About the Semantics Layer[ ]

Semantics is the study of how language is used to represent meaning. The goal of semantic analysis for interpreting and translating the Bible is to understand the meaning of words and how they relate to each other in context. We want to understand what is implicit about word meaning – and thus assumed by the original audience – and make it explicit – and thus clear for us who are removed by time, language, and culture. The semantics layer is composed of three major branches: lexical semantics, phrase-level semantics and verbal semantics. (Click 'Expand' to the right for more information.)

About Lexical Semantics[ ]

One major branch of semantic study is lexical semantics, which refers to the study of word meanings. It examines semantic range (=possible meanings of a word), the relationship between words (e.g. synonymy, hyponymy), as well as the relationship between words and larger concepts (conceptual domains). One component of our approach involves not only the study of the Hebrew word meaning, but also of our own assumptions about word meaning in modern languages. Because the researcher necessarily starts with their own cultural assumptions (in our case, those of Western-trained scholars), this part of the analysis should be done afresh for every culture.

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

About Phrase-level Semantics[ ]

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).

For a detailed description of our method, see the Phrase-level Semantics Creator Guidelines.

About Verbal Semantics[ ]

This sub-layer focuses on the relationship between verbs, time and modality. These are important categories for interpretation and translation, and how one analyses a verb can have a significant effect on how it is rendered. This sub-layer has been through several iterations, as it strives to accomplish two things: (1) Transparency for the native Hebrew structures, and (2) Transparency for the interpretation necessary to translate the verbal semantics into other languages.

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

Semantics Visuals for Psalm 119[ ]

Lexical and Phrase-level Semantics Diagram[ ]

For legend, click "Expand" to the right

	Prepositional phrase	Construct chain	Construct chain within a prepositional phrase	Phrase-level waw	Article and כֹּל
Diagram Shading
Definition	- A prepositional phrase consists of a preposition plus its object. The phrase usually modifies the clause or another constituent in the clause.	- A construct chain, also called a 'genitive phrase', is a grammatical encoding of the relationship 'A of B,' in which A is a phonologically modified noun (in the construct state), and B is a phonologically unmodified noun (the absolute state).	- Some construct chains occur within prepositional phrases	- A waw conjunction can join units of all sizes. Phrase level waw join units at the word or phrase level (i.e., below the level of the clause).	- Definite articles tell you something about the identifiability or inclusiveness about the word it is attached to - כֹּל is a quantifier that tells you about the scope of a word it is attached to

See our growing collection of Venn Diagrams, not only for Psalm 119, but for all of the psalms.
See SDBH on Psalm 119.

v. 1[ ]

v. 1a: אַשְׁרֵ֥י, that is, כַּמָּה טוֹב לָאֲנָשִׁים שֶׁ– ('How good it is for those who', Ḥakham 1979, 378). The construct chain אַשְׁרֵ֥י תְמִֽימֵי־דָ֑רֶךְ is a relationship of characteristic-possessor (BHRG §25.4.1), as is אַ֭שְׁרֵי נֹצְרֵ֥י עֵדֹתָ֗יו in v. 2a.

The construct chain תְמִֽימֵי־דָ֑רֶךְ is a relationship of limitation (Joüon-Muraoka §129i) or characteristic (BHRG §25.4.6) i.e., 'X with regards to Y'.

For a discussion of the אַשְׁרֵי fragment, see the note in Psalm 1:1 Verse-by-Verse Notes; cf. Ps 112.1 in the context of an acrostic.

v. 1b: The article on הַֽ֝הֹלְכִ֗ים is anaphoric, introducing the appositive הַֽ֝הֹלְכִ֗ים בְּתוֹרַ֥ת יְהוָֽה, which specifies a characteristic action of the first member.

The function of בְּ is metaphorical localization – notice, דֶּרֶךְ is already active in the previous line, and we have the verb הלך coming in v. 3 (cf. Ps. 1:1 and Jer. 26:4).

The construct chain בְּתוֹרַ֥ת יְהוָֽה is a relationship of product-author (BHRG §25.4.6, Joüon-Muraoka §129d).

Product - author/creator is the most likely analysis of the "Torah words" with God's pronominal suffix throughout the psalm. As for דֶּרֶךְ and אֹרַח, though perhaps verbal notion in the case of the psalmist, when they refer to 'YHWH's way' can also be viewed as product-origin: "the ways of God, the realm of instructions and declaration of his will, the receiver of which is mankind, where man adopts the norm of the divine ways as a rule of life" (Hossfeld 2019, 139).

The mention of תּוֹרָה is the first of the Big Eight 'Torah words' throughout the psalm, perhaps taking a privileged position as mentioned in the first verse, as well as the most frequent (25 instances). Taken as part of the Big Eight whole, however, more than written law or instruction is in view; all of God's communicative acts are in view, including promises (see a number of instances of דבר and אמרה which require such a nuance) and probably also saving acts, in light of the parallels with Ps 111 (see, e.g., v. 2 – גְּ֭דֹלִים מַעֲשֵׂ֣י יְהוָ֑ה דְּ֝רוּשִׁ֗ים לְכָל־חֶפְצֵיהֶֽם; v. 7b – מַעֲשֵׂ֣י יָ֭דָיו אֱמֶ֣ת וּמִשְׁפָּ֑ט; and v. 8b עֲ֝שׂוּיִ֗ם בֶּאֱמֶ֥ת וְיָשָֽׁר).
Teaching (תּוֹרָה):

See the Venn diagram of Torah-words below:

v. 2[ ]

v. 2b: For the phrase בכל לב in Book 5, cf. also אוֹדֶ֣ה יְ֭הוָה בְּכָל־לֵבָ֑ב in 111:1. For the mode function בְּ in this construction, cf. YHWH's promise to those returning from exile: וּבִקַּשְׁתֶּ֥ם אֹתִ֖י וּמְצָאתֶ֑ם כִּ֥י תִדְרְשֻׁ֖נִי בְּכָל־לְבַבְכֶֽם (Jer 29:13).
For the semantic pairing of לֵב and דֶּרֶךְ, see Jer 32:39: וְנָתַתִּ֨י לָהֶ֜ם לֵ֤ב אֶחָד֙ וְדֶ֣רֶךְ אֶחָ֔ד לְיִרְאָ֥ה אוֹתִ֖י כָּל־הַיָּמִ֑ים.
For the expression דרשׁ the Lord: "drš yhwh became such a comprehensive designation for Yahweh worship that it often stands as the antithesis of idolatry (Isa 65:1, 10; Jer 8:2; Zeph 1:6; Ezra 6:21; 2 Chron 15:12f.; 17:3f.; 34:3; cf. Ps 24:6; Ezra 4:2; 2 Chron 25:15, 20). Consequently, it occurs regularly in the evaluations of kings in Chron (2 Chron 12:14; 14:3; 17:4; 19:3; 22:9; 26:5; 30:19). But, at the same time, drš yhwh became synonymous with “to fulfill God’s will” or “to keep the commandments” (1 Chron 22:19; 2 Chron 14:6a; 31:21; likewise Ps 14:2 = 53:5; 119:2, 10 the lament no longer stands in the background here—only the conditional promise of blessing." (TLOT 1:350).
Testimony (עֵדוּת):

v. 3[ ]

v. 3b: The construct chain בִּדְרָכָ֥יו is either product-source (as the other Torah words; i.e., the ways he prescribes we walk in) or verbal notion - subject >> characteristic-possessor (BHRG §25.4.1), i.e., the walking he does, probably more likely when the agent is the psalmist.

v. 4[ ]

Fully for מְאוֹד is borrowed from ganz, völlig (Gesenius 2013, 619) as a more generic intensifier. More specific nuance, though perhaps not licensed by מְאוֹד, is found in glosses such as diligently (CSB, ESV, KJV, NASB, NJPS), carefully (CEB, NET), or faithfully (GNT, REB). For fully, see, e.g., the NIV.
Command (מִצְוָה):

v. 4b: For פִקֻּדֶ֗יךָ belonging to the first clause, see the Grammar notes.

The impersonal infinitive can be rendered with the generic "people" or with a passive (as the LXX's φυλάξασθαι and the variants למינטר and ܢܬܢܛܪܘܢ in found in TgPss and Syr, respectively).

Precept (פִּקּוּד):

v. 5[ ]

v. 5b: The LXX and Syr treat the infinitive here in the exact same way as in v. 4b: impersonally. That is, through the employment of a passive (φυλάξασθαι and ܢܬܢܛܪܘܢ in some variants of the Syr) the agent is suppressed. Whereas in v. 4b the referent was generic, here the agent is quite unambiguously the psalmist.
The particle אַחֲלַי only occurs here and in 2 Kgs 5:3. Here we have a pair of yiqtols, while in 2 Kgs 5:3 we have a verbless clause followed by a yiqtol. The wish expressed by the servant girl in 2 Kgs 5:3, while not true at the moment of utterance, was possible and thus fulfilled at her encouragement of Namaan to visit Elisha.
The rest of Ps 119 makes clear that the psalmist does indeed (learn to) keep YHWH's decrees:
- There is an ongoing desire to learn them (לַמְּדֵ֥נִי חֻקֶּֽיךָ in vv. 12, 26, 64, 68, 124, 135, 171).
- The wish is also here (just like in 2 Kgs 5:3) fulfilled as, minimally, a possibility, and maximally, a reality by the (cohortative?) yiqtols (אֶת־חֻקֶּ֥יךָ אֶשְׁמֹ֑ר, v. 8; חֻקֶּ֥יךָ אֶצֹּֽרָה, v. 145).
- His affliction helped teach him (טֽוֹב־לִ֥י כִֽי־עֻנֵּ֑יתִי לְ֝מַ֗עַן אֶלְמַ֥ד חֻקֶּֽיךָ, v. 71).
- He has not forgotten them (חֻ֝קֶּ֗יךָ לֹ֣א שָׁכָֽחְתִּי, v. 83).

It is advisable to maintain the optative/wish semantics behind the particle, while being careful to avoid a counterfactual reading as if it were not only not true, but also impossible, real world, to fulfill. The latter is typically implied by English translations with a past simple verb following the optative particle and a conditional in the second clause (as the CSB's If only my ways were committed to keeping your statutes! Then I would not be ashamed...). Preferable, then, is modal verb of possibility following the particle and a simple future in the second clause (as the ESV's Oh that my ways may be steadfast in keeping your statutes! Then I shall not be put to shame...), cf. Soll 1991, 155; Goldingay 2008, 376 n1. See how this same wish becomes more hopeful later in the psalm (v. 80): יְהִֽי־לִבִּ֣י תָמִ֣ים בְּחֻקֶּ֑יךָ לְ֝מַ֗עַן לֹ֣א אֵבֽוֹשׁ.

v. 6[ ]

v. 7[ ]

v. 7a: The construct chain בְּיֹ֣שֶׁר לֵבָ֑ב is a relationship of limitation (Joüon-Muraoka §129i) or characteristic (BHRG §25.4.6) i.e., 'X with regards to Y'.
v. 7b: For triple construct chains with pronominal suffix modifying the first constituent, see Joüon-Muraoka §129kb: "a pronominal suffix can be attached to the nomen rectum where such a pronoun relates to the entire construct phrase, effectively to the nomen regens," cf. Ps. 2:6; 24:3; 48:2, etc.
Here, and throughout the psalm, למד should be understood as the "process by which humans or animals acquire knowledge or skill from an identified or unidentified source, ► which usually results in a specific behavior or skill" (SDBH).
Rule (מִשְׁפָּט):

v. 8[ ]

v. 8b: The combination עַד מְאֹד can be used to modify an adjective (BHRG §30.4.2c; e.g., Gen. 27:33; 1 Kgs. 1:4). In this psalm, however, only sole מְאוֹד functions as such (see vv. 96, 138, 140). Each instance of עַד מְאֹד in this psalm modifies a verb phrase (cf. also vv. 4, 43, 51, 107), so unto greatness i.e., exceedingly, completely (HALOT).

v. 9[ ]

v. 9a: The piel זכה could be read as a causative, "to purify," or pluractional, indicating repetition through time, i.e., "to keep pure."

Note that אֹרַח is virtually synonymous with דֶּרֶךְ throughout the psalm.

