User Guide

Background

Over the course of developing the content for Psalms: Layer by Layer, several issues have arisen – relating to both the theoretical foundation (theory) and the practical use of the materials in a translation setting (workflow). Some of the methodological approaches followed require considerable explanation and defence, and some need only a brief mention. Regardless, it is important that our approach and position(s) on these issues is clear and placed in the appropriate context for users. Introducing Psalms: Layer by Layer

Psalms: Layer by Layer (LBL) is an exegetical resource produced by Cambridge Digital Bible Research in collaboration with Bible translation organisations (esp. SIL and the Seed Company). It is designed to meet the unique needs of Bible translation teams and to support their work to produce Bible translations that communicate with clarity and beauty. Layer by Layer is not a translation methodology, but is intended to support existing processes and translation types of all kinds.

Breadth Since Bible translators cannot skip over difficult verses, LBL offers substantial information for every verse of the Psalter. Each verse is treated from the perspectives of grammar, semantics, discourse, and poetics.

Depth For most visuals, LBL displays the Hebrew text and a modern language translation (in English, the “Close-but-clear” translation). The biblical text is the focus for every layer of analysis, so it is no more than a click away. For especially difficult or contested issues in the Psalms, LBL provides additional detailed information. For example, the meaning of elohim in Ps. 8:6 receives extensive attention, and users can see the best arguments for and against each view: “The meaning of אלהים in Ps. 8:6.” The aim is to allow interested users to evaluate the evidence themselves and make a well-informed decision before rendering the passage into the receptor language.

Open Access Layer by Layer videos are freely available to the public through the CDBR Youtube channel. Verse-by-verse Notes and additional exegetical materials are available on the Psalms: Layer by Layer website. They are intended for the benefit of anyone interested in reading and understanding the Hebrew Psalms. The website also contains links to other open-access resources for additional reading. For example, click here to get to know Rinda, Moses, and Sarah, our personas – three fictional yet realistic characters who represent the target audience of LBL.

Visual Presentation Layer by Layer presents most information visually – including both diagram and video formats – and keeps extended prose to a minimum. This visual format allows non-academic users to assimilate information more quickly and to see patterns in the text more readily. The visual format also allows users with less proficiency in English to engage meaningfully with the material.

2. Using LBL Materials

While Layer by Layer is not a translation methodology and does not require a particular translation workflow, the materials are likely to be most useful if users know the options available to them. This section describes the types of material produced by LBL and the purpose and intended audience for each. If you’re asking, “Where do I start?” this section provides an overview of our materials and guidance for using them effectively. There are two main points of access, depending on your situation: general overview and specific verse/issue. General Overview For a general overview of a psalm, we recommend starting here: Overview video. The Overview video provides a 10–15 minute explanation of the main message of the psalm, including important background ideas and its literary structure.

Synthesis visual. The video has an accompanying Synthesis visual in static form for easy reference, which can be downloaded for later reference.

Poetic Features video. The Poetic Features video identifies the most prominent Hebrew poetic devices and their functions within the context of the psalm as a whole. For more information on LBL videos, see the “Videos” section below. Specific Verse or Exegetical Issue If your interest is related to a specific verse, exegetical issue, or translation-related issue, then you can go straight to the verse in question. These resources are designed for finding more detailed, verse-specific information quickly:

Translation Challenges. Succinct, colour-coded, at-a-glance guide that gives information and translation suggestions about challenging words, phrases, and imagery that appear in the psalm.

Verse-by-verse Notes. An in-depth commentary on each verse.

Top 3 Exegetical Issues. Discuss the most challenging interpretive problems in a psalm. They lay out various interpretations and their rationales, and present a preferred reading and the reasons behind that conclusion. Top 3 Exegetical Issues are available in written form or in video form.

Individual psalm web page. The LBL website has a dedicated page for each psalm. You can access this on the Welcome page under the heading “Select a Psalm.” This page features the Synthesis visualisation, and you can navigate below to find links to individual layers and specific verses. If a particular problem (e.g. complicated tense system), then view the most relevant layer(s) in detail. Start with “Select a Psalm,” then navigate to the page for the layer in question. Videos Layer by Layer produces three types of videos for each psalm:

Psalm Overview. The Overview video for each psalm presents a single coherent interpretation. It is ESL-friendly and intended for anyone involved with BT as well as anyone interested in understanding the Psalms more deeply.

