Psalm 109 Grammar

Back to Psalm 109

Psalm Overview

• Grammar
• Semantics
• Story behind the Psalm
• Discourse
• Poetics

About the Grammar Layer

The grammar layer visually represents the grammar and syntax of each clause. It also displays alternative interpretations of the grammar. (For more information, click "Expand" to the right.)

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.

For a detailed description of our method, see the Grammar Creator Guidelines.

Grammar Visuals for Psalm 109

The grammar layer visually represents the grammar and syntax of each clause. It also displays alternative interpretations of the grammar. (For more information, click "Grammar Legend" below.)

Grammar Legend

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.

Gloss text colors
Gloss used in the CBC	The gloss used in the Close-but-Clear translation is represented by bold blue text.
Literal gloss >> derived meaning	A gloss that shows the more literal meaning as well as the derived figurative meaning is represented in blue text with arrows pointing towards the more figurative meaning. The gloss used in the CBC will be bolded.
Supplied elided element	The gloss for a supplied elided element is represented in bold gray text.

v. 1

• Some medieval Hebrew manuscripts (three Kennicott manuscripts) read אֱלֹהִים instead of אֱלֹהֵי, in which case תְּהִלָּתִי would either be (1) in apposition to אֱלֹהִים ("God, my praise", so Targum) or (2) an adverbial modifying תֶּחֲרַשׁ ("do not be silent with respect to my praise" >> "do not pass over my praise in silence" [LXX—NETS], cf. Theodotion). The Septuagint appears to support the אֱלֹהִים reading: Ὁ θεός, τὴν αἴνεσίν μου μὴ παρασιωπήσῃς. So does the Targum: אלהים שבחתי. The MT construct phrase אֱלֹהֵי תְהִלָּתִי is unique in the Bible, but it is analogous to other invocations in the Psalms: cf. אֱלֹהֵי צִדְקִי (Ps 4:1), אֱלֹהֵי תְּשׁוּעָתִי (Ps 51:16) (see also Jer 17:14—תְהִלָּתִי אָתָּה). As the more difficult reading (a unique expression), it is probably also the earlier reading.

v. 2

• The grammar of v. 2a—they have opened their wicked and deceitful mouths against me—is difficult and open to debate. It also has significant implications for how the rest of the psalm is interpreted. Therefore, it is worth discussing in some detail.
  • In the first place, it is not clear whether the two-fold occurrence of the word "mouth" (פִי) is the subject or the object of the verb "opened" (פָּתָחוּ). Some interpreters, including the ancient translations, appear to interpret it as the subject: "Wicked and deceitful mouths are opened against me" (ESV). The problem with this view is that the qal verb פתח ("to open") is almost always transitive. Thus, some who hold this view argue that the verb should be revocalized as a qal passive perfect (פֻתָחוּ) or emended to a qal passive participle (פָּתוּחַ) or to a niphal (נִפְתָּחוּ). The simplest approach, however, is the follow the Masoretic vocalization and read פָּתָחוּ as a qal active (transitive) with "mouth...mouth" as the compound direct object. "To open one's mouth" (פָּתַח פֶּה) is a common expression (see e.g., Pss 38:14; 39:10; 78:2). Hence, the syntax should probably be read as follows: "they [impersonal subject] have opened their wicked and deceitful mouths against me."
  • Secondly, interpreting the compound noun phrase "wicked and deceitful mouths" (פִי רָשָׁע וּפִי מִרְמָה) as the direct object of the verb raises an additional issue, because the phrase "to open a mouth" can mean either "to open one's own mouth" or "to open the mouth of another." In the case of the former, the verse would be saying: "For people... have opened their mouths" (NIV, cf. NJPS). In the case of the latter, it would be saying: "they have opened a... mouth against me," i.e., "they have appointed someone to accuse me." The latter only occurs in extraordinary situations and always with God as the subject. The former occurs more frequently and seems more likely in this context. The fact that the object "mouth" (פִּי) is singular does not mean that it refers to a single "mouth." Rather, with the plural subject, it is plural in sense: "their mouths."
  • Closely related to the previous issue is the question of whether the substantival adjective wicked (רָשָׁע) (lit.: "wicked person") refers to a single "wicked person" (i.e., "the mouth of a wicked person") or whether it represents a figurative way of saying "a mouth such as belongs to the 'wicked'" (i.e., "a wicked mouth"). Most ancient interpreters understood it as referring to a single "wicked person." Bar Hebraeus identified this individual as Antiochus Epiphanes, Rashi as Esau, and early Christian interpreters as Judas Iscariot (cf. Acts 1:20). In light of the parallel phrase "mouth of deceit" (>>deceitful mouth) along with the fact that the rest of the other descriptions of the enemy in vv. 1-5 are plural, "mouth of a wicked person" is probably a figurative way of saying "a mouth such as belongs to the 'wicked.'"