- Causative:
  - HALOT, DCH,
  - the factitive κατορθώσει in the LXX
  - the qal counterpart 'be pure' (in Ps. 51.6, Job 15.14 for example)
  - Penney (2023: 130)

- Pluractional (preferred):
  - BDB suggests both make or keep pure.
  - Context of ongoing integrity in Ps 119
  - Context of the parallel אַךְ־רִ֭יק זִכִּ֣יתִי לְבָבִ֑י in Ps 73.13
v. 9b: For lamed infinitive constructs as explicative > specification, see BHRG §39.11.3.b.ii (cf. Exod. 20:8; Judg. 9:56; 1 Kgs. 3:3).
Although Revell reads כִּדְבָרֶֽךָ as a pausal form, the plural is almost certainly intended in light of all of the ancient versions and a large number of Hebrew manuscripts (see VTH: vol. 2, 416 and De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 76).

v. 10[ ]

v. 10a: For another instance of בְּכָל לִבִּי in an acrostic see Ps 9:2.
v. 10b: The hiphil שׁגה could be read as causative ('make stray'), but more likely tolerative ('let stray') as Tigay's analysis (2017, 409). Note that in force-dynamic terms, the stronger entity in the predicate relationship is the one impinging the inevitable event (or probably tendency), if the psalmist (in this case) is left untouched (Talmy 2000, 418-419), i.e., only YHWH's hindrance keeps the psalmist obedient!

Though Θ' renders μὴ ἀγνοηματίσῃς με (cf. the LXX's μὴ ἀπώσῃ με), this is somewhat of an outlier, being LSJ's only listing of ἀγνοηματίζω, 'fail to observe' (though cf. the adjective ἀγνοητικός, 'performed in ignorance'; CGL).

See also the tolerative hiphil in אַל־תְּבִישֵֽׁנִי ('do not let me be ashamed', v. 31) and in v. 116; also 'let see' in Deut. 34.4 (הֶרְאִיתִ֣יךָ בְעֵינֶ֔יךָ וְשָׁ֖מָּה לֹ֥א תַעֲבֹֽר); 'let fall' in 1 Sam. 3.19 (וְלֹֽא־הִפִּ֥יל מִכָּל־דְּבָרָ֖יו אָֽרְצָה); and 'let go down' in 1 Kgs. 2.6 (וְלֹֽא־תוֹרֵ֧ד שֵׂיבָת֛וֹ בְּשָׁלֹ֖ם שְׁאֹֽל).

v. 11[ ]

v. 11a: Revell again reads אִמְרָתֶ֑ךָ as a pausal form. This time, however, the ancient versions are split between a singular (Jerome and Targum Psalms) and plural (LXX, Syr.) reading and the number of Hebrew manuscripts with the plene yod is much fewer (see VTH: vol. 2, 416 and De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 76).
v. 11b: For malefactive, i.e., dative of "disadvantage" > sin against, see also Gen. 20:6; Exod. 10:16; Num. 32:23; Dt 1:41, etc.

v. 12[ ]

v. 13[ ]

v. 13b: The construct chain מִשְׁפְּטֵי־פִֽיךָ is a relationship of product-author/source (BHRG §25.4.6, Joüon-Muraoka §129d).

v. 14[ ]

v. 14a: The function of בְּ is causal, i.e., I rejoice in (because of) > see BHRG §39.6.3(b).
v. 14b: The function of עַל is as the focus of attention with expression of emotion by trajector (BHRG §39.20(6)); cf. v. 162, see also Deut 28:63; 30:9; Isa. 62:5; Jer. 32:41; Zeph. 3:17, etc.

The function of the quantifier כֹּל in the phrase כָּל־הֽוֹן is inclusive of all differentiable members of this set, in comparable fashion to the אַלְפֵ֗י זָהָ֥ב וָכָֽסֶף in v. 72. For similar instances of כָּל־הוֹן see Prov. 1:13; 24:4, which have multiple modifiers (כָּל־ה֖וֹן יָקָ֣ר וְנָעִֽים); and Ezek. 27:12, 18, which are explicitly types of wealth. On other occasions, the mention is definite, modified by בֵּיתוֹ (Prov. 6:31; Song 8:7).

For the use of הוֹן as indicative of a borrowing from a Wisdom milieu see Hurvitz 1988, 45-47.
The superior comparative reading as hinted at by DCH's comment 'more than (in)' and the Syr. ܪܚܡܬ ܛܒ ܡܢ ܟܠܗ ܥܘܬܪܐ ('I have loved... more than all riches,' Taylor 2020, 497) is not necessary. Rather, the more natural equative comparative reading of כְּ is preferred (cf. the unproblematic parallel שָׂ֣שׂ אָ֭נֹכִֽי עַל־אִמְרָתֶ֑ךָ כְּ֝מוֹצֵ֗א שָׁלָ֥ל רָֽב in v. 162).

The elided participle has been provided as following the explicit construction in v. 162. For the gloss 'as concerning' for the compound preposition כְּעַל, see Mena (2012, 124); cf. 2 Chr. 32.19.

v. 15[ ]

v. 15a: The function of בְּ is metaphorical extension of localization (BHRG §39.6.a.ii); cf. v. 23b, 27b.

v. 16[ ]

v. 16a: The function of בְּ is causal, i.e., I delight in (because of) > see BHRG §39.6.3(b).
For the pilpel of שׁעע cf. v. 70: אֲ֝נִ֗י תּוֹרָתְךָ֥ שִֽׁעֲשָֽׁעְתִּי; see also Ps. 94:19 תַּ֝נְחוּמֶ֗יךָ יְֽשַׁעַשְׁע֥וּ נַפְשִֽׁי (your consolations cheer my soul; ESV). The hithpalpel is found in v. 47 (וְאֶשְׁתַּֽעֲשַׁ֥ע בְּמִצְוֺתֶ֗יךָ) and the nominal form, שַׁעֲשֻׁעָי, in vv. 24, 77, 92, 143, 174.
v. 16b: Although Revell reads דְּבָרֶֽךָ as a pausal form, the plural is almost certainly intended in light of all of the ancient versions, 11Q5, and a large number of Hebrew manuscripts (see VTH: vol. 2, 416 and De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 76).

v. 17[ ]

v. 17a: The function of עַל is benefactive, i.e., for the sake of (BHRG §39.20.3(c)).
SDBH's "repay" or "reward" will require slight elaboration in the context, so as a gloss the best options may be between HALOT's 'look after' and DCH's (≈ BDB) 'deal generously with' >> 'deal fairly with.'

In any case, it must be stressed that the "dealing fairly with" is the result of recompense for integrity, as indicated by all of the ancient versions (apart from the Syr.) and both 4Q90 and 11Q5's גמור, 'avenge'.

v. 17b: Although Revell reads דְבָרֶֽךָ as a pausal form, the plural is almost certainly intended in light of all of the ancient versions and a large number of Hebrew manuscripts (see VTH: vol. 2, 416 and De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 76-77).

v. 18[ ]

v. 19[ ]

v. 19a: The article in בָאָ֑רֶץ would point in the direction of 'earth' as world-knowledge-recognizable. See lexical notes for discussion of a specific country or the whole earth.
Should the land of Israel be in view here? Is the exile in view (as Soll 1991, 152)? Or is this a spiritual disposition in general for the whole planet? Is it an identification with vulnerable groups of people יְהוָ֤ה׀ שֹׁ֘מֵ֤ר אֶת־גֵּרִ֗ים יָת֣וֹם וְאַלְמָנָ֣ה יְעוֹדֵ֑ד (Ps 146:9; where the psalmist cannot claim to be a widow or orphan...)? The other uses of אֶרֶץ in the psalm point to a cosmic reading (vv. 64, 87, 90), though v. 119 seems to be as ambiguous as the current case. The article may also point in this direction, as a particular land has not been discourse-activated. On the other hand, this is poetry (cf. v. 90). Ultimately, despite the lack of גֵּר with generic 'earth', this may be the most straightforward reading, not requiring a specific Sitz im Leben like the exile or post-exile (as Soll 1991, 152 and Goldingay 2008, 390).
- On the earth (Kraus 1989, 415; Terrien 2003, 788; Zenger 2011, 254)
  - Meaning? "This declaration has now been spiritualized and applied to life in the presence of Yahweh" (Kraus 1989, 415)
  - "The concept of the גר has been spiritualized... The resident alien had no territorial claim... According to Lev 25:23, Israel comprised a group of such aliens permitted to live on divine property and dependent completely on God" (Allen 2002, 186) ≈ "The psalmist is alluding to... Leviticus 25:23... Psalm 39:13" (Ḥakham 1979, 484 n. 17) > גֵ֣ר אָנֹכִ֣י עִמָּ֑ךְ תּ֝וֹשָׁ֗ב כְּכָל־אֲבוֹתָֽי.
- In the land (preferred) (Soll 1991, 152)
  - Either (a) as a low member of society in his own country or (b) as an exile
  - "The awareness of personal insecurity from attackers that runs through the psalm with the whole community's insecurity in the Second Temple period, surrounded by peoples such as the Samarians and Edomites" (Goldingay 2008, 390)

v. 20[ ]

v. 20a: For the first word גָּרְסָה, the sense is dependent on the longing (תַּאֲבָה) for YHWH's judgments. The preposition לְ, then, seems to most naturally indicate the stimulus role of the גרס verb phrase. Ḥakham (1979, 484) paraphrases: נשׁחקה נפשׁי. See also the hiphil in Lam. 3.16: וַיַּגְרֵ֤ס בֶּֽחָצָץ֙ שִׁנָּ֔י.

On נֶפֶשׁ (both here and throughout the psalm): the syntax does not permit the reflexive sense, typical of LBH and MH.

So the lexicons:

-languish (HALOT)

-be crushed (DCH, BDB)

-sich verzehren 'consume oneself' (Gesenius 2013, 230)

And the ancient versions:

-ἐπιποθέω (LXX; 'desire, long for,' LSJ, BDAG)

-desiderare (Hebr.)

-רגג (TgPs; 'to desire', Sokoloff 2017: 591)

-ܨܒܝ (Syr; 'to delight, take pleasure', Sokoloff 2009, 1271)

There is a close relationship with the by-form גר׳׳שׂ, with both roots generally attested as 'to grind', and 'to consume, devour' in North-West Semitic (Hoftijzer & Jongeling, vol. 1, 1995: 235). The latter, therefore, seems to be safely in view here (cf. Gesenius, SDBH).

v. 20b: The function of לְ is causal, i.e., consumed because of >> with (DCH).
v. 20b: The function of אֶל is the goal of an emotional process, i.e., longing for (BHRG §39.3.1(c)).

v. 21[ ]

v. 21: The first appositive specifies the status of the first member, while the second specifies characteristic action.
For another instance of גָּעַרְתָּ in an acrostic see Ps 9.6.

While שׁגה is quite consistently "do wrong... unintentionally" (HALOT), both here and in v. 118 we have unique cases of to "do wrong against something (really to wander away from)... here the vb. has the more general sense of to sin (HALOT, 1413); cf. the parallel profile in v. 53: זַלְעָפָ֣ה אֲ֭חָזַתְנִי מֵרְשָׁעִ֑ים עֹ֝זְבֵ֗י תּוֹרָתֶֽךָ.

v. 22[ ]

v. 22b: Although this is the only instance in which חֶרְפָּה and בּוּז appear as a pair, they both belong to the contextual domain of human status (SDBH) and are thus unlikely to refer to two completely different concepts, but rather complementary sides of the same social status.

v. 23[ ]

v. 23a: For (possibly) the only other instance of דבר with בְּ as malefactive, see Ezek 33:30. It may be that this example is better understood as specification, i.e., 'talk about you' (see the LXX's οἱ λαλοῦντες περὶ σοῦ and the Vulgate's loquuntur de te), whereas both the LXX (κατʼ ἐμοῦ κατελάλουν) and Jerome (adversum me loquebantur) are unambiguous here. Nonetheless, the בְּ could perhaps be most neutrally read as specification, i.e., 'about', even if the intended consequences were negative (in light of שָׂ֭רִים רְדָפ֣וּנִי חִנָּ֑ם in v. 161), due to the less ambiguous case of עַל in Mal 3:13 – חָזְק֥וּ עָלַ֛י דִּבְרֵיכֶ֖ם אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ֑ה וַאֲמַרְתֶּ֕ם מַה־נִּדְבַּ֖רְנוּ עָלֶֽיךָ ("Your words have been hard against me, says the Lord. But you say, ‘How have we spoken against you?’"; ESV).
For שָׂרִים elsewhere in the psalm, see v. 161. The only other place they appear in the Psalter is in Ps. 148.11, in parallel to kings, peoples and judges: מַלְכֵי־אֶ֭רֶץ וְכָל־לְאֻמִּ֑ים שָׂ֝רִ֗ים וְכָל־שֹׁ֥פְטֵי אָֽרֶץ.

