Grammar

• Grammar
• Semantics
  • Lexical Semantics
  • Phrase-Level Semantics
  • Verbal Semantics
  • Story Behind the Psalm
• Exegetical Issues
• Discourse
  • Participant Analysis
  • Macrosyntax
  • Speech Act Analysis
  • Emotional Analysis
• Poetics
  • Poetic Structure
  • Poetic Features
• Synthesis
  • Method:Verse-by-Verse Notes (Academic)
  • Translation and Performance Notes
• Close-but-Clear
• Videos
  • Overview
  • Top 3 Exegetical Issues
  • Top 3 Poetic Features
• Post to wiki
• Style Guide

Version: 1.1
Overseer: Ian Atkinson

Introduction

What

The grammar layer visually represents the grammar and syntax of each clause. It also displays alternative interpretations of the grammar, major textual variants, and emendations that are reflected in modern translations or otherwise considered significant enough for inclusion.

The grammatical diagram provides a way to visualise how different parts of a sentence work together. It represents the “surface-level” grammar, or morphosyntax, of a sentence. Morphosyntax includes both the form of words (morphology) and their placement in the sentence (syntax). This approach to visualising the text, based on the Reed-Kellogg diagramming method, places the grammatical subject in one slot, the verb in another slot, and modifiers and connectives in other slots.

Why

A solid understanding of sentence grammar is foundational for understanding the meaning of a text. There are several exegetical "payoffs" for analysing a text in this way. Grammatical diagramming:

• encourages you to slow down and consider how each word relates to the words around it;
• helps reveal grammatical and syntactical ambiguities;
• reveals interpretive possibilities useful for evaluating existing versions and interpretations; and
• aids in discovering grammatical and syntactical parallels and other formal features, especially for poetic texts.

The grammatical diagram is limited to the sentence-level, so in most cases it will not visually represent relationships that obtain across larger sections of text (cf. the “discourse” layers). The method proposed here requires knowledge of basic linguistic terminology and of Hebrew morphology and syntax. For more on grammar basics, see Additional Resources below.

Tools

Hebrew Text: all Layer by Layer materials use the OSHB as the base text, which may be modified as needed to reflect preferred readings.

Diagramming Software: All of our grammatical diagrams are currently being generated in our online simple format tool, with instruction page here.

Diagrams Page: All of our grammatical diagrams are loaded directly from the diagrammer (see above) to the Diagrams page of your psalm. The link will be provided by Amanda.

Diagramming examples:

• Psalm 25
• Psalm 32

Legend

For Legend, click "Expand" to the right

Visualization	Description
	The clause is represented by a horizontal line with a vertical line crossing through it, separating the subject and the verb.
	The object is indicated by a vertical line that does not cross the horizontal line of the clause. Infinitives and participles may also have objects. If the direct object marker (d.o.m.) is present in the text, it appears in the diagram immediately before the object. If the grammar includes a secondary object, the secondary object will appear after the object, separated by another vertical line that does not cross the horizontal line of the clause.
	The subject complement follows the verb (often omitted in Hebrew) separated with a line leaning toward the right. It can be a noun, a whole prepositional phrase or an adjective. The later two appear modifying the complement slot.
	When a noun further describes or renames the object, it is an object complement. The object complement follows the object separated by a line leaning toward the right.
	In a construct chain, the noun in the absolute form modifies the noun in the construct form.
	Participles are indicated in whatever position in the clause they are in with a curved line before the participle. Participles can occur as nominal, where they take the place of a noun, predicate, where they take the place of a verb, or attributive, where they modify a noun or a verb similar to adjectives or adverbs.
	Infinitives are indicated by two parallel lines before the infinitive that cross the horizontal line. Infinitive constructs can appear as the verb in an embedded clause. Infinitive absolutes typically appear as an adverbial.
	The subject of the infinitive often appears in construct to it. In this situation, the infinitive and subject are diagrammed as a construct chain.
	The object of the infinitive is indicated by a vertical line that does not cross the horizontal line of the infinitival clause.
	Modifiers are represented by a solid diagonal line from the word they modify. They can attach to verbs, adjectives, or nouns. If modifying a verb or adjective, it is an adverb, but if modifying a noun, it is an adjective, a quantifier, or a definite article. If an adverb is modifying a modifier, it is connected to the modifier by a small dashed horizontal line.
	Adverbials are indicated by a dashed diagonal line extending to a horizontal line. These are nouns or infinitives that function adverbially (modifying either a verb or a participle), but are not connected by a preposition.
	Prepositional phrases are indicated by a solid diagonal line extending to a horizontal line. The preposition is to the left of the diagonal line and the dependent of the preposition is on the horizontal line. They can modify verbs (adverbial) or nouns (adjectival).
	Embedded clauses are indicated by a "stand" that looks like an upside-down Y. The stand rests in the grammatical position that the clause fulfills. Extending from the top of the stand is a horizontal line for the clause. If introduced by a complementizer, for example כִּי, the complementizer appears before the stand. Embedded clauses can stand in the place of any noun.
	When clauses are joined by a conjunction, they are compound clauses. These clauses are connected by a vertical dotted line. The conjunction is placed next to the dotted line.
	Within a clause, if two or more parts of speech are compound, these are represented by angled lines reaching to the two compound elements connected by a solid vertical line. If a conjunction is used, the conjunction appears to the left of the vertical line. Almost all parts of speech can be compound.
	Subordinate clauses are indicated by a dashed line coming from the line dividing the subject from the predicate in the independent clause and leading to the horizontal line of the subordinate clause. The subordinating conjunction appears next to the dashed line.
	Relative clauses also have a dashed line, but the line connects the antecedent to the horizontal line of the relative clause. The relative particle appears next to the dashed line.
	Sentence fragments are represented by a horizontal line with no vertical lines. They are most frequently used in superscriptions to psalms. They are visually similar to discourse particles and vocatives, but most often consist of a noun phrase (that does not refer to a person or people group) or a prepositional phrase.
	In the body of the psalm, a horizontal line by itself (with no modifiers or vertical lines) can indicate either a discourse particle or a vocative (if the word is a noun referring to a person or people group). A discourse particle is a conjunction or particle that functions at the discourse level, not at the grammatical level. Vocatives can appear either before or after the clause addressed to them, depending on the word order of the Hebrew.
	Apposition is indicated by an equal sign equating the two noun phrases. This can occur with a noun in any function in a sentence.