v. 3

• The phrase hateful words (דִבְרֵי שִׂנְאָה) is probably an adverbial accusative: "with words of hatred they surround me" (NIV).
• Similarly, the pronominal suffix on the verb they have fought (וַיִּלָּחֲמוּנִי) is probably not the direct object but an adverbial: against me. The verb נלחם (niphal) always takes a prepositional phrase to indicate the person against whom one fights.

v. 4

• 4Q88 reads יסטמוני in v. 4, probably an orthographic variant of ישטמוני ("be at enmity with, be hostile towards" [HALOT], a synonym of שׂטן). (Note that 4Q88 substitutes ס for ש also in v. 5: ויסימו). The scribe might have copied ישטנוני as ישטמוני by mistake (scribal error) or on purpose (using a form that was more familiar to him).
• On the text of v. 4b, see The Meaning of Ps 109:4b.

v. 5

v. 6

• 4Q88 appears to read שטן as a participle (שוטן) (cf. vv. 20, 29). This difference is significant because it means the scribe probably did not understand שׂטן as a proper noun ("Satan") as some interpreters have.

v. 7

• The adjective רָשָׁע is represented in the diagram as a predicate complement, because it describes the (changed) state of the subject.
• Instead of וּתְפִלָּתוֹ ("and his prayer"), the NEB reads וְתִּפְלָתוֹ ("and his unseemliness"). But there is no manuscript evidence for this reading, and the traditional reading (וּתְפִלָּתוֹ) makes good sense in the context.

v. 8

• As BHS notes, some mss (3 Kennicott mss) have a waw coordinating the clauses (cf. LXX, Peshitta), probably to facilitate the reading of the text.

v. 9

v. 10

• It makes the most sense to read this verse according to the principle of vertical grammar, i.e., the prepositional phrase from their ruins (מֵחָרְבוֹתֵיהֶם) in the second line modifies the verb phrase aimlessly wander (נוֹעַ יָנוּעוּ) in the first line. The NJPS translation nicely captures this interpretation of the verse: "May his children wander from their hovels, begging in search of [bread]." Translations that render the second line as "May they be driven from their ruined homes" (NIV, cf. NLT, GNT) are following a variant reading in the Septuagint (ἐκβληθήτωσαν, from יְגֹרְשׁוּ or גֹרשׁוּ). But the Greek translator (or an earlier Hebrew scribe) is probably just trying to make sense of a difficult text. The reading of the Masoretic Text is the more difficult reading, and it not only makes sense when understood according to the principle of vertical grammar, but it also results in a chiasm: (a) "may they aimlessly wander" (b) "and beg" (b') "and plead" (a') "from their ruins."

v. 11

v. 12

• The lamed PP in the b-line could modify either חונן or יהי. The corresponding line (v. 12a) suggests that it modifies יהי. The phrase ליתומיו appears at the end of the clause because of how long it is.

v. 13

• The Septuagint has ἐν γενεᾷ μιᾷ, apparently reading בדור אחד instead of בדור אחר. The translator (or an earlier scribe) probably confused the ר for a ד. Both readings convey the same idea ("in the next generation" = "in one generation". The parallelism between אחרית (a-line) and אחר (b-line) might support the Masoretic Text's reading.
• The Septuagint and the Targum have a singular pronominal suffix ("his name") instead of a plural ("their name"). The singular suffix probably represents an assimilation to the context, which abounds in singular suffixes. The plural suffix might refer to the individual's entire family (cf. vv. 9-10, 12b-13a, 14-15). According to others, the suffix is plural to include the plural enemies who were associated with the individual against whom the curse is directed.

v. 14

v. 15

• Some Septuagint manuscripts have a singular suffix, but this probably represents an inner-Greek corruption. Ra 2110 (unknown to Rahlfs) has a plural suffix. In the context, the plural suffix probably refers to the accused person's family.

v. 16

• The conjunction יַעַן אֲשֶׁר ("because") introduces the rationale for the preceding imprecations (cf. Jer 19:3-5).

