Exegetical Issue—Tyler

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Revision as of 17:00, 21 March 2024 by Tyler.Fulcher (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Introduction

Most modern translations follow the Masoretic Text of Psalm 19:4 (MT), which reads as follows:

MT אֵין־אֹמֶר וְאֵין דְּבָרִים בְּלִי נִשְׁמָע קוֹלָם׃

They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. (NIV)

A minority of translations, however, follow the LXX and other ancient versions by translating the final part of the phrase as a relative clause.

LXX : οὐκ εἰσὶν λαλιαὶ οὐδὲ λόγοι, ὧν οὐχὶ ἀκούονται αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν [1]

There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. (ESV)

The alternative translations substantially change the meaning of the verse. In the first option (i.e., independent clause), the words and speech cannot be heard. In the second option (i.e., relative clause), the words and speech are heard by everyone (Futato, 2009, 89-90).

Argument Maps


===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        rankdir: LR
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 

[Conclusion]: Psalm 19:4b is an independent clause.
  +<Absence of a Relative Particle>: The Masoretic Text does not have a relative particle before בלי נשׁמע קולם.
    <-[Ommission of Relative Particle]: The relative particle is sometimes omited in Hebrew poetry (Calvin, :C:) 
    <-[Necessary Words]: Some additional word (e.g., like, but, etc.) must be provided to make sense of the relationship between v. 4b and its surrounding context if this is not a relative clause (cf. “yet” at the beginning of 19:5 in the NRSV). (Charry, 2015, Psalm 19 :c:; Brueggemann, 2014: 102 :c:)
    +[Parataxis]: Parataxis is a common feature of Hebrew poetry and may be evidence for the oral traditions behind the text's composition. Therefore, the lack of connecting words is not a problem. (Watson, 1986, 81 :m:; Briggs, 1906: 165 :c:).
  +<The Antecedent of קולם>: The 3mp suffix refers either to יוֹם and  לַיְלָה or הַשָּׁמַיִם. (Kirkpatrick, 1897, 103; Alexander, 1864, 96 )
    <-[דברים as antecedent]: The plural noun דברים can function as the antecedent of the pronominal suffix.
  -<Ancient Versions>: Most of the ancient versions have translate 19:4b as a relative clause. (cf. LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, Peshitta, Jerome).
    <_[Unnecessary Emendation]: The introduction of a relative particle in the ancient versions could be the result of a translator trying to correct a perceived problem with the text's coherence. (Kraus, 1960: 155 :c:)
  -<Contradiction>: If 19:4b is an independent clause, it creates a contradiction in the Psalm's message.
    +[Sound or Not?]: The absence of sound does not make sense with the psalm's emphasis on the heavens making a sound (Charry, 2015, Psalm 19 :c:).
      <_[This is a Pseudo-Contradiction]: The two statements seem contradictory on the survace, but the contradiction highlights the verse's truth: one cannot hear the heavens' speech, but you can certainly perceive it. (Wagner, 1999: 250 :A:)
  -<בלי with Passive Participles>
    <_[בלי and אשׁר]: The Hebrew word בלי never occurs in a clause with אשׁר or שׁ without a preposition (cf. Deut 4:42; 9:28; 19:4).
    <_[בלי at the head of a clause]: The only other time בלי stands at the head of one half of the verse (i.e., either side of the ʾAthnâḥ), the clause is independent (cf. Ps 59:5)



Argument Mapn0ConclusionPsalm 19:4b is an independent clause.n1Ommission of Relative ParticleThe relative particle is sometimes omited in Hebrew poetry (Calvin, 🄲) n10Absence of a Relative ParticleThe Masoretic Text does not have a relative particle before בלי נשׁמע קולם.n1->n10n2Necessary WordsSome additional word (e.g., like, but, etc.) must be provided to make sense of the relationship between v. 4b and its surrounding context if this is not a relative clause (cf. “yet” at the beginning of 19:5 in the NRSV). (Charry, 2015, Psalm 19 :c:; Brueggemann, 2014: 102 :c:)n2->n10n3ParataxisParataxis is a common feature of Hebrew poetry and may be evidence for the oral traditions behind the text's composition. Therefore, the lack of connecting words is not a problem. (Watson, 1986, 81 :m:; Briggs, 1906: 165 :c:).n3->n10n4דברים as antecedentThe plural noun דברים can function as the antecedent of the pronominal suffix.n11The Antecedent of קולםThe 3mp suffix refers either to יוֹם and  לַיְלָה or הַשָּׁמַיִם. (Kirkpatrick, 1897, 103; Alexander, 1864, 96 )n4->n11n5Unnecessary EmendationThe introduction of a relative particle in the ancient versions could be the result of a translator trying to correct a perceived problem with the text's coherence. (Kraus, 1960: 155 :c:)n12Ancient VersionsMost of the ancient versions have translate 19:4b as a relative clause. (cf. LXX, Aquila, Symmachus, Peshitta, Jerome).n5->n12n6Sound or Not?The absence of sound does not make sense with the psalm's emphasis on the heavens making a sound (Charry, 2015, Psalm 19 :c:).n13ContradictionIf 19:4b is an independent clause, it creates a contradiction in the Psalm's message.n6->n13n7This is a Pseudo-ContradictionThe two statements seem contradictory on the survace, but the contradiction highlights the verse's truth: one cannot hear the heavens' speech, but you can certainly perceive it. (Wagner, 1999: 250 🄰)n7->n6n8בלי and אשׁרThe Hebrew word בלי never occurs in a clause with אשׁר or שׁ without a preposition (cf. Deut 4:42; 9:28; 19:4).n14בלי with Passive Participlesn8->n14n9בלי at the head of a clauseThe only other time בלי stands at the head of one half of the verse (i.e., either side of the ʾAthnâḥ), the clause is independent (cf. Ps 59:5)n9->n14n10->n0n11->n0n12->n0n13->n0n14->n0