Hebrew text colors
Default preferred text	The default preferred reading is represented by a black line. The text of the MT is represented in bold black text.
Dispreferred reading	The dispreferred reading is an alternative interpretation of the grammar, represented by a pink line. The text of the MT is represented in bold pink text, while emendations and revocalizations retain their corresponding colors (see below).
Emended text	Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is represented by bold blue text, whether that reading is preferred or dispreferred.
Revocalized text	Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is represented by bold purple text, whether that reading is preferred or dispreferred.
(Supplied elided element)	Any element that is elided in the Hebrew text is represented by bold gray text in parentheses.
( )	The position of a non-supplied elided element is represented by empty black parentheses. For example, this would be used in the place of the noun when an adjective functions substantivally or in the place of the antecedent when a relative clause has an implied antecedent.

Steps

1. Prepare your workspace.

• Open the following page: https://psalms.scriptura.org/w/Psalm_X/Diagrams, replacing "X" with your psalm number. If the page isn't created yet, create the page and copy and paste the following code and save:

{{Diagrams}}

• Using the Hebrew text of the Psalm from OSHB, you can either construct the diagram directly in the Diagrams page of your psalm or on the diagramming tool. (The advantage of using the diagrammer tool is that you can display the image of the diagram as you build the code.) You will need to remove all diacritics such as accents and maqqefs, but do not remove vowel points. A good place to deposit the text with these formatting capabilities is found here.
• Begin the code for each verse with DiscourseUnit [v. x]. Each subsequent verse (or verse range) should be encoded with its own DiscourseUnit and a note identifying the verse as above. A verse may have multiple fragments. When two or more verses are syntactically joined into a single diagram, then indicate this combination in the note on the single DiscourseUnit (e.g., [vv. 3-4]), rather than having separate DiscourseUnits for each separate verse.
• Once you have finished diagramming a certain fragment or verse, create a New Grammatical Diagram on the Diagrams page previously created for your psalm, select the verse range and paste the code into the Simple Format Code. The description box should be used to indicate alternatives and their sources. See the following example from Ps 92:11:

• Notes and their relevant details should be pasted into the following text boxes:

• When you are ready to create another diagram visual, or enter notes for another diagram, simply select Add another.

2. Create simple format code.

Basic code

Exegetes are encouraged to draft their simple format code in the new diagrammer, because it has many helpful drafting aids, such as word completion, alignment aids, and localized error detection (e.g., typos, invalid children, misalignment, and blank lines). Drafted simple format code should be copy-pasted into the Diagrams page of your psalm, as discussed above.