v. 17

• • The verbs translated and so it will come upon him (וּתְבוֹאֵהוּ) and and so it will stay far from him (וְתִרְחַק) could also be translated as "and it has come upon him" and "and it has distanced itself from him" (cf. NET, NLT) depending on how the Hebrew consonantal text is vocalized. Our preferred understanding of the verbs vocalizes them as weyiqtols, following the Septuagint and most modern translations (cf. KJV, ESV, NIV, NJPS, GNT, NRSV). Translations that have past tense verbs vocalize these verbs as wayyiqtols (וַתְּבוֹאֵהוּ...וַתִּרְחַק), following the Masoretic text. The weyiqtol vocalization assumed by the Septuagint makes the most sense in the context. For a curse to "come" (בוא) means for it to take effect. Thus, the wayyiqtol form וַתְּבוֹאֵהוּ would have to be "understood in such a way that the psalmist is mentally transported into the future and looks back from here." Yet there is no clear indication (apart from the verb form in question) that the text should be read in this way. The text makes more sense if the form is vocalized as a weyiqtol (וּתְבוֹאֵהוּ). The parallel verb about blessing should be similarly vocalized (וְתִרְחַק).

v. 18

v. 19

• The verb יַעֲטֶה in v. 19a is an asyndetic relative clause: "May it be like a garment that he wraps around him" (ESV; so LXX, Jerome). The last two words of the b-line (תָּמִיד יַחְגְּרֶהָ) are probably also an asyndetic relative clause: "like a belt that he puts on every day!" (ESV, so LXX, Jerome).

v. 20

• See The Meaning of Ps 109:20.
• The word רע could be diagrammed as an adjective (so SDBH) or as a noun (so DCH). In either case, it functions as a "substantive" (HALOT), and its meaning is the same ("evil" or "that which is evil").

v. 21

• The Targum has היך טובך וחסדך ("according to your goodness and kindness," Stec 2004, 202). On this basis, some scholars propose reading כְּטוּב חַסְדְּךָ (so BHS, NEB, cf. Brockington 1973). But this emendation is unlikely for multiple reasons.
  • The oldest witnesses read כִּי טוֹב with MT (e.g., LXX, 11Q5, also Jerome).
  • The reading כִּי טוֹב חַסְדְּךָ makes good sense in the context: the כִּי provides a reason, which is a good parallel with לְמַעַן in the previous line.
  • The reading כִּי טוֹב accords with similar expressions elsewhere. Cf. Ps 63:4: כִּי־טוֹב חַסְדְּךָ.
  • It is not even clear that the Targum supports the reading כְּטוּב חַסְדְּךָ. Its parent text might have been כטובך וחסדך, or the Targum might just be giving a free translation of כִּי טוֹב חַסְדְּךָ.

v. 22

• The verb translated in anguish (חָלַל) is difficult and has given rise to emendations to the text. Some translations have "pierced" (NRSV), "stricken" (ESV), or "wounded" (NIV, KJV, CSB), from the root חלל). But for this meaning, we would have expected the polal stem, not the qal, which, with the possible exception of Ps 77:11, is otherwise unattested for this root. The nearly identical clause in Ps 55:5—לִ֭בִּי יָחִ֣יל בְּקִרְבִּ֑י ("my heart is in anguish within me")—suggests that the verb חָלַל in Ps 109 has a similar meaning to the verb יָחִיל in Ps 55. On this basis, some scholars propose emending the text in Psalm 109, for example, to חֹלַל (so BHS). But this kind of interchange among weak roots (e.g., חלל/חיל) is common in Hebrew. As the forthcoming Oxford Grammar of Biblical Hebrew states, "One specific root may be used in the qatal form, whereas another root may be used for the yiqtol form." In this case, יחיל is used in the yiqtol form (Ps 55), and חלל is used in the qatal form (Ps 109). The following definition by SDBH (for חִיל) would therefore apply to the word in Ps 109: "state in which humans experience strong fear and distress, compared to the state of mind of a woman in labor; often accompanied by physical side-effects, like writhing, and trembling."

v. 23

v. 24

v. 25

v. 26

v. 27

• Because the clause in the second line—[that] you, YHWH, have done it (אַתָּ֖ה יְהוָ֣ה עֲשִׂיתָֽהּ)—is synonymous with the clause in the first line—"this is your doing" (יָדךָ זֹּאת)—both clauses should be understood as part of what the enemies come to "know" as the result of YHWH's action. In other words, the second clause, like the first, is probably an embedded clause.