Top 3 Poetic Features. The Poetic Features videos explains the distinctive beauty and power of the biblical poem. It aims to be the "next best thing to reading the original Hebrew” and is intended for BT audiences whose goal is to capture the artistry of the Hebrew text.

Top 3 Exegetical Issues. The Top 3 Exegetical Issues video introduces and discusses difficult passages of relevance to translation. It is intended for a scholarly audience and assumes some knowledge of Hebrew. Workshop Packages Layer by Layer is not intended to be a translation methodology, but a support for existing Bible translation processes. However, we recognise that some translation teams would like more guidance in exactly how they can best use our materials to facilitate the exegetical understanding needed to create accurate, clear, and natural translations of the Psalms–whatever methodology they may choose.

For these teams, we recommend a workshop package containing the recommended minimum materials and instructions that can be used to provide teams with the exegetical information they need before beginning to draft translations. The workshop package consist of the following for each psalm:

Overview video. See above for link and description.

Poetic Features video. See above for link and description.

Internalisation guide: internalisation is an increasingly popular process, based on orality, to help equip translators to deeply understand a text before they set out to translate it. To this end, we provide step-by-step instructions intended to be used alongside the videos, if a team so desires. The guide includes recommended activities and discussion prompts to help translators absorb, bit by bit, the information that is given in the videos, so that they can feel equipped to begin drafting quality translations--whether written, oral, sung, or signed.

Translation Challenges: a succinct, colour-coded, at-a-glance guide that gives information and translation suggestions (where appropriate) about various words, phrases, and imagery that appear in the psalm and that translators may find challenging. This is not intended to replace the more detailed Verse-by-verse Notes on the LBL website; rather, it is intended to be used by the facilitator or advisor as a quick-reference guide during discussions in the internalisation, drafting, or checking process of translation.

Poetic Features At-a-glance sheets: the full text of the psalm, in Hebrew and our Close-but-Clear translation, with the poetic features and canonical references highlighted, for a quick, birds-eye view of these features.

The materials are designed to be used effectively without the need for training by a CDBR staff member. However as part of initial development and user feedback, we facilitate or consult on a small number of translation workshops, including drafting workshops with full translation teams, consultant/TA training, and local arts analysis workshops. If you would like help with planning your Psalms workshop or project using LBL materials, please contact nikki_mustin@tsco.org for a free consultation.

If you are interested in learning more about a methodology that will take teams through the entire translation process—from exegesis and drafting, through various checks up to consultant checking—please see the materials created by our partner group, Psalms That Sing. 3. Theoretical Foundations

The LBL analysis reflects an intentionally interdisciplinary approach to the biblical text, and therefore draws from a number of different hermeneutic and linguistic theories. Because most scholarly theories have something valuable to offer, if kept within the right context, multiple approaches help provide a fuller understanding and avoid the blind spots of any one theory. This section describes each analytical layer and where it fits within the field, explaining the purpose of a given analytical method for interpretation and translation. For practical instructions on how to perform a given methodology, see the LBL Creator Guidelines. Biblical Text(s) The textual starting point—from which our preferred reading may diverge—for Psalms: Layer by Layer is the Hebrew text of the Psalms as represented in the manuscript St Petersburg, National Library of Russia, Firkovich Evr. I, B 19a or, as it is commonly referred to, the Leningrad Codex. The text is Public Domain and is sourced from the Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible 1, which licences its lemma and morphology data under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. The authority of the Westminster Leningrad Codex derives from the reading tradition it represents as well as the means used to to represent this tradition, both of which are a product of the efforts of the mediaeval textual scholars known as the Tiberian Masoretes. The Masoretes worked to preserve the reading tradition of the Jewish scriptures, and, from about 500–900 C.E., developed the system of graphic signs and paratextual notes that most precisely reflect this reading tradition. One particular convention developed by the Masoretes was a system of notes that recorded the differences that arose between the written text (ketiv) and the way that text was read (qere). These differences are of various sorts, some of which make a significant difference to exegesis and translation, and others that do not. The value of either reading is not consistent; at times, the ketiv is the original reading, whereas other times the qere is original. Whenever a difference betweeb the qere and ketiv is relevant for translation, the meanings and implications of both the qere and ketiv will be detailed in the Verse-by-verse Notes, along with justification for the preferred reading.