Here, they are almost certainly replaced by עֵ֭דֹתֶיךָ as carrying out the expected function of אַנְשֵׁ֥י עֲצָתִֽי.

Throughout the psalm, עֶבֶד is used by the psalmist to refer to himself, and both here and in v. 161, שָׂרִים is used to refer to his antagonists, while his speaking of YHWH's testimonies before מְלָכִים without shame is mentioned in v. 46.

v. 24[ ]

v. 24b: In contrast to the שָׂ֭רִים in v. 23, who may be expected to carry out this function of advising, it turns out to be עֵ֭דֹתֶיךָ that are personified as those carrying out the expected function of אַנְשֵׁ֥י עֲצָתִֽי.

v. 25[ ]

v. 25a: For a parallel passage, see Ps. 44:26: ֣שָׁ֣חָה לֶעָפָ֣ר נַפְשֵׁ֑נוּ דָּבְקָ֖ה לָאָ֣רֶץ בִּטְנֵֽנוּ. "This is a way of saying that he is close to death" (Bratcher & Reyburn 1991, 1005; cf. Ps 22:16, 30) or, alternatively, an intentional act whose "purpose is rather to manifest stress in order to establish a request" (Keel 1997, 320).

For the expression of sticking דבק to the dust as almost dying or feel like I am dying cf. Ps 22:30 and especially the treatment in Ps 22:16, where we have both the root דבק and עפר in the same verse. So also Ḥakham (1979, 387): נפשי – משמע: גופי החי. Alternatively: "lying on the ground is not an expression of creaturely feeling, as is the case in spontaneous proskynesis, nor is it a pointless expression of grief and powerlessness, as in the pure lament. Its purpose is rather to manifest distress in order to establish a request" (Keel 1997, 319-320).

v. 25b: We take כִּדְבָרֶֽךָ to be singular because Revell reads it as a pausal form. Only Targum Psalms contains a plural among the ancient versions, though the number of Hebrew manuscripts containing the mater yod is not few (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 77).

v. 26[ ]

v. 26a: For the meaning of this clause, compare with v. 59's חִשַּׁ֥בְתִּי דְרָכָ֑י וָאָשִׁ֥יבָה רַ֝גְלַ֗י אֶל־עֵדֹתֶֽיךָ, which is the only other instance of the combination ERPM qatal + wayyiqtol in the psalm, beside v. 73 (see verbal semantics). Compare also the clearer formulation in v. 168: כָל־דְּרָכַ֣י נֶגְדֶּֽךָ.

v. 27[ ]

v. 27a: For הֲבִינֵ֑נִי, Ḥakham (1979, 387): תן בלבי בינה ללכת בדרך פרודיך ("put in my heart understanding...").

v. 28[ ]

v. 28a: The function of מִן is grounds, i.e., because of grief >> from grief (BHRG 39.14.4(b)).
v. 28b: We take כִּדְבָרֶֽךָ to be singular because Revell reads it as a pausal form, only Targum Psalms and the LXX contain a plural among the ancient versions, though the number of Hebrew manuscripts containing the mater yod is not few (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 77). Although the LXX gives slightly more evidence for the plural than in v. 25b, for consistency within the stanza that singular is preferred here also.
For דל׳׳ף:
- weep, shed tears (HALOT)
- drip, leak, shed tears (DCH)
- drip, i.e. weep (BDB)
- 'tränen, weinen' ('weep, cry' Gesenius 2013, 252)

And the ancient versions:

- στάζω (LXX; 'drop, fall, trickle,' LSJ, BDAG)
- destillare (Hebr.; 'drip, trickle down')
- אגם (TgPs; 'to grieve', CAL)
- ܛܪܦ (Syr. Ethpa.; 'to be shaken, jolted', Sokoloff 2009, 555)

Alternatively: גופי נמס טפים טפים ('my body melts bit by bit'; 1979, 387).

v. 29[ ]

v. 29a-30a: The indefinite construct chains דֶּֽרֶךְ־שֶׁ֭קֶר and דֶּֽרֶךְ־אֱמוּנָ֥ה are also nonspecific, so 'remove from me a way of disloyalty' >> remove from me any disloyal way and I have chosen a way of faithfulness >> I have chosen a faithful path.
Although 'treachery' is not the most obvious sense of שֶׁקֶר (SDBH), it works well in the sense of general covenant unfaithfulness (≠ faithfulness in v. 30), as Allen: "שקר, rendered "faithlessness," has the sense of betrayal of covenant values, in contrast to v 30" (2002, 187). Cf. also Jer 9:2: וַֽיַּדְרְכ֤וּ אֶת־לְשׁוֹנָם֙ קַשְׁתָּ֣ם שֶׁ֔קֶר וְלֹ֥א לֶאֱמוּנָ֖ה גָּבְר֣וּ בָאָ֑רֶץ and the tail-head linkage in v. 86 of the current psalm.
v. 29b: The nominal adverb תוֹרָתְךָ֥ in תוֹרָתְךָ֥ חָנֵּֽנִי is intended as instrumental, as reflected in the LXX's dative, τῷ νόμῳ σου ('by your law') and Gallical ablative lege tua ('by your law'). Notice, however, that Iuxta Hebraeos has the accusative legem tuam, as it reads חָנֵּֽנִי as 'give/grant me' (see the Grammar notes for the possible ditransitive reading of חנן as 'graciously give'). It seems most plausible, therefore, that the reception of the law is the gracious action, i.e., be gracious to me by (means of giving) your law (so Ḥakham 1979, 387: תן לי תורתך ביד רחבה וברוח נדיבה – "Give me your Torah with an open hand and willing spirit"), though the enactment of the Torah (≈ מִשְׁפָּט) could also be in view.

v. 30[ ]

v. 30b: Regarding שִׁוִּיתִי, Reynolds notes, "the phrase משפטיך שויתי... is enigmatic because it is incomplete. Regardless of how this phrase is interpreted, something must be supplied to complete the syntax. Many translations (JPS, KJV, NASB, RSV) supply the phrase “before me” in order to complete the syntax of v. 30, thus “I have set your regulations [before me].” This solution is based on Ps 16:8 which reads, “I have set YHWH before me continually” שויתי יהוה לנגדי תמיד. Since the author substitutes Torah in place of God himself in so many other verses in the chapter, the substitution here is plausible" (2010, 41).

v. 31[ ]

v. 32[ ]

v. 32a: The construct chain דֶּֽרֶךְ־מִצְוֺתֶ֥יךָ is a relationship of verbal-notion – subject, i.e., the way prescribed by your commands >> the way of your commands. See also דֶּ֥רֶךְ חֻקֶּ֗יךָ in v. 33a.

The nominal adverb דֶּֽרֶךְ־מִצְוֺתֶ֥יךָ is explicit in the Syr. ܒܐܘܪܚܐ, 'in/along the way'. The lack of explicit PP is probably due to the ד–initial acrostic.

The difference between the direct object and nominal adverb readings depend on the semantics of both the verb and the דֶּֽרֶךְ־מִצְוֺתֶ֥יךָ argument. The only satisfying conditions for the direct object reading would be if דֶּֽרֶךְ־מִצְוֺתֶ֥יךָ provided a theme argument, i.e., 'run a race' or if רוץ was adequately read 'pursue' (as SDBH, CEB), which does not seem to be the case.

The nominal adverb reading also seems to best favor the manner/lifestyle domain of the path metaphor throughout the psalm, best glossed as something similar to DCH's "(by) way (of)" (as the Syr, ESV, NIV, KJV's 'in' and the NET's 'along'). The image seems to continue the 'obedient life as journey' metaphor (cf. Pss 1; 119:1, 3, etc.), though here at a faster pace (cf. v. 60, 147–148)!

v. 32b: The causal reading of כִּי has been preferred over the LXX's temporal, 'when'.
The Syr is the only ancient version to explicitly offer a sense of the expression תַרְחִ֣יב לִבִּֽי, rather than a wooden lexeme-for-lexeme, as the others. It opts for the 'rejoicing' reading (see the qal in Isa. 60:5), however, where the 'understanding' interpretation has been preferred (see the DCH, NIV, NJPS, SDBH). See the same phraseology in 1 Kgs 5:9, unambiguously in parallel to wisdom: וַיִּתֵּן֩ אֱלֹהִ֨ים חָכְמָ֧ה לִשְׁלֹמֹ֛ה וּתְבוּנָ֖ה הַרְבֵּ֣ה מְאֹ֑ד וְרֹ֣חַב לֵ֔ב כַּח֕וֹל אֲשֶׁ֖ר עַל־שְׂפַ֥ת הַיָּֽם.

v. 33[ ]

v. 33a: See note on construct chain in v. 32a.
v. 33b: For the nominal adverb, עֵקֶב, see the lexical notes.
Although the nominal עֵקֶב can indeed mean 'reward' (cf. Ps 19:12), the LXXs' διὰ παντός ('continually') and Targum Psalms' עד גמירא ('to the utmost') make the adverbial 'end' reading more likely. As noted in grammar, the MT simply does not license the syntax required for the 'reward' reading (see, for example, the REB's 'in keeping them I shall find my reward').

v. 34[ ]

v. 35[ ]

v. 35a: See note on construct chain in v. 32a.

v. 36[ ]

v. 37[ ]

v. 38[ ]

v. 38b: Is the function of לְ in לְיִרְאָתֶֽךָ as belonging, reevaluation, normative, i.e., 'according to', or purpose (BHRG §39.11(1)(a); (4)(a); (6)(c); (6)(d), respectively)? With the 'promise' semantics of אִמְרָה in this verse, purpose seems the most likely, as Stec's (2004, 212) rendering of TgPs's די לדחלתך: which is for your fear.

For supporting arguments of the purpose reading, see the Grammar notes. Note that Jenni prefers the emendation 'for those who fear you' ("Verheißungen für die Furcht vor dir (=für die dich Fürchtenden)"); (Jenni 2000, 81).

v. 39[ ]

v. 40[ ]

v. 40a: The function of לְ in תָּאַ֣בְתִּי לְפִקֻּדֶ֑יךָ is best understood as experienced mental contact (BHRG §39.11(2)).

v. 41[ ]

v. 42[ ]

v. 42a: "The singular reference to enemies in v 42a is doubtless collective." (Allen 2002, 187; cf. the LXX, Syr.).
v. 42b: Although Revell reads בִּדְבָרֶֽךָ as a pausal form, the plural is almost certainly intended in light of all of the ancient versions (minus Jerome) and a large number of Hebrew manuscripts (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 77), contra 11Q5, however.

v. 43[ ]

v. 43a: The construct chain דְבַר־אֱמֶ֣ת as entity-characteristic licenses the plural as a "class" interpretation.

v. 44[ ]

v. 44b: The pair לְעוֹלָ֥ם וָעֶֽד (also found in Exod 15:18; Mic 4:5; Pss 9:6; 10:16; 21:5; 45:7, 18; 52:10; 104:5; 111:8; 145:2 and 21) is a common construction of intensification. (Notice also the previous mention of תָמִ֗יד).