Create the basic code for each sentence using the detailed instructions document. This document explains the syntactic hierarchy for encoding the text with many categorized examples based on commonly-encountered syntactical relationships.

NB If you encounter a situation not covered in the instructions, you may 1) check (and re-use) the code of other Psalms with similar constructions to ensure consistency of treatment and/or 2) message the overseer of the grammar layer (Ian Atkinson) for help in resolving the problem.

In order to avoid transcription errors, use the Hebrew text pasted from the OSHB for the Hebrew words. Only type the Hebrew directly in cases where the Hebrew differs (e.g., revocalizations, emendations, some ellipses).

In general, each main clause should be diagrammed separately along with any modifying clauses (e.g., subordinate, relative, embedded, temporal). Only join separate main clauses into clause clusters when they are conjoined by a conjunction or when they together govern a subordinate clause.

If you run into problems where the diagrammer is crashing or otherwise displaying incorrectly, you will need to troubleshoot using the following steps:

1. If using the new diagrammer, resolve any localized errors detected by the diagrammer.
2. Proofread the code carefully to ensure there are no further typos or formatting errors.
3. Use a process of elimination (by removing functioning sections of the code from the online diagrammer) to identify the precise part of the code that is causing the diagrammer to crash.
4. If you still cannot identify and fix the problem, then contact the layer overseer.

Compound clauses

Treat clauses as compound clauses (ClauseCluster in code) when they:

• are conjoined by a conjunction within a well-defined discourse unit (e.g., verse or poetic couplet)
• share a constituent (e.g. subject, object, prepositional phrase) or subordinate clause

Otherwise, treat clauses as separate clauses (encoded within separate Fragment tags).

This indicates the formal relationship between the clauses. At Macrosyntax we will address the implied semantic relationships.

Ellipsis

In cases where an elided word or phrase seems necessary to explain the grammar of a clause, include the Hebrew (with contextual adjustments as necessary) and label it with <status="elided">. Null copulas are not encoded as elision (unless a form of היה is to be understood).

Alternatives

The grammatical diagram should include all alternative (i.e., dispreferred) readings that reflect different interpretations of the syntax and meet the relevant criteria:

1. The alternative is grammatically viable.
2. The alternative has sufficient support from ancient and/or modern versions.

When multiple readings are possible, any dispreferred readings should be marked as <status="alternative"> at the lowest level that encompasses the entirety of the alternative diagram. The preferred reading will then be in black, and the alternative (dispreferred) readings in pink.

If possible, alternatives should be diagrammed connected to the main (preferred) diagram at their appropriate locations, rather than isolated fragments. If, however, the alternatives require complete restructuring of the clause (or phrase), then they should be diagrammed separately. At the phrase-level semantics layer, all alternatives will be stripped away from the diagram, so alternatives that are improperly combined with preferred readings will crash the diagrammer.

For each alternative, the exegete should write a note in the Diagrams page explaining the options and arguments.

Revocalization and Emendations

Text-critical discussion is currently included in the grammar layer, so notes should also be made concerning any textual variants and proposed emendations to the Hebrew text. The exegete should indicate any variants/emendations/revocalizations which are preferred, significant, or reflected in modern translations. Items of interest which are not preferred, significant, or reflected in modern translations may be noted, but should not be included in the diagram.

See the following sources for textual variants:

1. Ketiv/Qere differences. In these cases, treat the vocalized Ketiv as the primary MT reading and the Qere as an emendation. Do not include continual Qere readings that are consistently read against the Ketiv.
2. The Dead Sea Scrolls. To see whether any fragments of a Psalm have survived in any Dead Sea Scrolls, see this DSS contents spreadsheet. Editions of the Dead Sea Scroll Psalm scrolls are available on the group Zotero library. Also, Qumran Digital-Text und Lexikon has transcriptions of the DSS (biblical at the bottom of the list).
3. The Septuagint according to Rahlfs 1931. In cases where it is unclear whether a difference is due to a different Hebrew base text or the translation technique of the translator, exegetes may use their discretion to decide what is necessary to include.
4. Modern translations, Hebrew text editions (esp. BHS), secondary literature (including HOTTP and CTAT).

When a reading shares the consonantal text of the Leningrad Codex (the base text of the OSHB) but reads the vowels differently, this should be encoded as <status="revocalization">. NB In previous versions of the code we used the anglicized spelling "revocalisation," which is still supported. But please now use the American spelling with "z" for consistency.

When a reading differs from the consonantal text of the Leningrad Codex, then it should be encoded as <status="emendation">. NB This is labelled as an emendation in the code, even if it has Hebrew manuscript support.