Layer by Layer materials reflect the assumption that the Masoretic Text is a valuable textual tradition, but text- critical issues are considered where relevant for Bible translation. Text- critical decisions depend heavily on the work of Dominique Barthélemy. Hermeneutics Superscriptions Most Psalms begin with superscriptions (also known as psalm titles). Superscriptions include information about (1) genre (e.g., “psalm” [mizmor]), (2) authorship (e.g., “by David”), (3) recipient/addressee (e.g., “for the director”), (4) musical performance (e.g., “on stringed instruments”), and (5) the historical circumstances surrounding the composition of the psalm. In the Leningrad Codex (as in the earliest extant Hebrew manuscripts), the superscriptions are represented as part of the text. For this reason, adopting the text of the Leningrad Codex as our base text means taking the superscriptions as part of the text. Practically, this means that we attempt to (1) interpret the meaning and function of the superscriptions, and (2) interpret the psalm to which a superscription is attached in light of the information in the superscription. Unfortunately, much of the information in the superscriptions is difficult to understand. For example, little is known about the various terms used to designate genre, and the meaning and function of the musical notations is obscure. The precise meaning of the phrase which is often translated “For the director/choirmaster” is likewise unclear. However, some of the information in the superscriptions can be understood with confidence and applied to the interpretation of psalms with meaningful implications. For example, the phrase “by David” (ledavid), which heads nearly half of the Psalms, is probably a designation of authorship. This means identifying the “I” of these psalms as David. The historical notes which head several psalms are also exegetically significant, and, where they appear, they play a significant role in our analysis. Genre and the Influence of Form Criticism Literary genre refers to a type of written discourse, e.g. a news article, historical fiction novel, or folktale. It reflects the human tendency to group like things together, to categorise, and to find patterns in the world. The importance of genre, however, goes beyond mere taxonomic interest. Because it sets the reader's expectations, it is foundational for effective communication. Genre is, as Kevin Vanhoozer writes, “a covenant, a covenant of discourse.” Modern research on the Psalms has been deeply influenced by an interpretive method (or set of questions and aims) known as Form Criticism, pioneered by Hermann Gunkel in the early 20th century. Form Criticism grouped similar psalms together by genre (Gattungen) and then reconstructed the cultic setting (Sitz im Leben) that gave rise to each genre. One important assumption of Gunkel’s is that “mixed” forms (i.e. psalms that don’t fit a single genre model) are likely later than the early oral forms, resulting from the move to written literature. While scholars now question many of Gunkel’s conclusions, his approach to categorising the Psalms by literary form remains influential. See the book summary here for more on Gunkel’s approach. While the LBL creators accept the possibility that many psalms had an oral history and share the assumption that they were used by the worshipping community, the aim of our exegesis is not to reconstruct the spiritual life of ancient Israel based on the texts. Instead, our focus is on the meaning of the texts themselves, using available historical and cultural background information where possible. LBL materials treat superscriptions as part of the received text, so these are considered when they contain interpretive clues. Where a reconstructed circumstance is proposed, the speculative nature of the interpretive framework is clearly indicated (see unit-level semantics Creator Guidelines). Layers of Analysis Grammar Sentence diagramming visually represents the morpho-syntactical structure of a sentence. For diagramming the Hebrew text, Psalms: Layer by Layer adapts the Reed-Kellogg diagramming method. This approach breaks down each sentence into easily identifiable parts and shows the syntactic relationship between those parts. The method was proposed in the 1870’s by Alonzo Reed and Brainerd Kellogg, professors at Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute. Their aim was to show language with a graphic structure to help English students learn how to better structure sentences and write more effectively.

One major benefit of the grammatical diagram is that it compels the diagrammer to face difficulties in the text. In the words of Reed and Kellogg themselves:

The assertion that correct diagrams can be made mechanically is not borne out by the facts. It is easier to avoid precision in oral analysis than in written [analysis]. The diagram drives the pupil to a most searching examination of the sentence, brings him face to face with every difficulty, and compels a decision on every point.