v. 45[ ]

v. 45a: Articular רְחָבָה probably as a characteristic class, as reflected in its use in the more dynamic expansion: I will walk about in the wide place >> I will live at ease. See the same function of מֶרְחָב in Ps 18:20 (וַיּוֹצִיאֵ֥נִי לַמֶּרְחָ֑ב); Ps 31:9 (וְלֹ֣א הִ֭סְגַּרְתַּנִי בְּיַד־אוֹיֵ֑ב הֶֽעֱמַ֖דְתָּ בַמֶּרְחָ֣ב רַגְלָֽי); and Ps 118:5 (מִֽן־הַ֭מֵּצַ֥ר קָרָ֣אתִי יָּ֑הּ עָנָ֖נִי בַמֶּרְחָ֣ב יָֽהּ).
v. 45a: cf. Ḥakham's (1979, 393) note: כלומר: להיות חפשׁי מלחץ ומצוקה, העלולים למנע אותי מלעסש בתורה ("That is: to be free from pressure and distress, which may prevent me from engaging in Torah"); Deissler (1955, 145): die Idee der Befreiung und Freiheit von feindlichem Druck ("the idea of liberation and freedom from enemy pressure"); and Allen (2002, 187): "The idea of spaciousness in v 45a is spiritualized and relates to life released from restrictions of distress and so free to develop its full potential." See also SDBH: "literally: a broad place; hence: = a situation in which humans experience relief after a time of trouble -- at ease."
v. 45b: For another instance of דרשׁ not related to Torah words, see גְּ֭דֹלִים מַעֲשֵׂ֣י יְהוָ֑ה דְּ֝רוּשִׁ֗ים לְכָל־חֶפְצֵיהֶֽם in Ps 111:2. (The same facet of actions as well as verbal revelation is probably included in the Big Eight – see note at v. 1).

v. 46[ ]

v. 46a: For the uncommon collocation of piel דבר with בְּ as 'about/concerning', see also Deut 3:26 (especially the Vulgate's de hac); 6:7; 11:19 and Ezek 33:30's הַנִּדְבָּרִ֤ים בְּךָ֙.

v. 47[ ]

v. 47a: The function of בְּ is causal, i.e., I will delight in (because of) > see BHRG §39.6.3(b)).
v. 47b: This and a number of other uses of אהב throughout the psalm (vv. 48, 119, 127, 140, 159, 167) "are the only verses in the Hebrew Bible where any of these synonyms for God’s word are the object of the verb “to love”" (Reynolds 2010, 39).

v. 48[ ]

v. 48a: For the collocation נשׂא כפים אֶל something as 'awe, reverence' (DCH) Pss 63:5 and 141:2 come the closest, but lack the אֶל preposition. We are left with just two parallels, the latter of which has textual issues:
- כֵּ֣ן אֲבָרֶכְךָ֣ בְחַיָּ֑י בְּ֝שִׁמְךָ אֶשָּׂ֥א כַפָּֽי׃ (Ps 63:5)
- תִּכּ֤וֹן תְּפִלָּתִ֣י קְטֹ֣רֶת לְפָנֶ֑יךָ מַֽשְׂאַ֥ת כַּ֝פַּ֗י מִנְחַת־עָֽרֶב (Ps 141:2)
- ק֣וּמִי׀ רֹ֣נִּי בַלַּיִל לְרֹאשׁ֙ אַשְׁמֻר֔וֹת שִׁפְכִ֤י כַמַּ֙יִם֙ לִבֵּ֔ךְ נֹ֖כַח פְּנֵ֣י אֲדֹנָ֑יבַלַּ֗יְלָה בַ֯לַּ֗יְלָ שְׂאִ֧י אֵלָ֣יו כַּפַּ֗יִךְ עַל־נֶ֙פֶשׁ֙ עֽוֹלָלַ֔יִךְ הָעֲטוּפִ֥ים בְּרָעָ֖ב בְּרֹ֥אשׁ כָּל־חוּצֽוֹת׃ (Lam 2:19)
- נִשָּׂ֤א לְבָבֵ֙נוּ֙ אֶל־כַּפָּ֔יִם אֶל־אֵ֖ל בַּשָּׁמָֽיִם (Lam 3:41)

In Ps 63:5 the 'lifting of hands' seems to refer to praise or an oath; in 141:2 it is in parallel to 'prayer.' In Lam 2:19 it is also unmistakably a prayer, while in 3:41 it is a vow or prayer of repentance. Thus, the only way such a collocation could be used in reference to מִ֭צְוֺתֶיךָ is as a vow to keep them. Under the emended reading, it would be a matter of prayer/praise. Nevertheless, since "idioms are partially decomposable" (Warren-Rothlin 2013, 229), other "hand" nouns and "lifting" verbs can shed light on our case, such as Neh 8:6 (וַיַּֽעֲנ֨וּ כָל־הָעָ֜ם אָמֵ֤ן׀ אָמֵן֙ בְּמֹ֣עַל יְדֵיהֶ֔ם וַיִּקְּד֧וּ וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲוֻּ֛ לַיהוָ֖ה אַפַּ֥יִם אָֽרְצָה).

On the other hand, could וְאֶשָּֽׂא־כַפַּ֗י אֶֽל־מִ֭צְוֺתֶיךָ be directional אֶל in 1 Kgs 8 style? Ps 138:2 (probably also exilic, following 137), hints at something similar: אֶשְׁתַּחֲוֶ֨ה אֶל־הֵיכַ֪ל קָדְשְׁךָ֡. "The ritual gesture of the lifted hands makes the prayer as ardent as the words" (Terrien 2003, 800); see also שְׂאֽוּ־יְדֵכֶ֥ם קֹ֑דֶשׁ in 134:2 (as noted in Soll 1991, 85).

The combination נשׂא and יד is quite common; limiting it to the inclusion of אֶל and לְ, however, we have:
- Lev 9:22 (blessing): וַיִּשָּׂ֨א אַהֲרֹ֧ן אֶת־יָדוֹ אֶל אֶל־הָעָ֖ם וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֑םיָדָ֛יו יָדָ֛֯ו
- Deut 32:40 (promise/vow): כִּֽי־אֶשָּׂ֥א אֶל־שָׁמַ֖יִם יָדִ֑י וְאָמַ֕רְתִּי חַ֥י אָנֹכִ֖י לְעֹלָֽם
- Isa 49:22 (summons?): כֹּֽה־אָמַ֞ר אֲדֹנָ֣י יְהוִ֗ה הִנֵּ֨ה אֶשָּׂ֤א אֶל־גּוֹיִם֙ יָדִ֔י וְאֶל־עַמִּ֖ים אָרִ֣ים נִסִּ֑י וְהֵבִ֤יאוּ בָנַ֙יִךְ֙ בְּחֹ֔צֶן וּבְנֹתַ֖יִךְ עַל־כָּתֵ֥ף תִּנָּשֶֽׂאנָה׃
- Ezek 20:5-6 (promise/vow): וְאָמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם כֹּֽה־אָמַר֮ אֲדֹנָ֣י יְהוִה֒ בְּיוֹם֙ בָּחֳרִ֣י בְיִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וָאֶשָּׂ֣א יָדִ֗י לְזֶ֙רַע֙ בֵּ֣ית יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב וָאִוָּדַ֥ע לָהֶ֖ם בְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם וָאֶשָּׂ֨א יָדִ֤י לָהֶם֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר אֲנִ֖י יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶֽם׃ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֗וּא נָשָׂ֤אתִי יָדִי֙ לָהֶ֔ם לְהֽוֹצִיאָ֖ם מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם אֶל־אֶ֜רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־תַּ֣רְתִּי לָהֶ֗ם זָבַ֤ת חָלָב֙ וּדְבַ֔שׁ צְבִ֥י הִ֖יא לְכָל־הָאֲרָצֽוֹת׃
- Ezek 20:15 (promise/vow): וְגַם־אֲנִ֗י נָשָׂ֧אתִי יָדִ֛י לָהֶ֖ם בַּמִּדְבָּ֑ר לְבִלְתִּי֩ הָבִ֨יא אוֹתָ֜ם אֶל־הָאָ֣רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־נָתַ֗תִּי זָבַ֤ת חָלָב֙ וּדְבַ֔שׁ צְבִ֥י הִ֖יא לְכָל־הָאֲרָצֽוֹת׃
- Ezek 20:23 (promise/vow): גַּם־אֲנִ֗י נָשָׂ֧אתִי אֶת־יָדִ֛י לָהֶ֖ם בַּמִּדְבָּ֑ר לְהָפִ֤יץ אֹתָם֙ בַּגּוֹיִ֔ם וּלְזָר֥וֹת אוֹתָ֖ם בָּאֲרָצֽוֹת
- Ps 106:26 (promise/vow): וַיִּשָּׂ֣א יָד֣וֹ לָהֶ֑ם לְהַפִּ֥יל א֝וֹתָ֗ם בַּמִּדְבָּֽר

The majority of these constructions convey a promise/vow.

On Lam 3:41: The versions have interpreted the first instance of אֶל in multiple ways. The safest interpretation may be an אֶל/עַל interchange (typical of Transitional and Late BH), such that the LXX/Syr represent the preferred reading, 'upon' (ἀναλάβωμεν καρδίας ἡμῶν ἐπὶ χειρῶν πρὸς ὑψηλὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ; ܢ̇ܫܩܘܠ ܠܒܝ̈ܢ ܥܠ ܐ̈ܝܕܝܢ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ ܠܫܡܝܐ̣) or אֶל as 'in addition to' (HALOT). In any case, the verse's 'lifting up' seems to be unambiguously directed towards God.
- levemus corda nostra cum manibus ad Dominum in caelos (Vulgate; 'Let us lift our hearts with hands to the Lord in heaven')
- ܢ̇ܫܩܘܠ ܠܒܝ̈ܢ ܥܠ ܐ̈ܝܕܝܢ ܠܘܬ ܐܠܗܐ ܠܫܡܝܐ̣ (Peshitta; 'Let us lift our hearts upon our hands towards God in heaven')
- σὺν / ܥܡ (Syrohexaplaric Symmachus; 'with')
- נִטֹול לִבַנָא בְרִיר וּנדַכֵי יְדַנָא מִגְזֵילָן וּנתוּב אַל אְלָהָא דִמדֹורֵיה בִשמַיָא (TgLam Yemenite; 'Let us lift up our hearts in purity, and let us cleanse our hands from theft, and let us return to God, whose dwelling is in the heavens', Alexander 2007, 200)
- נטול לבבנא בריר ונרמי חטוף וגזילן ידנא וניתוב קדם יהוה אלהנא דשכינתיה בשמי מרומא׃ (TgLam Western; Let us lift up our hearts in purity, and let us cast robbery and theft from our hands, and let us repent before God, the dwelling of whose Shekhinah is in the heavens above,' Alexander 2007, 155)

v. 49[ ]

v. 49b: The function of עַ֝֗ל in עַ֝֗ל אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִֽחַלְתָּֽנִי could either be understood as the norm, i.e., "according to which you have made me hope" or the focus of attention, i.e., "on which you have made me hope" (BHRG §39.20(5); cf. Mena 2012, 123). In light of the ancient versions' lack of this preposition – probably understanding it simply as part of the verbal valency of יחל, and the LXX's ᾧ, which may be natural in an ἐπελπίζω verbal clause (though apparently we should expect ἐν or ἐπί to accompany it – LSJ), it seems the more neutral hope in/for is preferable.

v. 50[ ]

v. 50: The apposition indicates the cataphoric content of the demonstrative זֹ֣את, introduced by the complementizer כִּ֖י.

v. 51[ ]

v. 51a: For the PP עַד מְאֹד as 'completely', see Jerome's nimis, while the other ancient versions isomorphically mimic the MT. BHRG comments on the function of עֵד as "extend[ing] to an extreme dimension" (§39.19(3)), so "greatly." Nevertheless, the negative examples throughout the psalm imply complete negation (vv. 8, 43), not only "great," as does לִשְׁמֹ֥ר מְאֹֽד in v. 4. In light of the hyperbole used on numerous occasions "greatly >> completely" seems appropriate. The same has been applied to v. 107.

v. 52[ ]

v. 53[ ]

v. 53a: See also the similar expression, וזלעו̇פות אחזונו מלפני לשון גדופיהם ([plural] זלעופות have seized me because of the tongue of their abuse) in 4Q501 (4QapocrLamB; cf. זל]ע̊ו̊פ̇ות אחזוני in 4Q429 [4QHod-c] as discussed in Elwolde 1999, who concludes that "The combination as such appears to have been a clichéd expression of terror/horror" (1999, 88).