v. 28

• Some translations, following the Septuagint, revocalize and emend the text to read קָמַי יֵבֹשׁוּ: Those who have risen up against me will come to shame. This reading makes for a stronger correspondence with the a-line: (a) let them curse (b) but you will bless // (a') those who have risen up against me come to shame (b') but your servant will rejoice. This reading is also able to explain the MT reading: a scribe probably mistook קמי for קמו—waw and yod are often difficult to distinguish—and then added a waw before יבשו, either as a dittography (קמו יבשו --> קמו ויבשו) or as an attempt to smooth out the verbal forms (qatal --> wayyiqtol). If the MT reading is preferred, there are at least three possible ways to explain the use of (apparently) past-tense verb forms (qatal + wayyiqtol): (1) The verbs "describe the enemies’ defeat as if it were already accomplished" (NET, cf. Ps 37:20); (2) The verbs indicate past time from a future reference point: "When they have risen and fallen, your servant will rejoice"; (3) The first verb is past tense, and the wayyiqtol is future or jussive: "when they arise, let them be ashamed" (KJV); "When they attack me, they will be disgraced!" (NLT). Yet another option is to follow the consonantal text of MT but revocalize it slightly: קָמוּ וְיֵבְשׁוּ—"they have risen up, and they will come to shame." Cf. Jerome (Hebr.): restiterunt et confundentur.

v. 29

vv. 30-31

• It is not clear whether the verb in v. 31 a should be a qatal or a yiqtol verb. The MT has a yiqtol (כִּֽי־יַ֭עֲמֹד; cf. Jerome: stabit), whereas 11Q5 has a qatal (כי עמד; so probably LXX: παρέστη). The reading כי עמד could be the result of haplography (accidentally writing the yod once instead of twice). On the other hand, the reading כי יעמד could be the result of dittography (accidentally writing the yod twice instead of once). It could also be an assimilation to v. 6b (יעמד על ימינו). Both readings work in the context: יעמד as a habitual ("because he always stands...") or עמד as a present-perfect ("because he has taken his stand...").
• Some Hebrew mss (4 Kennicott mss) read נפשי (so also LXX: τὴν ψυχήν μου) instead of נפשו. Yod and waw are easily confused in Hebrew manuscripts. The 3ms suffix is a better fit in the context, functioning as a parallel to אביון in the previous line. In either case, the psalmist is probably referring to himself in some sense.

Bibliography

Baethgen, Friedrich. 1904. Die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.

Barthélemy, Dominique. 2005. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Tome 4: Psaumes. Fribourg, Switzerland: Academic Press.

Brockington, L. H. 1973. The Hebrew Text of the Old Testament: The Readings Adopted by the Translators of the New English Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dahood, Mitchell. 1963. Proverbs and Northwest Semitic Philology. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Biblicum.

Duhm, Bernhard. 1899. Die Psalmen. Vol. XIV. Kurzer Hand-Kommentar zum Alten Testament. Leipzig und Tübingen: Mohr (Paul Siebeck).

Eusebius. 2022. Werke Band X Der Psalmenkommentar: Teil 3: Fragmente zu Psalm 101-150. Edited by Franz Xaver Risch. Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der rrsten Jahrhunderte, n. f. 32. Boston: De Gruyter.

Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. 2011. Psalms 3: A Commentary on Psalms 101-150. Edited by Klaus Baltzer. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Hermeneia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress.

Hupfeld, Hermann. 1871. Die Psalmen. Vol. 4. Gotha: F.A. Perthes.

Jenkins, Steffen G. 2020. “A Quotation in Psalm 109 as Defence Exhibit A.” Tyndale Bulletin 71 (1): 115-135.

Kaddary, M. Z. 1963. “‮חלל‬ = ‘Bore’, ‘Pierce’? Note on Ps. CIX 22.” Vetus Testamentum 13 (4): 486–89.

Keil, Carl F. and Delitzsch, Franz. 1996. Commentary on the Old Testament. Volume 5. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

Rahlfs, Alfred. 1931. Psalmi cum odis. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Rashi. Rashi on Psalms.

Strickman, Norman. 2016. Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Commentary on Books 3-5 of Psalms: Chapters 73-150. Newton: Academic Studies Press.

Theodoret. 2001. Commentary on the Psalms. Translated by Robert C. Hill. The Fathers of the Church, a New Translation, v. 101-102. Washington, D.C: Catholic University of America Press.

Tsumura, David Toshio. 2023. Vertical Grammar of Parallelism in Biblical Hebrew. Ancient Israel and Its Literature 47. Atlanta: SBL Press.