Grammatical diagramming is not done for its own sake, therefore, but for the sake of understanding the text, specifically how each word of the text is used. Knowing the precise grammatical function of every word is essential to confidence in later interpretation. Another benefit of diagramming grammar, in this case specifically for translators, is that it provides a means to represent alternative readings. If existing Bible versions render a verse in grammatically diverging ways, the diagram will likely explain those differences by showing how different versions have taken the sentence grammar. It should be noted that grammatical diagramming does not attempt to show semantic relations, only morpho-syntactic ones. For example, the grammatical diagram represents all construct phrases on stair steps, regardless of their semantic function (possession/possessor, entity/name, product/material, etc.). Similarly, the grammatical diagram does not consider discourse-level features, since its unit of focus is the sentence. Subsequent layers, such as Phrase-level Semantics and Macro-syntax, provide further semantic analysis both at the sentential and the supra-sentential level.

If you are unfamiliar with the Reed-Kellogg diagramming method, it can feel intimidating at first and will require some time to learn. Knowledge of Hebrew and of grammatical diagramming is not required to use the Layer by Layer materials, but tools like the grammatical diagram are provided for those who find them helpful. For more details on specific conventions for diagramming Biblical Hebrew grammar, see the Grammar Creator Guidelines. Semantics Lexical Semantics A scholar has many options for understanding the meaning of a word, the task of lexicography. The history of a word (etymology) may be useful, as may the use of similar words in cognate languages (comparative linguistics). As with the Grammar layer, our concern remains understanding the language as used in a particular text, which means we find most helpful the main or basic meaning in texts (semantic analysis) combined with the meaning of words as derived from context (syntagmatic relations). This leads to the relationship between words and meanings. Cognitive semantics identifies meaning as what happens cognitively, the mental phenomenon, or the conceptualisation, associated with linguistic expressions. Cognitive grammar (and cognitive linguistics, more broadly) attempts to provide a coherent view of language structure which its adherents find more intuitively natural, psychologically plausible and empirically viable than other theoretical frameworks. Our goal is therefore to understand the meaning of words, as used in a particular text, according to an intuitive framework. Even further, we seek to understand words as much as possible as the native speakers would have understood them. We follow the Semantic Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew closely (where it is finished), in accordance with these principles: Words are organised according to two kinds of semantic domains: lexical and contextual. Lexical domains refer to cognitive categories, e.g. in English ‘apple’ belongs to the lexical domain of ‘fruit’. These domains are culturally defined, dependent on the experiences, beliefs, and practices of a particular social and ethnic group. These domains have both prototypical and non-prototypical members (e.g. ‘robin’ vs ‘ostrich’ for ‘bird’, in English). Understanding just how prototypical a given member is plays an important role in the associated prominence of a specific word choice. Contextual domains reflect the cognitive context in which a given word is used, e.g. a ‘rope’ in Hebrew might be for sale on the market, for use in climbing down a wall, to hang curtains, or used to tear down a wall during a siege. Contextual domains are pivotal in shifting from the mindset of our own native cultures to a mindset closer to the ancient world. Words have definitions, which are the list of attributes of a given word with reference to its lexical domain (e.g., the definition of ‘ostrich’ would include that is is a bird that does not fly), and which include cultural connotations (stereotypical qualities from the Hebrew perspective). We assign every word, in every verse of each psalm, a gloss, which is a convenient translation-equivalent that captures what is possible to capture when crossing cultures and languages. To compensate for the necessary gain of new meaning and loss of old meaning, we make Venn diagrams to compare the Hebrew and English meanings, to provide full awareness of the cost of translating even a given word. Metaphors are considered, in their simplest form, as ‘thought mappings’ from one domain to another. We represent both literal and metaphorical meanings with indication of the metaphorical transfer, e.g. ‘tight place >> distress’. We recognise that different translations will prefer to preserve the literal or metaphorical according to their own needs. Phrase-level Semantics From a constructivist perspective, language consists of constructions all the way down - that is, from large units of discourse, to individual morphemes. One implication of this is that in the same way we are exposed to a single lexical unit and learn its appropriate use and conceptualisation within our language community (see Lexical Semantics, above), the phrasal constructions enumerated below are learned, repeated, and entrenched as undivided units of meaning. At the same time, since constructions go all the way down, “Parts of a construction are themselves constructions,” enabling the analysis of individual phrasal elements such as heads and dependents. Therefore, phrase-level semantics, whose unified semantics remains important to determine, represents the necessary step between individual lexemes and full verb phrases. The Phrase-level Semantics layer analyses the meaning of syntactic units which are larger than the level of the word and smaller than the level of the clause. Specifically, this layer analyses the meaning of prepositional phrases (e.g., לְאִישׁ), construct phrases (e.g., אִישׁ אֱלֹהִים), phrases formed by a coordinating waw conjunction (e.g., אִישׁ וְאִשָּׁה) and noun phrases which consist of a noun plus a determiner (e.g., הָאִישׁ) or a quantifier (e.g., כֹּל אִישׁ). Prepositions, like lexemes, can have a variety of meanings which extend metaphorically from a prototypical (usually spatial) meaning. The precise meaning of a given preposition in a particular text may be determined with reference to its immediate syntactic