The expression seems at home in the ANGER IS HEAT metaphor, in light of עוֹרֵ֙נוּ֙ כְּתַנּ֣וּר נִכְמָ֔רוּ מִפְּנֵ֖י זַלְעֲפ֥וֹת רָעָֽב (Lam 5:10). See also the similar expression צִמְּתַ֥תְנִי קִנְאָתִ֑י in v. 139, where the psalmist claims to be destroyed by "strong emotions" (SDBH).

v. 53b: The appositive (עֹ֝זְבֵ֗י תּוֹרָתֶֽךָ) specifies a characteristic action of its head (רְשָׁעִ֑ים).

v. 54[ ]

v. 54b: The construct chain בֵ֣ית מְגוּרָֽי is a relationship of entity – characteristic, i.e., the house of my sojourning >> the house where I sojourn. This is the only instance of בֵּית with מָגוֹר, which is more typically found with אֶרֶץ (which, as a location, is similar to the present case) or יְמֵי 'days of' (i.e., 'the time during which I sojourned'). For justification of the phrasal gloss, cf. the comments by Procházková: "One variant of the journey metaphor in the Bible regards passages that include the theological motif of homelessness and pilgrimage" (2021, 44), in light of the TORAH IS JOURNEY metaphor throughout the psalm.

v. 55[ ]

v. 56[ ]

v. 56: The apposition indicates the cataphoric content of the demonstrative זֹ֣את, introduced by the complementizer כִּ֖י.
For הָיְתָה as potentially 'has become' instead of 'has been', see the alternation in the LXX's ἦσάν (v. 54) and ἐγενήθη (v. 56) and Jerome's erant (v. 54) and factum est (v. 56).

The possibility of reading היה as eventive 'happened' is attractive (see the RVA-2015 [Esto me ha acontecido] ≈ the ESV [This blessing has fallen to me]), but multiplies the difficulties with the antecedent of זֹאת (whether positive or negative, and if negative – as the tone of the psalm would suggest – should כִּי be read as adversative...?).

v. 57[ ]

For אמר plus לְ inf. as an intention, see also Exod 2:14; 2 Sam 21:16; 30:6; 1 Kgs 5:19; Ps 106:23 (HALOT vol. 1, 66; DCH vol. 1, 324). A further entailment of commitment or promise is found in 1 Kgs 8:19 (& 2 Chr 21:7), Jer 48:8, Joel 3:5, 1 Chr 27:23.
v. 57b: Lamed infinitive as complement of verbal clause, i.e., 'I intend to keep your words.'

v. 58[ ]

v. 58a: For construction piel חלה plus פָּנִים, see also Ps 45:14; Job 11:19 and Prov 19:6, all of which refer to an inferior seeking an audience with the face of X, i.e., entering into their presence is to seek their favor.

v. 59[ ]

v. 60[ ]

v. 60: Lamed infinitive as complement of verbal clause, i.e., 'I do not wait to keep your commands' is approximately equivalent to 'I do not delay in keeping your commands' as a smoother English complementation of the gloss 'delay.'

v. 61[ ]

v. 61a: The construct chain חֶבְלֵ֣י רְשָׁעִ֣ים has the semantic relationship of entity–source.

v. 62[ ]

v. 62a: For the function of לְ after ידה, BHRG comments, "Often the content of the communication is implied by the content of the verb so that it has a valency of two and not three" (§39.11.1b; cf. Jenni 2000, 145). See also Pss 6:6; 33:2; 75:2; 79:13; 92:2; 100:4; 105:1, etc.
v. 62b: The function of עַל is read as causal (Mena 2012, 100). For the analysis of the triple construct chain, cf. the note on v. 7b.

v. 63[ ]

v. 63: The waw links two verbal modifiers describing two habitual actions of the same group of people.
The two לְ PPs communicate experienced relationship (§BHRG 39.11.2).

v. 64[ ]

v. 64a: The sense of חֶסֶד is to be differentiated from the other instances throughout the psalm, since “the earth” does not enjoy the same particular covenant relationship and Torah history as “your servant.” Of course, the fact that there are others who שֹׁמְרֵ֗י פִּקּוּדֶֽיךָ (v. 63) is proof that חַסְדְּךָ֣ יְ֭הוָה מָלְאָ֥ה הָאָ֗רֶץ (v. 64) within the frame of texts like Josh 14:5: כַּאֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֤ה יְהוָה֙ אֶת־מֹשֶׁ֔ה כֵּ֥ן עָשׂ֖וּ בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַֽיַּחְלְק֖וּ אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ and in light of the parallels between 'Israel', the 'house of Aaron' and 'fearers of YHWH in Pss 115:9-11 and 118:2-4. Thus, "the hymn fittingly concludes the canto [the ח–stanza] as a whole (v. 64a)" (van der Lugt 2013, 308).

v. 65[ ]

v. 65: In this verse, the עִם phrase functions as recipient/beneficiary (BHRG §39.21.2.b).

v. 66[ ]

v. 66: The construct chain ט֤וּב טַ֣עַם וָדַ֣עַת could either be entity–synonym: 'goodness, that is, discernment and knowledge' (cf. all the other instances of the imperative לַמְּדֵנִי in the psalm); entity–result: 'goodness (which leads to) discernment and knowledge'; or entity–origin: 'goodness (which comes from) discernment and knowledge'. The first option is the simplest and is somewhat reflected in the LXX and Syr. (χρηστότητα καὶ παιδείαν καὶ γνῶσιν and ܛܥܡܐ ܘܛܝܒܘܬܐ ܘܡܕܥܐ; see the alternative diagram).

This is the only instance of the pair טַ֣עַם וָדַ֣עַת in the Bible, but see also חָכְמָה וָדָֽעַת in Isa 33:6 and מוֹעֵצוֹת וָדָֽעַת in Prov 22:20.

In yet another overlap with Ps. 19, דַּעַת only occurs four times in the Psalter, once being here and once being 19:3.
v. 66b: "This is the only example in the Hebrew Bible in which commandments (מצות) is the object of belief" (Reynolds 2010, 38). In light of the causal כִּי, the idea seems to be that the psalmist believes in the trustworthiness and effectiveness of keeping the commands, since 'knowledge' and 'discernment' are characterised as 'goodness.'

v. 67[ ]

v. 67a: For the root, שׁגג, clearly related to שׁגה, the sense of erring/sinning inadvertently is in view (so BDB and DCH; cf. the LXX's πλημμελέω and Jerome's delinquo). Applied to the LIFE AS PATH metaphor throughout the psalm, 'going astray' has been preferred (so HALOT). Nevertheless, the innocence of being deceived externally, as in Job 12:16's עִ֭מּוֹ עֹ֣ז וְתֽוּשִׁיָּ֑ה ל֝וֹ֗ שֹׁגֵ֥ג וּמַשְׁגֶּֽה (the deceived and the deceiver are his; ESV) is probably not in view here, as the psalmist needed YHWH's discipline (see Story Behind). The plain sense of 'erring' is the prototype also in Rabbinic Hebrew (Jastrow 1903, vol. II, 1521).

v. 68[ ]

v. 68a: This seems to be quite a unique use of the hiphil participle of יטב (although, of course, in other conjugations its sense approaches that found here), with the other five instances as getting tipsy (Judg 19:22), being good at playing an instrument (1 Sam 16:17; Ezek 33:32), and being impressive, in general (Prov 30:29 x2).

v. 69[ ]

v. 69a: We take כִּדְבָרֶֽךָ to be singular because Revell reads it as a pausal form, only Targum Psalms and the LXX contain a plural among the ancient versions, though the number of Hebrew manuscripts containing the mater yod is not few (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 77). Although the LXX gives slightly more evidence for the plural than in v. 25b, for consistency within the stanza that singular is preferred here also.
On טפל
- Lexicons:
  - surfaces; ≈ often associated with efforts to make something appear different from what it actually is -- to whitewash, to smear (SDBH)
  - smear (HALOT)
  - cover, plaster, smear (DCH, BDB)
  - 'anschmieren, andichten' ('smear, seal' Gesenius 2013, 428)

- Other passages:
  - Job 13.4 (cover/smear with) – וְֽאוּלָ֗ם אַתֶּ֥ם טֹֽפְלֵי־שָׁ֑קֶר רֹפְאֵ֖י אֱלִ֣ל כֻּלְּכֶֽם
  - Job 14.17 (cover over) – חָתֻ֣ם בִּצְר֣וֹר פִּשְׁעִ֑י וַ֝תִּטְפֹּ֗ל עַל־עֲוֺנִֽי
  - Ben Sira 51.5: משפתי זמה וטפלי שקר וחצי לשון מרמה (lying words, NRSV)

- Ancient versions:
  - πληθύνω (LXX; 'increase, multiply') > Gall. multiplicare esse
  - Symmachus: ἀφῆπτόν??
  - adplicare (HIER; ??)
  - חבר על (TgPs; 'gather, combine against', Sokoloff 2017, 187)
  - ܣܓܝ (Syr. Pe.; 'be numerous', Sokoloff 2009, 967)

- Cognates:
  - Akk. ṭapālu, "scorn, insult, slander" (CAD: vol 19, 47)

v. 70[ ]

The article on כַּחֵ֣לֶב is probably functioning as class.
For the 'milk' (חָלָב) for 'fat' (חֵלֶב) confusion see the Grammar notes, which has caused the LXX (and Gall.) and Syr. to read the verb as 'curdle' (ἐτυρώθη; coagulatum est; ܐܬܓܒܢ), unsupported by any of the lexicons or the Akk. cognate ṭapāšu, 'become plump' (CAD: vol. 19, 49).
On טָפַשׁ:
- Symmachus reads ἐμυαλώθη, from μυελόομαι, 'be full of marrow' (LSJ), which may simply be a colloquial way of communicating 'be fat/plump'.
- The sense seems to be comparable to hiphil קשׁה the heart (cf. Ps 95:8 אַל־תַּקְשׁ֣וּ לְ֭בַבְכֶם כִּמְרִיבָ֑ה and Prov 28:14 וּמַקְשֶׁ֥ה לִ֝בּ֗וֹ יִפּ֥וֹל בְּרָעָֽה) or qal חזק the heart (cf. Exod 9:35 וַֽיֶּחֱזַק֙ לֵ֣ב פַּרְעֹ֔ה וְלֹ֥א שִׁלַּ֖ח אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל, among others).
- See also Targum Jonathan's טַפֵיש לִבֵיה דְעַמָא הָדֵין for the MT's הַשְׁמֵן֙ לֵב־הָעָ֣ם הַזֶּ֔ה (Isa 6:10). The context here is telling: Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” (ESV) See also Targum Onkelos's
- יִמחֵינָך יוי בְטַפשוּתָא for the MT's יַכְּכָ֣ה יְהוָ֔ה בְּשִׁגָּע֖וֹן in Deut 28:28. So "be covered with fat, be inaccessible, dull, obdurate, stupid" in Talmudic literature (Jastrow vol I, 548).
- Though the verb only occurs here, the adjectival טפשה is found in the margin of manuscript B of Ben Sira 42:6, replacing רעה in על אשה רעה חותם (see Beentjes 1997, 73).

v. 71[ ]

v. 72[ ]

v. 72: See also this word pair in the context of the Exodus in Ps 105:37 (וַֽ֭יּוֹצִיאֵם בְּכֶ֣סֶף וְזָהָ֑ב) and idols in Ps 115:4 (עֲֽ֭צַבֵּיהֶם כֶּ֣סֶף וְזָהָ֑ב מַ֝עֲשֵׂ֗ה יְדֵ֣י אָדָֽם) and 135:15 (עֲצַבֵּ֣י הַ֭גּוֹיִם כֶּ֣סֶף וְזָהָ֑ב מַ֝עֲשֵׂ֗ה יְדֵ֣י אָדָֽם).