When revocalizations and emendations are the preferred readings in the diagrams, they will replace the black text in the main diagram. The dispreferred OSHB text will then be marked as an alternative. When they are dispreferred, they should be marked as alternatives; they will either follow the preferred text directly or else be positioned within an alternative (dispreferred) part of the diagram. When a dispreferred emendation does not have a parent that can be labelled "alternative," then the word itself can be marked as <status="alternative emendation">.

Every revocalization and emendation that is included in the diagram should also be discussed briefly in a note explaining the options and arguments. In the case of text-critical decisions, it is important to explain what possible processes could explain the origins of all dispreferred readings.

3. Generate diagram.

Throughout the drafting process, you can copy-paste your code from the diagrammer into the Diagrams page. You can also edit directly in the Diagrams page, but making changes on the diagrammer itself is probably more efficient, since you can click "Draw" to generate the diagram as you go.

4. Draft notes.

With each diagram, you can include notes in the appropriate text boxes of the Diagrams page, as discussed above. These may list and explain viable options and provide arguments for your preferred reading. These notes should include relevant secondary literature as appropriate and follow the Style Guide.

Include notes for:

1. alternatives
2. revocalizations
3. emendations
4. and any difficult, rare, or atypical forms or constructions that are likely to be a challenge for translators.

Help

Good Examples

• Psalm 25
• Psalm 32

Common Mistakes

The following are a list of common mistakes to be aware of. For further details, see the instruction document.

• Suffix-pronouns misplaced - The suffix-pronoun part of speech requires precise placement, and when misplaced it will often supply grayed-out suffixes on the wrong words.
• Empty parts of speech - Often exegetes will create unnecessary parts of speech in the code that do not have any corresponding Hebrew. The only time this should occur is for null-copula verbless clauses, where a gloss is provided on the verb part of speech, but no Hebrew. Otherwise, there should be no empty parts of speech. E.g., if a subject is not stated, you do not need to write Subject followed by an empty noun. Both will be understood and supplied by the diagrammer.
• Confusion of revocalization, emendation, and alternative - Revocalization refers to alternative vocalizations that differ from the Leningrad Codex when there is no change in the consonantal text. Emendations refer to textual variants or conjectural emendations that differ from the consonantal text of the Leningrad Codex. Alternatives refer to all dispreferred texts, which can include revocalizations, emendations, and also rejected readings of the Leningrad Codex. There can only be one preferred (i.e., non-"alternative") text for each word.
• Alternatives not encoded or positioned properly - Often, alternative status is not marked in the right place, leading to problems when stripping alternatives for phrase-level highlighting. Also, alternatives that should be merged with the preferred diagram are often written unnecessarily as separate fragments.
• Misalignment of elements - The diagrammer is dependent upon correct hierarchical alignments, and even small errors in spacing can disrupt the diagrammer.
• Smart quotes - The diagrammer is designed to accept regular quotation marks. If a text processor automatically changes these to smart quotes, it will create an error.
• Notes do not explain origins of variants - Often exegetes fail to explain how attested variants could have arisen, but having a viable hypothesis is essential for explaining which variant is earlier.

Additional Resources

Hebrew Grammar (Learning)

AnimatedHebrew: beginning Hebrew video lectures.

Aleph with Beth: biblical Hebrew video course in an immersive style.

“Biblical Hebrew: A Student Grammar”: draft copy by John A. Cook and Robert D. Holmstedt, 2009.

Pronominal Suffixes." Chapter notes from Basics of Biblical Hebrew. Gary D. Pratico and Miles V. Van Pelt.

Van Pelt, Miles V. Basics of Biblical Hebrew Video Lectures. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012. Available on Logos's "Translator's Workplace."

H. H. Hardy II and Matthew McAffee, Going Deeper with Biblical Hebrew: An Intermediate Study of the Grammar and Syntax of the Old Testament. Brentwood, TN: B&H Academic, 2024.

Hebrew Grammar (Reference)

Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited and revised by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1910. Available on archive.org or Wikisource.

Joüon, Paul, and T. Muraoka. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew, 2d ed. Subsidia Biblica, 27. Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 2006.

Van der Merwe, Christo, et al. A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1990. Available on archive.org.

Waltke, Bruce and Michael Patrick O'Conner. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990. Available on archive.org.

Other

GrammarBook.com: “Finding Nouns, Verbs, and Subjects.”

SIL "Glossary of Linguistic Terms."

SIL "French/English Glossary of Linguistic Terms."