environment (co-text) as well as the way in which it fits into the overall mental representation of the discourse (context). Sources of information on specific prepositions which we find especially helpful include the Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar (section 39) and the volumes by Ernst Jenni. Bound phrases, or construct chains, consist of two or more nominals which stand in close phonological and semantic relation to one another. Bound phrases may express many different semantic relationships, and the precise relationship between/among the nominals in a particular bound phrase must be determined with reference to the context. The list of possible semantic relationships in BHRG (section 25.4) is a helpful source of information for this kind of analysis. Words or phrases joined by a coordinating conjunction sometimes mean more than the sum of their parts (e.g., English: by and large; e.g., Hebrew: יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה) and therefore require analysis at the phrase level. The Hebrew definite article has a variety of syntactic and semantic functions. Each instance of the article, therefore, merits analysis. The same is true of the quantifier כּל. Hints of Construction Grammar come out in phrase-level semantics, recognising that the meaning of a phrase is not always componential and can emerge on its own as an independent ‘building block of human language’. Verbal Semantics The verbal system may be the most difficult part of biblical Hebrew, at least for Westerners, because its structure is so different from our own verbal systems. Scholars have wrestled over how the different pairs of forms (e.g. yiqtol/qatal, qatal/wayyiqtol, yiqtol/weqatal) have so many roles. One seems to cover the triplet of tense (e.g. past/present/future) that we perceive in European languages. And yet, our familiar categories of tense, mood and aspect do not explain other pairings (e.g. qatal/wayyiqtol), and we are confused by morphological similarity (e.g. qatal and weqatal) that does not represent a Hebrew pair (indeed, it represents opposing, rather than similar, semantics). Our approach is rooted in the cognitive linguistic belief that the best analysis is one which understands language as reflecting cognitive phenomena, which should be intuitive when fully understood. We seek to understand the Hebrew verbal system ‘from within’ as much as possible, which means refraining from imposing a foreign framework. We therefore aim to understand the function of the pairs, whether it be relative tense (e.g. anterior/posterior), discourse management (e.g. continuity/discontinuity) or otherwise. The difficulty comes in providing and justifying translation equivalents for different verbal systems. To do so, we need to do more than understand the Hebrew on its own terms: we need to make additional distinctions that are necessary to accurately convey the same idea in another language. Different languages encode semantics at different levels, and faithful translation respects the needs of both languages. In addition to the internal Hebrew categories, we thus also track categories necessary for translation into other languages, including discourse features that indicate whether a verb should be understood as simple past (he ran) or present perfect (he has run). Although the same Hebrew form would represent both, the same discourse context would not support both. We therefore need to derive from the larger discourse which is appropriate. Modality remains poorly understood within Hebrew, outside the volitional modality which verbs explicitly encode. Our approach in areas of less certainty is to not only indicate the modality we believe appropriate for each context, but to document, in the very next column, the factors that led to the decision. This forces a transparency and enables accountability and confidence when patterns emerge that justify certain translation equivalents based on recurring discourse patterns, which would be missed when studying verbs or clauses in isolation. Story behind the Psalm In "Story behind the Psalm" we analyse the meaning of sentences and larger units of meaning, up to and including the entire psalm. The goal of this layer is to reconstruct and visualise a mental representation of the text as the earliest hearers/readers might have conceptualised it. We start by identifying the propositional content of each clause in the psalm, and then we identify relevant assumptions implied by each of the propositions. During this process, we also identify and analyse metaphorical language (“imagery”). Finally, we try to see how all of the propositions and assumptions fit together to form a coherent mental representation. The main tool we use for structuring the propositions and assumptions is a story triangle, which visualises the rise and fall of tension within a semantic unit. Although story triangles are traditionally used to analyse stories in the literary sense of the word, we use them at this layer to analyse “stories” in the cognitive sense of the word—i.e., a story as a sequence of propositions and assumptions that has tension. It’s important to realise that the diagrams at this layer are designed to visualise the internal coherence of the psalm—its “inner logic”—and not its outward form. Just as the grammatical diagrams explicitly disregard word order beyond what determines grammatical relationships, so the semantic diagrams also explicitly disregard presentation order that does not affect the semantic relationships. For our analysis at this layer, we lean on cognitive lexical semantics as embodied in SDBH, which aims to recreate the cognitive world as represented in the Hebrew text. We also take into account Relevance theory, lexical semantics and compositional semantics, particularly as represented by Paul Kroeger’s book, Analyzing Meaning. Conceptual metaphor theory also plays a role in our analysis of imagery. Close-but-clear Translation The Close-but-clear (CBC) is a “wooden” translation that exists to provide a window into the Hebrew text. It is essentially an interlinear that has been put into English word-order. It is also similar to a “back-translation” (of the Hebrew) often used in Bible translation checking. It is important to remember that the CBC is not intended to be a stand-alone translation, but is rather a tool for using the Layer by Layer materials. The CBC is used as the primary display text (along with the Hebrew) for most analytical visualisations. It is also used as the display text for most videos.

