is a king.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000001-QINU`"'
* Most translations read אָרֶץ as "the land (of Israel)", but if the man is a king with international significance, then ארץ might refer more broadly to the "the earth", as in Gen. 10:8.
* The meaning of "'''blessed'''" (יברך pual) depends on who is doing the blessing and who is being blessed. If the generation of upright ones is being blessed by YHWH, then the verb refers to a "causative action by which deities grant a special favor to humans."'"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"' If, however, the generation of upright ones is "blessing" the "man," then it would mean "to pronounce blessed," or, "to congratulate" (see e.g. 2 Sam. 8:10; Ps. 49:19), or, perhaps even "to praise". In either case, the meaning might be similar to Psalm 72:17 which, like Ps. 112:2, celebrates the king's legacy; the king is both blessed by others and a source or blessing to them: יְהִ֤י שְׁמ֨וֹ לְֽעוֹלָ֗ם לִפְנֵי־שֶׁמֶשׁ֮ יָנִין שְׁ֫מ֥וֹ וְיִתְבָּ֥רְכוּ ב֑וֹ כָּל־גּוֹיִ֥ם יְאַשְּׁרֽוּהוּ׃.