See Grammar layer for the analysis of cardinal numerals as quantifiers, here with an elided 'pieces.' The resulting analysis of the construct chain is 'product-material.'

v. 73[ ]

v. 73: This uncommon collocation may be an allusion to the Song of Moses, speaking of Israel as a whole: ה֥וּא עָֽשְׂךָ֖ וַֽיְכֹנְנֶֽךָ (Deut 32:6). More natural is reference to the creation of the earth (בּוֹרֵ֨א הַשָּׁמַ֜יִם ה֣וּא הָאֱלֹהִ֗ים יֹצֵ֨ר הָאָ֤רֶץ וְעֹשָׂהּ֙ ה֣וּא כֽוֹנְנָ֔הּ; Isa. 45.18), or sky (שָׁ֭מֶיךָ מַעֲשֵׂ֣י אֶצְבְּעֹתֶ֑יךָ יָרֵ֥חַ וְ֝כוֹכָבִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר כּוֹנָֽנְתָּה; Ps 8:4).

v. 74[ ]

We take כִּדְבָרֶֽךָ to be singular, despite the LXX's plural.
The verbal collocation ראה and שׂמח is also found in 1 Sam 6:13 (the return of the Ark); 2 Sam 19:5 (Saul being pleased with David's victories); Ps 69:33 (the humble rejoicing in the psalmist's salvation); 107:42 (the upright rejoicing at the deliverance of the poor); and Job 22:19 (the righteous rejoicing at the destruction of the wicked).

v. 75[ ]

v. 75a: For intensive equative reading of the nominal predicate in צֶ֣דֶק מִשְׁפָּטֶ֑יךָ, see GKC §141c and the notes on אֱמוּנָ֑ה in v. 86.
v. 75b: In line with Targum Psalms' בקושטא סגפתני ('in truth you have afflicted me', Stec 2004, 214) i.e., justly, "in faithfulness" communicates the right action of YHWH in carrying out his disciplinary duties upon his covenant subject when necessary (see Story Behind for further discussion).

v. 76[ ]

v. 76: This is the first of a couple of instances of jussive יְהִי + infinitival whereby the היה seems to primarily indicate modality and also satisfy the acrostic (here yod, but see also tau in v. 173 – תְּהִֽי־יָדְךָ֥ לְעָזְרֵ֑נִי). For similar TAM functions, see Gen. 8.5: וְהַמַּ֗יִם הָיוּ֙ הָל֣וֹךְ וְחָס֔וֹר עַ֖ד הַחֹ֣דֶשׁ הָֽעֲשִׂירִ֑י (aspect); Num. 24.22: כִּ֥י אִם־יִהְיֶ֖ה לְבָ֣עֵֽר קָ֑יִן (result); Deut. 5.29: מִֽי־יִתֵּ֡ן וְהָיָה֩ לְבָבָ֨ם זֶ֜ה לָהֶ֗ם לְיִרְאָ֥ה אֹתִ֛י (purpose).

v. 77[ ]

v. 78[ ]

The Syr. reading ܡܟܟ ('humbled me,' Taylor 2020, 511) for the MT's עות (cf. TgPs's עות) is probably a mis-reading for the piel of ענה.
For the clarification of the nominal adverb to unjustly see the ancient versions (ἀδίκως, inique, על שקרא).
On עות:
- Lexicons:
  - = action by which someone acts towards someone else in a morally or ethically unacceptable manner -- to wrong (SDBH)
  - bend [ways, justice, etc], falsify [scales], lead astray (HALOT)
  - bend, falsify, put in wrong (DCH)
  - subvert, deprive of justice (DCH, BDB)
  - 'ungerecht behandeln, bedrücken' ('treat unfairly, oppress' Gesenius 2013, 940)

- Ancient versions:
  - ἀνομέω (LXX) > Gall. iniquitatem fecerunt
  - contrire/contrere (HIER; ??)
  - עות (TgPs; 'subvert', CAL)
  - ܡܟܟ (Syr. Pa 'humiliate', CAL, Sokoloff 2009, 759)

Although perversion of justice seems to be the verb's primary sense, in this context, and accompanied by the nominal adverb שׁקר, SDBH's 'to wrong' is preferable (cf. DCH's 'put in wrong' and Gesenius' bedrücken).

v. 79[ ]

v. 79: 'Those who fear you' (יְרֵאֶ֑יךָ) and 'those who know your testimonies' (וְ֝יֹדְעֵ֗י עֵדֹתֶֽיךָ) go hand in hand, as do 'those who fear you' and 'those who keep your precepts' (v. 63; יְרֵא֑וּךָ וּ֝לְשֹׁמְרֵ֗י פִּקּוּדֶֽיךָ).

v. 80[ ]

v. 80a: The prepositional phrase תָמִ֣ים בְּחֻקֶּ֑יךָ is similar to "figurative contact by means of mental process" (BHRG §39.6.1.ii.b), though here תָמִ֣ים is an evaluative quality, rather than emotional-cognitive process (see also 'Ort = Weg' in Jenni 1992, 177 "bildlich für Befolgung positiver Normen"), i.e., "regarding the sphere of your decrees." Alternatively, it could be read as mode/instrument, but that is unlikely here.

v. 81[ ]

v. 81a-82a: For the function of לְ after כלה, Jenni simply groups these two in with "mental contact" (in this case, 'yearn [for]'; 2000, 129), in the same fashion as תאב in vv. 40, 174 (cf. Targum Psalms' and the Peshitta's רג׳׳ג/ܪܓܓ, here). See also Targum Psalms' rendering of כָּלְתָ֨ה׀ נַפְשִׁי֮ לְחַצְר֪וֹת יְה֫וָ֥ה (Ps 84:3) as תאיבת נפשי לדרת יהוה.
v. 81b: The affirmative sense of the preferred reading (in line with the other instances of this expression throughout the psalm – cf. vv. 43, 49, 74, 114, 147) indicates a gritting of teeth and adversative relationship to its surrounding clauses. Another possibility involves reading piel יחל as 'wait', so the psalmist continues to wait (not necessarily as a positive reflection of his faith) until deliverance comes.

v. 82-83[ ]

v. 82b: For the לְ plus infinitive לֵאמֹר in the poetic books as a simple quotative frame, see also Pss 71:11; 105:11; Job 24:15. Thus, the לְ in isolation need not be accounted for. Notice also that both the LXX and Jerome index the participle λέγοντες/dicentes with 'my eyes' (plural), supporting the simple adverbial reading.
v. 82a: We take לְאִמְרָתֶ֑ךָ to be singular because it is singular in all the ancient versions, Revell reads it as a pausal form, there is no mater yod in either 11Q5 and 4Q89 (it is only present in Kennicott 148).
For the sense of כלה: 'my eyes look constantly until they fail' (Rashi; צופים תמיד עד כי כלו), but see the parallel with נַפְשִׁ֑י in the previous verse. The sense is undoubtedly "literally: to be finished; hence: = process by which objects are heavily damaged to the extent that they are almost gone" (SDBH) where נַפְשִׁ֑י would refer to the psalmist('s life) himself and עֵ֭ינַי represent health and vigor in general.
v. 83a: The noun קִיטוֹר, clearly derived from the verbal root קטר ('make a sacrifice,' 'go up in smoke'), only appears elsewhere in the account of Sodom and Gomorrah, where it is said that וְהִנֵּ֤ה עָלָה֙ קִיטֹ֣ר הָאָ֔רֶץ כְּקִיטֹ֖ר הַכִּבְשָֽׁן׃ (Gen 19:28).

v. 84[ ]

v. 84a: For כַּמָּ֥ה as 'How much/many' cf. the LXX and Jerome's πόσαι εἰσὶν and quot sunt. The sense may be in line with the psalmist's self-identification as 'insignificant and unworthy' (צָעִ֣יר אָנֹכִ֣י וְנִבְזֶ֑ה; v. 141) and his identification with the 'young man' (נַּ֭עַר) and 'simple people' (פְּתָיִֽים) in vv. 9, 130. (See the participant analysis notes.) Similarly, a request follows the self-identification as a 'sojourner' in v. 19 (גֵּ֣ר אָנֹכִ֣י בָאָ֑רֶץ אַל־תַּסְתֵּ֥ר מִ֝מֶּ֗נִּי מִצְוֺתֶֽיךָ). In sum: "I am young and weak (and yes, unworthy), so I have no hope of vindication outside of you."

More likely, however, in light of the surrounding co-text (the following question, for example!), is that the question of "days" is actually "How many are the days [of] my [suffering]?" Ringleben 2019, 186-187: "Because the worshipper also thinks of his own dwindling time of life (84a), all the culpable behavior he has experienced against him on the part of the unbelievers finally pushes him to the passionate question to the Lord" ("Weil der Beter auch an seine eigene schwindende Lebenszeit denkt (84a), drängt ihn alles, was er an schuldhaftem Verhalten gegen ihn von Seiten der Unfrommen erleben muss, schließlich zu der leidenschaftlichen Frage an den Herrn").

v. 84b: The preposition בְּ functions as social contact with a negative effect on the landmark (BHRG §39.6.1.b(iii)).

v. 85[ ]

v. 86[ ]

v. 86a: For lack of a more sophisticated account, GKC's insight has been drawn upon here: "The employment of a substantive as predicate of a noun-clause is especially frequent, either when no corresponding adjective exists ... or when the attribute is intended to receive a certain emphasis. For in all cases there is a much greater stress upon a substantival predicate, since it represents something as identical with the subject... than upon an adjectival or verbal predicate" (§141c). While the adjectival אֵמוּן is attested, it is rare and exclusively for descriptions of humans (in parallel with חָסִיד, for example; see 2 Sam 20:19; Ps 12:2; 31:24).

GKC's "emphasis" argument amounts to an intensive focal nature of an equative construction: "Your commands are faithfulness itself" >> "Your commands are absolutely trustworthy."

v. 87[ ]

v. 87a: Regarding the function of the preposition בְּ, Ḥakham explains, "In great straits and very near to falling by the hands of my enemies, who are seeking to finish me, to destroy me and to kill me, so that I will not be found any more in the land, in this world (And some interpret: in the land of Israel)" (1979, 406; בצרה גדולה וקרוב מאד לפּל בידי אויבי המבקשים לכלותני, להשמידני ולהרגני, למען לא אהיה עוד נמצא בארץ, בעולם הזה (ויש מפרשים: בארץ־ישראל)). The sense, then, seems not to be the action of destroying taking place in the land, but rather the result of that finishing off, "[from being] among those living] in the land", which bring us very close to the מארץ read in 11Q5. Nevertheless, the gloss 'finish with' (as the ESV) sounds natural enough to access the intention of these elided ideas.
The ancient versions are ambiguous as to whether כִּמְעַט refers to temporality (They will “soon” finish me) or ability (they “almost” finished me). The qatal verb form, however, makes the ability (and potentially finished implications) preferable, since the temporal interpretation would require a future time reference.

v. 88[ ]

v. 89[ ]

v. 89-96: The lamed PPs progress from 'forever' (v. 89) to 'for many generations' (v. 90; i.e., a long time) to 'today' (v. 91), back to 'forever' (v. 93), culminating in the רְחָבָ֖ה ... מְאֹֽד going beyond קֵ֑ץ in v. 96!

v. 90[ ]

v. 90a: The waw in לְדֹ֣ר וָ֭דֹר creates the repetition which gives rise to a distributive reading: generation and generation >> each generation. For the directional reading of the preposition לְ see BHRG (§39.11(5)(b)).
v. 90b: For the inchoative reading of וַֽתַּעֲמֹֽד, see verbal semantics.

v. 91[ ]

v. 91a: Lamed in לְֽ֭מִשְׁפָּטֶיךָ functions as normative relationship (BHRG §39.11.6c).
v. 91b: Although the anaphoric reference of הַכֹּ֣ל (cf. TgPss כולהון, 'all of them') could potentially be מִשְׁפָּטֶיךָ, it seems more likely to be all creation (thus, 'all things') as indicated by the word pair שָׁמָיִם and אֶרֶץ spread across the previous two verses.

v. 92[ ]

v. 92b: Note: the sense of עני does not speak of material privation (as in Deut 15:11; Job 24:9), but rather the psalmist's state of persecution and oppression by his adversaries.

v. 93[ ]

v. 94[ ]

v. 94a: Lamed in לְֽךָ־אֲ֭נִי indicates a relationship of belonging (BHRG §39.11.1a).

v. 95[ ]

v. 95b: Concerning "pay attention to" (SDBH) for hithpolel בין, in contrast to the first clause, the psalmist does not pay attention to those out to get him, but rather stays focused on YHWH's testimonies. See the similar contrast in v. 161 (שָׂ֭רִים רְדָפ֣וּנִי חִנָּ֑ם וּמִדְּבָרֶיךָ פָּחַ֥ד לִבִּֽיוּ֝מִדְּבָרְךָ֗ וּ֝מִדְּבָ֯רְיךָ֗), where he does not fear those persecuting him, but rather YHWH's words.

v. 96[ ]

The sense seems to be that even if everything else, no matter how perfect, comes to an end, YHWH's command goes above and beyond even that.