Occasionally, the CBC does not represent the Hebrew text word-for-word. For the sake of transparency, this will be indicated on the Phrase-level Semantics diagram and explained in the notes for that verse. For example, Ps 45:13 literally reads, “And Daughter Tyre, the richest people, will weaken your face with tribute.” “To weaken your face” is an idiomatic expression that means “to seek your favour.” The Phrase-level Semantics diagram below shows the Hebrew words in gray, and provides the CBC glosses in blue. Discourse Macrosyntax The macrosyntax layer rests on the belief that human communicators desire their addressees to receive a coherent picture of their message and will cooperatively provide clues to lead the addressee into a correct understanding. So, in the case of macrosyntax of the Psalms, the psalmist has explicitly left syntactic clues for the reader regarding the discourse structure of the entire psalm. Here we aim to account for the function of these elements, including the identification of conjunctions which either coordinate or subordinate entire clauses (as the analysis of coordinated individual phrases is carried out at the phrase-level semantics layer), vocatives, other discourse markers, direct speech, and clausal word order. We aim to best account for the scope of coordination (that is, to which sentence or discourse section does the waw link the current clause), and subordination (that is, to which sentences or discourse section is the current clause being subordinated). Vocatives, as direct forms of address, and other discourse markers, such as עַתָּה or הִנֵּה, provide explicit signs of the beginning or end of sections of discourse, while the clause-position of the vocative provides further insight into its pragmatic function. Word order in general can indicate the discourse function of individual sentence constituents, in the case of topic or focus positions, or of an entire sentence, in the case of thetic sentences. Putting all of the analysis together, we determine the paragraph divisions and even discourse topics (Floor 2004) of the psalm’s message according to these macrosyntactic signals, which can be either confirmed or challenged by similar structure analysis based on thematic content or poetic features. This is important for translators, since the encoding strategies for how the information packaging is communicated differs from language to language. English, for example, uses sentence intonation to indicate many pragmatic structures that BH communicates with varying word order. Or Russian, for another example, tends to place certain types of marked word order at the end of the clause, rather than the beginning, like Hebrew. Thus, from a functional-typological perspective, our macrosyntactic visual and the expanded English translation aim to make the macrosyntactic structure of the Hebrew transparent so that the morphosyntactic encoding of their functional equivalents can be determined by experts in each target language. Speech Acts A speech act is an act that a speaker performs when making an utterance. Speech Act Theory assumes that language does something, and it builds on the recognition that there is more to communication than the exchange of propositions. Take, for example, the statement, “I’m tired.” The speaker of this sentence likely intends to convey more than an assertion (i.e. a truth claim). Depending on the situation, the speaker may be doing something else with their words. For example, the speaker may be declining an offer (perhaps to go for a bike ride), complaining (perhaps because the bike ride has gone on too long), or agreeing (when a fellow biker comments on post-ride fatigue). The Layer by Layer method draws on the foundational work of J. L. Austin and John Searle, but also incorporates more recent work on discourse pragmatics and macro-speech acts.