Conclusion

Research

Translations

Ancient

  • LXX: οὐκ εἰσὶν λαλιαὶ οὐδὲ λόγοι, ὧν οὐχὶ ἀκούονται αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν [2]
    • "There are no conversations, there are no words, the articulations of which are not heard." [3]
  • Aquila: οὐκ ἔστι λόγος, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι ῥήματα,οὗ μὴ ἀκουσθῇ φωνὴ αὐτοῦ
  • Symmachus: οὐ ῥήσεσιν, οὐδὲ λόγοις, ὧν οὐκ ἀκούονται [4]
  • Jerome: non est sermo et non sunt verba quibus non audiatur vox eorum
  • Targum: לית מימר דתורעמתא ולית מילי דשגושא דלא משתמע קלהון׃ [5]
    • "There is no word of commotion, nor are there words of confusion, and their voice is not heard." [6]
  • Peshitta: ܠܝܬ ܡܐܡܪܐ ܐܦ ܠܐ ܡ̈ܠܐ܂ ܕܠܐ ܢܫܬܡܥ ܒܩܠܗܘܢ܂ [7]
    • "There is no speech or words, for their voice is not heard." [8]

Modern

v. 4b independent clause

  • There is no actual speech or word, nor is its voice literally heard. (NET)
  • They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. (NIV)
  • They don’t speak a word, and there is never the sound of a voice. (CEV)
  • No speech or words are used, no sound is heard; (GNT)
  • They speak without a sound or word; their voice is never heard. (NLT)
  • and this without speech or language or sound of any voice (NEB)
  • No utterance at all, no speech, not a sound to be heard, (NJB)
  • ohne Sprache und ohne Worte; unhörbar ist ihre Stimme. (Luther 2017)
  • Dies alles geschieht ohne Worte, ohne einen vernehmlichen Laut. (HFA)
  • Sie tun es ohne Worte, kein Laut und keine Stimme ist zu hören. (NGU)
  • ohne Rede und ohne Worte, mit unhörbarer Stimme. (ELB)
  • ohne Rede und ohne Worte, ungehört bleibt ihre Stimme. (EU)
  • Kein Wort wird gesprochen, kein Laut ist zu hören (GNB)
  • ohne Sprache, ohne Worte, mit unhörbarer Stimme. (ZUR)
  • Ce n’est pas un recit, il n’y a pas de mots, leur voix ne s’entend pas (TOB)
  • Ce n'est pas un langage, ce ne sont pas des paroles, on n'entend pas leur voix. (NBS)
  • Ce n'est pas un langage, ce ne sont pas des paroles, Leur voix n'est pas entendue. (NVSR)
  • Ce ne sont pas des paroles, ce ne sont pas des discours, ni des voix qu’on peut entendre. (BDS)
  • Ce n’est pas un discours, il n’y a pas de paroles, aucun son ne se fait entendre. (PDV)
  • Ce n'est pas un discours, ce ne sont pas des mots, l'oreille n'entend aucun son. (NFC)
  • Ce n’est pas un langage, ce ne sont pas des paroles, on n’entend pas leur son. (S21)
  • No hay lenguaje ni palabras ni es oída su voz. (RVR95)
  • Sin palabras, sin lenguaje, sin una voz perceptible, (NVI)
  • Aunque no se escuchan palabras ni se oye voz alguna, (DHH)
  • Donde no hay lenguaje ni idioma, la voz de Ellos no es para ser oida, (BTX4)

v. 4b relative clause

  • There is no utterance, there are no words, whose sound goes unheard. [9] (JPS 1985)
  • There is no speech, nor are there words, whose voice is not heard. (ESV)
  • There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. (NIV 1984) [10]

Secondary Literature

References

  1. Rahlf’s 1931
  2. Rahlf's 1931.
  3. NETS [1]
  4. [2]Göttingen Hexapla Database
  5. CAL [3]
  6. Stec, 2004: 54; Footnote: Stec emends the text by replacing the relative particle (ך) with the conjunction van (ן). However, he does not offer a rationale or supply evidence for this emendation. [4]
  7. CAL [5]
  8. Kiraz and Bali, 2020: 65
  9. With Septuagint, Symmachus, and Vulgate; or “their sound is not heard.”
  10. Footnote: The more recent edition of the NIV (i.e., 2011) opts for the more prominent view (e.g., 4b as an independent clause). [6]