Cf. the similar תַּכְלִית in Job 28:3: וּֽלְכָל־תַּ֭כְלִית ה֣וּא חוֹקֵ֑ר ("and searches out to the farthest limit," ESV).

Although quality could be in view (with perfection), the terminus (as similarly, end) is probably to be preferred in light of the surrounding co-text's discussion of YHWH and his word's eternal value, rather than temporary suffering etc. Thus, as indicated by the clearer instances of the root כלה, completion has been preferred, along the lines of TgPs's לכל מה דאשתרי ואשתכלל ('all that is begun and finished'; Stec 2004, 215).

In the contrast of v. 96b, the domains of space and time are blended to comments on the endurance of YHWH's command, though with echoes of vv. 32, 45).

On תִּכְלָה:
- Lexicons:
  - perfection (SDBH)
  - completeness (HALOT, BDB) perfection (HALOT, DCH, BDB)
  - 'Vollendung, Vollkommenheit, Ende' ('perfection, completion, end' Gesenius 2013, 1438)

- Ancient versions:
  - πάσης συντελείας (LXX) > Gall. omni consummationi = Hebr.
  - τῇ πάσῃ τελέσει (Aquila): fulfillment
  - πάσης κατασεκευῆς (Symmachus) "permanent or fixed assets" (LSJ) ≠ παρασκευή.
  - לכל מה דאשתרי ואשתכלל 'all that is begun and finished' (Stec 2004, 215)
  - ܣܘܦܐ (Syr. 'end', CAL, Sokoloff 2009, 987)

v. 97[ ]

v. 98[ ]

v. 99[ ]

v. 100[ ]

SDBH defines this use of the root בין as “action by which someone observes something carefully, with the intention of seeing through the outward appearance of things and grasping their essence, and so gain knowledge and understanding.”

v. 101[ ]

v. 101b: Although Revell reads דְּבָרֶֽךָ as a pausal form, the plural is almost certainly intended in light of all of the ancient versions and a large number of Hebrew manuscripts (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: vol. 4, 79), perhaps contra 5Q5, however.

v. 102[ ]

v. 103[ ]

Lamed in both לְ֭חִכִּי and לְפִֽי indicates an experiencing organ, rather than locative, i.e., 'in my mouth' (BHRG §39.11.2); see the LXX's bare dative τῷ στόματί μου, ESV, KJV, NABRE, NASB, NIV; contra the CSB, CEB.
Although Revell reads אִמְרָתֶ֗ךָ as a pausal form, the plural is almost certainly intended in light of the verbal form and the ancient versions (with the exception of Jerome's Hebr.).
On מלץ:
- Lexicons:
  - niph. to be pleasing (SDBH)
  - to glide (HALOT)
  - be smooth, pleasant (DCH), slippery (BDB)
  - 'glatt sein, gleiten, erquikkend (sic), köstlich sein' (be smooth, slide, refreshing, be delicious' Gesenius 2013, 689)

- Ancient versions:
  - ὡς γλυκέα (LXX; 'How sweet...!', BDAG) = Jerome
  - חלי (TgPss; sweet Sokoloff 2017, 207) = Syr. ܚܠܝ (Sokoloff 2009, 455)

- Cognates:
  - It roughly corresponds to Arab. ملص (maliṣa), slipped, fell slipping... by reason of its smoothness (Lane Vol. II, 2736), as pointed out in BDB. Furthermore: lamaṣa in Tigre and Ge'ez as vb. be smooth, and lǝmuṭ in Amharic as adj. smooth (see Gesenius 2013, 689).

Related to: מְלִיצָה as an allusive (slippery) expression or proverb (see Hab 2:6 and Prov 1:6).

v. 104[ ]

v. 104a: For intransitive hithpolel בין as 'gain understanding', see SDBH's 'draw understanding' and BDB's 'get understanding'.

v. 105[ ]

v. 105a: The evidence is quite evenly split between the singular and plural readings of דְבָרֶ֑ךָ (Revell has it marked as a pausal form, among the ancient versions the plural is only found in the Targum, but also 11Q5), so the conservative approach should most likely be followed, viz. the addition of the mater yod came about from the pausal reading.
For a similar image see the context of Job 22:28 (וְֽתִגְזַר־א֖וֹמֶר וְיָ֣קָם לָ֑ךְ וְעַל־דְּ֝רָכֶ֗יךָ נָ֣גַֽהּ אֽוֹר).
For the רֶגֶל/דֶּרֶךְ interchange see the MT (רַגְלֵ֤י חֲסִידוֹ יִשְׁמֹ֔רחֲסִידָיו֙ חֲסִי֯דָו֙) and 4Q51 ([ודרך ח[סידיו ישמור) of 1 Sam 2:9.
For the pair נֵר and אוֹר, cf. Prov 6:23: כִּ֤י נֵ֣ר מִ֭צְוָה וְת֣וֹרָה א֑וֹר וְדֶ֥רֶךְ חַ֝יִּ֗ים תּוֹכְח֥וֹת מוּסָֽר, which makes explicit the דֶ֥רֶךְ חַ֝יִּ֗ים!
v. 105b: Rather than spatial orientation, לִנְתִיבָתִֽי could also be read as 'advantage,' as לְרַגְלִ֥י. This is not preferred, however, since the נְתִיבָה is less naturally read as the conduct, rather than the sphere of where that conduct (life) will be carried out.
Think pillar of cloud and fire in the desert!

v. 106[ ]

v. 106a: Compare the construction נִשְׁבַּ֥עְתִּי וָאֲקַיֵּ֑מָה לִ֝שְׁמֹ֗ר מִשְׁפְּטֵ֥י צִדְקֶֽךָ with Gen 26:3: וַהֲקִֽמֹתִי֙ אֶת־הַשְּׁבֻעָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר נִשְׁבַּ֖עְתִּי לְאַבְרָהָ֥ם אָבִֽיךָ. Notice also the expansion of the root in Targum Onkelos of the same passage: וַאֲקַיֵים יָת קְיָמָא דְקַיֵימִית לאברהם אֲבוּך, as well as Targum Jonathan's rendering of the MT's וְלֹֽא־יִֽהְיֶ֤ה עָלֵ֙ינוּ֙ קֶ֔צֶף עַל־הַשְּׁבוּעָ֖ה אֲשֶׁר־נִשְׁבַּ֥עְנוּ לָהֶֽם׃ as וְלָא יְהֵי עְלַנָא רֻגזָא עַל קְיָמָא דְקַיֵימנָא לְהֹון.

Since this is a unique case of intransitive piel קום, it seems preferable to read as part of the שׁבע verb phrase, and thus as a hendiadys. As the confirmation/ratification of a commitment, see also the use in אין עדים מצויין לקַיְּימוֹ 'no witnesses are likely to be found to attest it' in Giṭṭin 2b; and the compound verb phrase שמע וק׳ 'if he heard her vow and confirmed it' in N'darim in the Talmud (see further Jastrow vol. II: 1330).

v. 106b: For the analysis of the triple construct chain, see the note on v. 7b.

v. 107[ ]

v. 107a: Once again, TgPs reads כִדְבָרֶֽךָ as plural, yet 11Q5 does not, nor does any other ancient version.

There does not seem to be much discernible distinction between the pual עֻנֵּ֑יתִי in v. 71 and the niphal here, as physical/social suffering is in view in both cases.

v. 108[ ]

v. 108a: For other instances of qal רצ׳׳ה as 'accept with pleasure' see Amos 5:22, Mal 1:10 (both with מִנְחָה), and Ps 51:18 (with עֹלָה).

v. 109[ ]

v. 109a: For other instances of נֶפֶשׁ being in כַּף (always with שִׂים, except here) see also Judg 12:3; 1 Sam 19:5; 1 Sam 28:21 and Job 13:14, which all amount to "take a risk." Here the risk seems to be involuntary, however, so simply "be in danger" is in view.

The conceptualization of בְכַפִּ֣י as spatially limited may be in contrast to the mention of רחב elsewhere (see, esp. וְאֶתְהַלְּכָ֥ה בָרְחָבָ֑ה in v. 45).

v. 110[ ]

v. 111[ ]

v. 111b: The construct chain שְׂשׂ֖וֹן – לִבִּ֣י is probably best read as verbal notion – subject (experiencer, that is, as a verbal idea of emotion), with עֵדְוֺתֶ֣יךָ providing the stimulus for such joy.

v. 112[ ]

v. 113[ ]

v. 113a: As a hapax in this particular form, much of the sense of סֵעֵף in translations is drawn from the clearer context of סְעִפָּה in 1 Kgs 18:21. It seems consistent with Jerome's tumultuosus, possibly Aquila's διάφορος, the paraphrase דחשבין מחשבן סריקן in TgPs, and the Arabic noun تَسْعِف.
On סֵעֵף:
- Lexicons:
  - double-minded (SDBH)
  - divided (HALOT, DCH), half-hearted (BDB)
  - 'Zwiespältige, Schwankende' ('ambivalent, fluctuating' Gesenius 2013, 895)

- Ancient versions:
  - παράνομος (LXX)
  - διάφορος (Α᾽; 'disagreeing')
  - παραβάτης (Σ; 'transgressor')
  - tumultuosus (Hebr.) 'turbulent, restless, full of confusion' (Harper's, 1913)
  - דחשבין מחשבן סריקן (TgPss; 'those who think vain thoughts', Stec 2004, 216)
  - Syr. ܥܘܠܐ

- Cognates:
  - Arab. تَسْعِف, n. 'mixing' (Lane, Vol. I, 1364).

- Shared root:
  - See סְעִפָּה in 1 Kgs 18:21: וַיִּגַּ֨שׁ אֵלִיָּ֜הוּ אֶל־כָּל־הָעָ֗ם וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ עַד־מָתַ֞י אַתֶּ֣ם פֹּסְחִים֮ עַל־שְׁתֵּ֣י הַסְּעִפִּים֒ אִם־יְהוָ֤ה הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ לְכ֣וּ אַחֲרָ֔יו וְאִם־הַבַּ֖עַל לְכ֣וּ אַחֲרָ֑יו וְלֹֽא־עָנ֥וּ הָעָ֛ם אֹת֖וֹ דָּבָֽר

v. 114[ ]

v. 114: This seems to be a unique case of this word-pair, but their semantic proximity is apparent in uses such as Ps 32:7 (אַתָּ֤ה׀ סֵ֥תֶר לִי֮ מִצַּ֪ר תִּ֫צְּרֵ֥נִי); Ps 91:1 (יֹ֭שֵׁב בְּסֵ֣תֶר עֶלְי֑וֹן בְּצֵ֥ל שַׁ֝דַּ֗י יִתְלוֹנָֽן); and מָגֵן in Pss 3:4; 18:31; 115:9-11; 144:2, etc.

v. 115[ ]

v. 116[ ]

v. 116b: Out of the two options for וְאַל־תְּ֝בִישֵׁ֗נִי מִשִּׂבְרִֽי, namely: 'Do not let me be ashamed of my hope' and 'Do not let me be put to shame because of my hope', the latter is preferred in light of the more common causal function of מִן and the two-participant event of the hiphil, 'X puts Y to shame,' rather than a simple 'X is ashamed'.
v. 116b: The nominal form שֵׂבֶר only occurs here and in Ps. 146, where it is in parallel with עֵזֶר. Its sense is clear enough, however, from the more common pi. verb, 'to hope' (BDB, DCH, HALOT), as in v. 166, for example (שִׂבַּ֣רְתִּי לִֽישׁוּעָתְךָ֣ יְהוָ֑ה).