Speech act analysis is important, in part, because it considers the interpersonal nature of the text. As Jeannine Brown says in her book Scripture as Communication, "Autonomous texts cut off from their authors do not warn, promise, or covenant. People warn, people promise, people covenant" (p. 35). Speech acts are also important to consider when communicating cross-culturally, since “speech acts are realized from culture to culture in different ways [which] may result in communication difficulties that range from the humorous to the serious” (Gass: 1991, 1). What to one culture, for instance, is a polite yet succinct turndown of an offer, might be a blunt, rude dismissal to another culture. Because understanding and translating the Bible is a cross-cultural endeavour, it is important to consider both how biblical language “acts” and how the target language performs the same action. Participant Analysis Participant analysis aims to identify ‘who is who’ in the Psalm: each participant, provisionally defined as an ‘agent, individual or corporate, who plays a unique relational role in the story of the psalm’. Typically these are volitional participants, but when elements of creation are employed as if behaving (volitionally) toward God or people in a distinct way (e.g. obeying), they thereby become participants. Participants are grouped based on their relationships within the psalm. This highlights parallels between, for instance, multiple participants who praise God, or multiple participants who petition God, or multiple participants who disobey. The purpose is to understand the ‘story’ told by the relationships between these participants, insofar as the psalms are understood as inherently experiential, particularly with regard to relationships with God, other humans and the earth. We do not incorporate formal ‘participant tracking’ (e.g. full noun phrases vs. pronouns vs pro-drop) for poetry. Poetics The poetics layer is divided into two parts: (1) poetic structure, and (2) poetic features. In poetic structure, we analyse the structure of the psalm beginning at the most basic level of the structure: the line (also known as the “colon” or “hemistich”). We determine line divisions based on a combination of external evidence (Masoretic accents, pausal forms, manuscripts) and internal evidence (syntax, prosodic word counting and patterned relation to other lines). Then, based on the perception of patterned similarities (and on the assumption that the whole psalm is structured hierarchically), we argue for the grouping of lines into verses, verses into strophes, strophes into stanzas, etc. Because patterned similarities might be of various kinds (syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, sonic) the analysis of poetic structure draws on all of the previous layers (especially the Discourse layer). In poetic features, we identify and describe the “Top 3 Poetic Features” for each Psalm. Poetic features might include intricate patterns (e.g., chiasms), long range correspondences across the psalm, evocative uses of imagery, sound-plays, allusions to other parts of the Bible, and various other features or combinations of features. For each poetic feature, we describe both the formal aspects of the feature and the poetic effect of the feature. We assume that there is no one-to-one correspondence between a feature’s formal aspects and its effect, and that similar forms might have very different effects depending on their contexts. The effect of a poetic feature is best determined (subjectively) by a thoughtful examination of the feature against the background of the psalm’s overall message and purpose. Synthesis The Synthetic layer refers to summaries of the psalm that serve as an introductory cheat-sheet for translation teams: the most important information on one page. This one page is the collective result of several analytic layers, so that every claim can be backed up by a separate, analytic, visualisation that shows how the conclusion was reached. The Synthesis has three sections: Overview, Orientation, and At-a-glance.

Overview

The Overview provides basic summary information for the psalm:

Purpose (communicative intent). This is the highest level speech act, such as to petition the divine King and Judge for justice from enemies. Content (actual wording, or summary, used to carry out the communicative intent). For instance, “YHWH, act justly! Banish the evildoers and shelter the righteous.” Message. The big idea that lies behind the purpose and which serves as the content for meditation, song, etc. For instance, YHWH is a just ruler, and he blesses the just.

Orientation

The Orientation includes important context and background ideas necessary for understanding the psalm yet likely to be misunderstood by readers today. It also includes the background situation, a schematic representation of precipitating events for the psalm. Both these are taken directly from the Story behind the Psalm.

At-a-glance

The At-a-glance is the first visual that Layer by Layer users see when they study a psalm, and it represents the big-picture view of the psalm. It displays the main sections of the psalm and the most important connections between them. Each section has the following: Heading, to encapsulate its significance in the minimum number of words Content summary, taken directly from the text wherever possible Visual icon, encapsulating a key emotion or thought from the section. This visual element symbolises the synthetic process in trying to sum up an entire section in one image. It necessarily omits all the detail, but it should capture what is most salient.

Connections between sections are indicated with colour, bolding, and other visual cues. The at-a-glance is aimed at all users, including members of oral translation teams.

Appendixes