Psalm 10 Grammar

Psalm Overview

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

Grammatical Diagram

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

• On both contextual and morphological grounds, it is best to analyse בַּצָרָה as the preposition בְּ + the noun צָרָה ‘distress’. We have analysed the grammatical relationship between the phrase בצרה and the noun עתות as a construct, where an entire phrase stands in the slot normally reserved for the second member of the construct (the absolute noun).
  • If בצרה is analysed as a noun, this obviously has the added effect of changing the semantics. But a problem also exists here. The only supposed instance of a noun בַצָּרָה occurs in Jeremiah 14:1 אֲשֶׁ֨ר הָיָ֤ה דְבַר־יְהוָה֙ אֶֽל־יִרְמְיָ֔הוּ עַל־דִּבְרֵ֖י הַבַּצָּרֽוֹת ‘That which was the Word of the Lord unto Jeremiah, regarding the droughts/needs’, where (1) the word is clearly inflected like a noun and (2) in light of what comes after, very probably refers to droughts. The two forms (בַּצָּרָה and בַּצָּרוֹת) also appear to exist in a paradigmatic relationship, as do, for example חַטָּאה/חַטָּאת (<*ḥaṭṭaʾ-(a)t) and חַטָּאוֹת
  • Later in Jeremiah 17, however, the singular form of בַּצָרוֹת appears; in v. 8 we find וּבִשְׁנַ֤ת בַּצֹּ֨רֶת֙ לֹ֣א יִדְאָ֔ג ‘and in the year of drought it (the tree) is not anxious.’ The noun pattern here is appropriate concrete substantives (cf. כַפֹּרֶת ‘cover’ and the related כֻּתֹּנֶת ‘tunic’) and has the expected plural form בָּצָּרוֹת (cf. כֻּתֳּנֹת ‘tunics’ [Ex. 28:40]). Thus, it probably makes more sense to see the forms בצֹרֶת and בצרוֹת in Jeremiah 17 as related to each other and, indeed, referring to something concrete—‘a drought’.
  • Finally, analysing בַּצָרָה as a noun in its other occurences is suspect. In the clause בַּצָּרָ֥ה קָרָ֗אתָ (Psa 81:8), it is clearly modifying the verb: ‘In distress you called out’. In Psalm 9:10 וִ֘יהִ֤י יְהוָ֣ה מִשְׂגָּ֣ב לַדָּ֑ךְ מִ֝שְׂגָּ֗ב לְעִתּ֥וֹת בַּצָּרָֽה, a ‘stronghold’/‘fortress’ would not be a conceptually appropriate solution to ‘need’ or a ‘drought’. It is best, therefore, to analyze בַּצָּרָה as a preposition ב + the (definite) noun צָרָה ‘distress’.

v. 2

• In nearly every ancient version, the ‘afflicted’ (עָנִי) are the subject of the verb. Most modern versions construe עָנִי as the object, however. We prefer the latter option—עִָנִי as object and רשׁע's head noun (elided) as subject.
  • The verbal root דל"ק in unmistakably transitive in Lamentations 4:19 where it is in the context of a pursuit and an ambush (אר"ב), as is the case here in Psalm 10.
  • The ancient versions are explained by the then-common tendency to gloss the verb from the root דל"ק as 'to burn'. However, it is not clear what it would mean for the poor to ‘burn’ in this context. This may be demonstrated by the range of attempts to make sense of this. For example Athanasius (d. 373 AD) interprets the verse as referring to a tribulation whereas Augustine (d. 430) interpreted the verse as referring to the ‘burning’ desire for God's intervention
  • It does not matter, semantically, whether בְּגַאֲוַת is analyzed as a construct or absolute noun. Both are equally possible. The archaic -at ending is somewhat expected in poetry and is supported by the equally archaic זוּ that follows. If, with the accents, בְּגַאֲוַת רָשָׁע is analysed as one phrase, רָשָׁע could simply be understood as the elided subject of the following verb.
• In light of recent research on כי-clauses it is best to interpret יתפשׂוּ as an imprecation, in which the (class of the) wicked are the subject. This is due to the fact that there is no causal relation between v. 3 and v. 2. That is, if עני were interpreted as the subject of יתפשו, it would not make any sense for the boasting of the wicked to seize the poor—where the כי presents the causal relation between propositional contents. Rather, the כי is grounding the speech act. Why should the wicked fall? Because they are boastful (see esp. Locatell 2017, 161–169).