Van Pelt, Miles V. English Grammar to Ace Biblical Hebrew. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010. Available on Logos's "Translator's Workplace."

Rubric for Version 1.1

Dimension	Description
Completeness	Every word in the psalm is represented in the diagram. Viable and attested grammatical alternatives are represented in the diagram. Textual variants, revocalizations, and emendations are represented in the diagram if they are preferred, significant, or attested in modern translations. Difficulties, alternatives, revocalizations, and emendations are explained with prose notes.
Quality of analysis	Every word in the psalm is accurately encoded and diagrammed according to project standards. In the case of difficulties, alternatives, revocalizations, and emendations, each view is thoroughly explained and defended with a note. The preferred view is viable and well grounded in evidence.
Engagement with secondary literature	Standard reference grammars (e.g., GKC, JM, IBHS, BHRG) are cited where relevant. Bible translations (ancient and modern) are cited where relevant. When two or more translations reflect a certain interpretation of the grammar, that interpretation is represented on the diagram.
Clarity of language	Prose notes are clear and concise. Language is not too technical so as to be inaccessible to Sarah.
Formatting/Style	Diagram is properly titled. Each verse in the diagram is properly labeled. The diagrammed text has vowels but no accents or maqqephs. Proposed changes to the text are properly represented. Alternatives are properly represented. Any remaining display problems relating to the diagrammer are flagged for further development. Correct spelling and punctuation are used throughout the prose notes. Notes adhere to the Style Guide.

Submitting your draft

Copy the text below into your forum submission post, entitled Grammar - Psalm ###. After posting, change your post into a wiki post so the reviewers can check the boxes. To change your forum post into a wiki post, click on the three dot menu at the end of the text.

Click on the wrench.

Select "make wiki."

[Grammar Layer Rubric Version 1.1](https://psalms.scriptura.org/w/Grammar#Rubric)
|Guardian Review|Overseer Review|Final Checks|Description|
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
||||**Completeness**
|[ ]||| Every word in the psalm is represented in the diagram.
|[ ]|[ ]|| Viable and attested grammatical alternatives are represented in the diagram.
|[ ]|[ ]|| Textual variants, revocalizations, and emendations are represented in the diagram if they are preferred, significant, or attested in modern translations.
|[ ]|[ ]|| Difficulties, alternatives, revocalizations, and emendations are explained with prose notes.|
||||**Quality of analysis**
|[ ]|[ ]||  Every word in the psalm is accurately encoded and diagrammed according to project standards.
|[ ]|[ ]|[ ]|  In the case of difficulties, alternatives, revocalizations, and emendations, each view is thoroughly explained and defended with a note.
|[ ]|[ ]|[ ]|  The preferred view is viable and well grounded in evidence.|
||||**Engagement with secondary literature**
|[ ]|[ ]||  Standard reference grammars (e.g., GKC, JM, IBHS, BHRG) are cited where relevant.
|[ ]|[ ]|[ ]|  Bible translations (ancient and modern) are cited where relevant. When two or more translations reflect a certain interpretation of the grammar, that interpretation is represented on the diagram.|
||||**Clarity of language**
|[ ]|[ ]|[ ]|   Prose notes are clear and concise.
|[ ]|[ ]|[ ]|   Language is not too technical so as to be inaccessible to [Sarah](https://psalms.scriptura.org/w/Personas).|
||||**Formatting/Style**
|[ ]|||   Diagram is properly titled.
|[ ]|||   Each verse in the diagram is properly labeled.
|[ ]|||   The diagrammed text has vowels but no accents or maqqephs.
|[ ]|[ ]||   Proposed changes to the text are properly represented.
|[ ]|[ ]||   Alternatives are properly represented.
|[ ]|[ ]||   Any remaining display problems relating to the diagrammer are flagged for further development.
|[ ]|||   Correct spelling and punctuation are used throughout the prose notes.
|[ ]|||   Notes adhere to the [Style Guide](https://psalms.scriptura.org/w/Style_Guide).|

Appendix

Sample diagrams

Code:

SimpleGrammar
  DiscourseUnit
    Fragment
      noun: איש man

Diagram:

SimpleGrammar
  DiscourseUnit
    Fragment
      noun: איש man

Previous Versions of these guidelines

These are the previous versions of the guidelines that mark significant milestones in our project history. Future versions will be numbered and will correspond to materials approved according to those guidelines.

• Logos diagrammer/CGs creation (June 2022)

• First simple code diagrammer (July 2023)— 0.9

• Second simple code diagrammer (Sept 2024)— 1.0

• Straight to wiki (Feb 2025)— 1.1