v. 3

• Some interpret בצע as the subject of the clause: "the one greedy for gain curses and renounces the LORD" (ESV , cf. GNT, NET) According to this interpretation, ברך ("bless") is a euphemism for "curse." That this is a euphemism here seems unlikely, since in the same breath the psalmist speaks of one who "abhors" (נאץ) YHWH. Other interpreters have taken בצע as the object of ברך: "he blesses the greedy and reviles the LORD" (NIV, cf. NLT). Our interpretation is similar to this one; we take בצע as the object of ברך and the clause בצע ברך as an asyndetic relative clause: "the one who blesses a greedy person insults YHWH.
• For a detailed discussion of this verse, see the exegetical issue.

v. 4

• Who is the subject of בל ידרש? It may be the wicked who, in their arrogance, "do not seek [God]." Or, it may be YHWH, who, according to the wicked, "will not call to account." In the latter case, בל ידרש is embedded speech, parallel with אין אלהים in the second line. Yet there is no formal introduction of direct speech in the first line (e.g. אמר; cf. vv. 6, 11, 13), and the verb דרש is often used in the psalms to refer to humans seeking God. For these reasons, we have preferred the first option (wicked as subject) as the more likely interpretation.

v. 5

• It is possible that the Hiphil of פוח marks its object with bet. According to Clines (DCH) This particular sense of the word only occurs twice. In one instance (Prov 29.8), there is no overt marking of the direct object. In the other (this verse) there seems to be. The more conservative option would be to analyse בהם as an adjunct, since there is at least one instance where the direct object is not marked by a preposition.
• Some would emend the word מרום here to the verb סָרוּ 'they turned away'. We, along with Barthelemey maintain the MT, no least because the initial the initial mem of מָרוֹם is visible in 5/6Hev1b f1ii:27.

v. 6

• The antecedent of אשׁר is not immediately clear. It could be the implicit subject of אמוט ("I... who will not be in adversity") or an implied "he" ("[He] who is not in adversity [will endure] for all generations"). The antecedent could also be the immediately preceding phrase לדר ודר ("for all generations, in which no trouble is seen"). The following considerations support this interpretation:
  • The verb לְהִמּוֹט in the Psalms is frequently modified by a synonym of לדר ודר—לעולם ‘forever’ (e.g, Psa 15:5; 30:7; 55:23; 104:5; 112:6; 125:1; cf. 62:3), indicating perpetuity nonetheless. The instance in Psa 10:6 would have the rhetorical function of an exaggerated expansion of this familiar phrase, as compatible with arrogance of the wicked.
  • The collocation אשר לא ב became the construction for the preposition ‘without’ at Qumran (1QS 7:8, 18; 5:17; 6:1, 12; 7:11). The construction even has precedent in Classical Biblical Hebrew:‏אֶ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֨ר לֹ֤א בְמִסְכֵּנֻת ‘a land without scarcity’ (Deut 8:9).
  • The sense is very close to that of the LXX translation; although there ἄνευ ‘without’ modifies the main verb, not γενεὰν (=דור).

v. 7

v. 8

• Barthélemy (2005, 40) points out that this same root (צפ"נ) is twice complemented via the preposision לְ and connected with the root אר"ב: אִם־יֹאמְרוּ֮ לְכָ֪ה אִ֫תָּ֥נוּ נֶאֶרְבָ֥ה לְדָ֑ם נִצְפְּנָ֖ה לְנָקִ֣י חִנָּֽם׃ ‘If they say “come with us! Let us wait in ambush for blood. Let us hide/watch for the innocent”’ (Prov 1:11); וְ֭הֵם לְדָמָ֣ם יֶאֱרֹ֑בוּ יִ֝צְפְּנ֗וּ לְנַפְשֹׁתָֽם׃ ‘But these men wait in ambush for their own blood; they hide/watch for their own lives’ (Prov. 1:18). He argues that a secondary sense grew out of the purpose for which one hid—to hide in oder to watch.

v. 9

• It is possible to analyse the 3ms pronominal suffix on משכו as the object/undergoer of the action (משך 'to pull'). These pronouns, however, usually indicate the subject of the verbal idea, which makes perfect sense in this context. It is likely that the enemy in this verse is performing this action in order to capture the afflicted.

v. 10

• According to the MT vowels (qere) the first word of v. 10 is a qal 3ms yiqtol verb יִדְכֶּה. However, the MT consonants give a different reading (ketiv). The consonants (ודכה) may be vocalized either as a qal 3ms weqatal verb (וְדָכָה) or as an adjective (וְדָכֶה). Barthélemy et. al. have argued that the ketiv reading is secondary and that the qere is to be preferred. According to this reading, he (i.e., the wicked person) crouches and stoops in wait for the poor.
• In the major Tiberian codices the consonantal text has חלכאים (the ketiv ‘what is written), whereas the reading tradition apparently read חֵיל כָּאִים (the qere ‘what is read’). The masorah to the Aleppo codex classifies this under the rubric כתב מלה חדה וקרי תרי מלין ‘one word is written but two are read’. The ketiv looks as if it is the plural form of the word occurring only here in this Psalm חֵלְכָה ‘wretch’, with an orthographic variant (חלכא with alef vs. חלכה with he). The qere, on the other hand is clearly the word חֵיל ‘strength’ plus the plural form of an adjective built on the root כא̎ה (DCH glosses as ‘to be discouraged’). Both options have have been used throughout the history of interpretation. Ibn Ezra tells of a ‘great grammarian who said that חלכאים is one word’ (מדקדק גדול אמר כי חלכאים מלה אחת), and the majority of the MSS collated by Ginsburg (1913, 16) witness to the ketiv as the correct interpretation. With the majority of modern translations, we have chosen the to follow the ketiv. Plural nouns referring to people, as is the case with חלכאים, may be construed with singular verbs. There is no difficulty, therefore, in taking חלכאים as the subject of נפל.

v. 11

v. 12

v. 13

v. 14

v. 15

• For a discussion on the division of this verse and, as a consequence, the grammar, see the exegetical issue.

v. 16

v. 17

v. 18

• 'In Ps 10:18, the meaning of the form laʿarōṣ can be either active or passive: “so that no man on earth may strike terror any more,” or “so that no man on earth need fear”’. The former position is taken here simply because the word אנוש (the subject) is typically used as a pejorative term to reflect the difference between man and God. To be sure, this component exists only within the word's theological framework, but this Psalm is obviously concerned with the nature of God (אמר בלבו...). Thus, ‘A major theological concept underlying the use of this word is the fundamental distinction between God and man...This fundamental difference is the basis of the affirmation in Ps 10:17–18 that “man who is of the earth" will no more strike terror. Man's sphere is earth, not heaven. He is mortal, not divine, wand so cannot prevail against God’. Ross (2011, 318–19 n. 27) sums up nicely: ' אֱנוֹשׁ “man,” is not what would be used of the sufferers, but of the tyrants; one would have expected “the afflicted” if it referred to the sufferers...The word for “man” is chosen to pour contempt on the proud plunderers. They are mere men of the earth (in contrast to the God of heaven). Thus לערץ is most likely active.