v. 117[ ]

v. 117b: On אֶשְׁעָה as 'pay regard to', see the discussion in TDOT: Human Regard. When šāʿâ refers to human regard of God or God’s covenant, it conveys the notion of honor and respect. These reactions are considered positive, but they can have various results: Yahweh may accept them or reject them as unnecessary. Here the hithpael (“look apprehensively” or “be awe-struck”) has the same meaning as yrʾ, “fear.” Humans are expected to “fear” God (Gen. 22:12), even though Yahweh’s first words in a theophany often are “Do not fear” (Gen. 15:1). In a similar vein, the people are expected to pay attention or respect to Yahweh. For example, Isaiah attacks “those who go down to Egypt for help ..., but do not look to the Holy One of Israel” (Isa. 31:1). After God’s judgment, however, the people will once more regard their Maker and will have no regard for the altars that are the work of their own hands (Isa. 17:7–8). Ps. 119:17 prays for God’s deliverance: “then I will have regard for your statutes continually.” In 2 S. 22:42 the prayers of David’s enemies are in vain: when they look for deliverance, Yahweh will not answer them. In Isa. 41:23 the prophet mocks the false gods, calling on them to do good or harm, that the people may be afraid of them (šʿh hithpael ). In fact, of course, they can do nothing. Yahweh, by contrast, comforts his people in a theophany: “Do not fear (yrʾ), for I am with you; do not be afraid (šʿh), for I am your God” (v. 10). (Lundbom, “שָׁעָה,”)

v. 118[ ]

v. 118b: The construct chain תַּרְמִיתָֽם is better understood as verbal action-agent rather than characteristic-possessor.
v. 118b: The verbless clause שֶׁ֝֗קֶר תַּרְמִיתָֽם is often taken as borderline tautologous ('their deceit is falsehood', KJV), so care should be taken to make transparent the correct nuance.
On סלה:
- Lexicons:
  - despise (SDBH, DCH, NIDOTTE)
  - treat as worthless (HALOT, DCH), --- (BDB)
  - 'verwerfen' ('reject, dismiss' Gesenius 2013, 888)
  - רוצה לומר דרכת ורמסת כל שוגים ('it means to say, "you stood on and trampled all those going astray"'; Radak, Sefer HaShorashim)

- Ancient versions:
  - ἐξουδενόω (LXX, Ε', Θ' – 'set at nought' LSJ; 'treat with contempt, scorn', BDAG)
  - ἀποσκολοπίζω (Α' – 'remove [stumbling blocks]' LSJ)
  - ἀπελέγχω (Σ' - 'convict, expose, refute' LSJ)
  - spernere (Gall.) 'sever, separate, remove' (Harper's, 1740)
  - abjicere (Hebr,) – 'cast away' (Harper's, 7)
  - כבש (TgPss; 'subdue', Sokoloff 2017, 266)
  - Syr. Aph. ܣܠܝ

- Cognates:
  - possibly related to Arab. سَلْوَة, n. a state of forgetfulness, unmindfulness, or neglectfulness (Lane, Vol. I, 1417).
  - Akk. šalû, to reject, throw away (CAD, Vol. 17; 272-273.3)

- Shared root:
  - piel in Lam 1:15: סִלָּ֨ה כָל־אַבִּירַ֤י׀ אֲדֹנָי֙ בְּקִרְבִּ֔י

On שֶׁקֶר:
- ἄδικον (LXX = E' Θ')
- ψευδεῖς (A')
- ματαία (Σ)
- iniusta (Gall.)
- mendax (Hebr.)
- ܥܘܠܐ (Syr.)
- שקרא (TgPs)

On תַּרְמִית:
- τὸ ἐνθύμημα αὐτῶν (LXX = E', Θ')
- συνεπιθέσεις αὐτῶν (A'; 'assault', LSJ)
- πᾶσα ἡ δολιότης αὐτῶν (Σ)
- cogitatio eorum (Gall., Hebr.)
- ܪܢܝܗܘܢ (Syr.)
- נכלהון (TgPs)

Some modern translations:
- their delusions come to nothing (NIV)
- their deceitfulness is built on a lie (ESV)
- their deceitfulness is useless (NASB)
- they are false and deceitful (NJPS)
- su astucia es un engaño (RVA)
- leur tromperie est sans effet (SG21)
- Lüge sind ihre Machenschaften (ZÜR)

Conclusion: taking שֶׁקֶר as adverbial, as other instances in the psalm (vv. 78, 86), seems to be the most satisfying. Furthermore, in light of the clearer instances of the root רמה (see, e.g., the verb רָמָה and the nominals רְמִיָּה and מִרְמָה), it seems safe to treat תַּרְמִית as treachery >> betrayal. The result could either be:
- 'without cause' i.e., unprompted negative actions towards the psalmist (cf. the LXX: 'their betrayal is unjust/unprompted',
- or 'in vain', i.e., useless (Symmachus, NIV, NASB, SG21), in their actions against the psalmist or in their rejection of Torah

Alternatively, deceit as a noun could describe the effects on themselves of rejecting Torah. This seems to be the least likely use of שֶׁקֶר in the psalm, however. In the end, without cause seems to best accommodate the actions against the psalmist or rejection of Torah in general, in that they will not get away with it, so YHWH rightly ends up rejecting them.

v. 119[ ]

v. 119a: Something like entity–location/origin seems to be the most accurate analysis here (cf. Ḥakham 1979, 416: כָּל הָרְשָׁעִים שֶׁבָּאָרֶץ "all the wicked who are on the earth").

Although the article would be expected here (הארץ), it only seems to be present in Kennicott 457.

v. 120[ ]

v. 120b: This "is the only place in the Hebrew Bible that משפט is the object of the verb “to fear" (Reynolds 2010, 40).
On סמר:
- Lexicons:
  - shudder (SDBH)
  - tremble (HALOT, DCH)
  - bristle up (BDB)
  - shudder, have goose bumps (NIDOTTE)
  - 'schauern, schaudern' ('shudder, shiver' Gesenius 2013, 893)

- Ancient versions:
  - καθηλόω (LXX, Θ') 'nail' = (Gall.) configere, 'join, unite' (Harper's, 417); cf. Akk., Arab., Ph., ***Jer. 51.27 and Eccl. 12.11.
  - ἐλώσθη (Α') as interchangeable with ἐφοβεῖτο (LSJ); φρῑκιάω (A') - 'shudder, shiver' (LSJ)
  - ὀρθοτρῐχέω (Σ') - have one's hair up-standing (LSJ)
  - horripilare (Hebr.) 'bristle with hairs' (Harper's, 865)
  - צלהב (TgPss; 'redden, burnish', Sokoloff 2017, 528)
  - Syr. pe. ܩܦܕ ('bristle, shrink, contract,' Sokoloff 2009, 1389)

- Cognates:
  - Deir ῾Alla n. smr as 'dread' (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995, Vol II, 794) possible homophone in Arab. سمّرهُ, vb. "to nail" (Lane, Vol. I, 1425); Akk. n. samrūtu (CAD, Vol. 15, 120) and Phoenician vb. smr (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995, Vol II, 793) as the source of the LXX's καθηλόω.

- Shared root:
  - מַסְמֵר in Eccl 12:11 as 'nail'.
  - כְּיֶ֥לֶק סָמָֽר as the 'bristly/hairy locust' in Jer 51:27
  - See also Job 4:15: וְ֭רוּחַ עַל־פָּנַ֣י יַחֲלֹ֑ף תְּ֝סַמֵּ֗ר שַֽׂעֲרַ֥ת בְּשָׂרִֽי (A spirit glided past my face;
  - the hair of my flesh stood up; ESV). Though in the piel, we have the same collocation of סמר and בָּשָׂר, so we can safely assume the same expression of fear (and probably hair) is in view both in Job 4:15 and here.

v. 121[ ]

v. 121a: This is the only instance in the psalm of מִשְׁפָּ֣ט וָצֶ֑דֶק as absolute, adjacent forms, the construct מִשְׁפְּטֵ֥י צִדְקֶֽךָ, and the like, being much more common (vv. 7, 62, 106, 160, 164).
v. 121b: SDBH defines the hiphil of נוח as follows: “literally: to give rest; hence: = causative action by which humans or deities place (other) humans or inanimate objects in a certain location, often with the intention of leaving them there for an extended period of time.“

v. 122[ ]

v. 122a: For the analysis of the lamed in עֲרֹ֣ב עַבְדְּךָ֣ לְט֑וֹב, BHRG comments that it is as a result relationship (§39.11.6.e): "Be responsible for your servant that it may go well with him [lit. for good]".
On ערב:
- Lexicons:
  - pledge, promise, put up security (SDBH)
  - be responsible for someone, lend support for someone's cause (HALOT)
  - give security (DCH)
  - take on a pledge, give surety (BDB)
  - give your servant as a pledge (ʿarōḇ) to some good man (leṭôḇ), lest the proud distrain me (TDOT)

- Ancient versions:
  - ἐκδέχομαι (LXX; stand surety for [LSJ]) ≈ ἐγγῠάω (A') ≈ ἀναδέχομαι (Σ')
  - suscipere (Gall.)
  - spondere (Hebr.) take pledge, etc.
  - Both TgPs and Syr. have read the homophonous root ער׳׳ב, be pleasant, pleasing (HALOT)

- Cognates:
  - Pun. ῾rb, 'to guarantee' (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995, Vol II, 884)

v. 123[ ]

v. 123: For the analysis of the lamed following כל׳׳ה, see the note on vv. 81-82.
v. 123b: The waw is probably one of re-characterization, rather than two distinct entities, and is probably best rendered either zero or with whatever conventions the target languages uses for re-evaluative apposition: My eyes fade for need of your salvation, of your just promise.

v. 124[ ]

v. 124a: The function of עִם in עֲשֵׂ֖ה עִם־עַבְדְּךָ֥ is that of human interaction, i.e., "the sharing of an activity between a trajector x and landmark y" (BHRG §39.21.2). See also עשׂ׳׳ה חֶסֶד עִם in Gen 21:23 (between Abraham and Abimelech), in 24:14 between God and Abraham; Josh 2:12, 14 (between the spies and Rahab with her family); Judg 1:24 (between the spies and the man coming out of Bethel); 1 Sam 15:6 (between the Kenites and the Israelites); 2 Sam 2:5 (between the men of Jabesh Gilead and Saul/Jonathan); and, of course, 119:65: ט֭וֹב עָשִׂ֣יתָ עִֽם־עַבְדְּךָ֑ יְ֝הוָ֗ה כִּדְבָרֶֽ, among others.

v. 125[ ]

v. 126[ ]

v. 126a: For the function of the lamed in לַיהוָ֑ה as lamed of experience (Jenni 2000, 111), see the exegetical issue: The Grammar and Meaning of Ps. 119:126.
Note that besides the ποιῆσαι of the LXX and the πρᾶξαι of Symmachus, Field also cites 'time of κάτορθωσις' in ῎Αλλος, that is, 'setting right, reform, right action' (LSJ) and restoration, improvement, success (Diggle 2021: 788). Along these lines, the sense of עֵת, then, seems to indicate the appropriate time for action (see Barr 1969, 122-123).

v. 127[ ]

v. 127: The waw is one of intensification, i.e., X even Y, rather than X and Y. פַּז as a semantic hyponym of זָהָב is unlikely to be added to the latter (cf. Ps 19.11).

v. 128[ ]

v. 128a: While HALOT and DCH offer glosses somewhat contextually ad sensum, BDB has more integrity, but does not make much sense. SDBH's development from 'to make straight (an event) >> to (perform an event) right' is a big, but probably necessary, leap. If BDB's reading were followed, the contrast would be between declaring YHWH's precepts as righteous (see especially the צ–stanza) and hating paths of falsehood. The preferred reading, however, confirms the psalmist's actions, concluding the stanza in a similar manner it began (עָ֭שִׂיתִי מִשְׁפָּ֣ט וָצֶ֑דֶק).

v. 129[ ]

v. 129a: The use of פְּלָא֥וֹת as adjectival cannot be explained for lack of an adjectival form of this root, in light of the common ptc. נִ֝פְלָא֗וֹת (cf. vv. 18, 27). Like vv. 18 and 27's 'wonderful things/deeds', we follow TDOT's understanding that "The noun peleʾ has fundamentally the same meaning as nip̱lāʾôṯ" (J. Conrad, פלא). It is understandable, however, that the LXX, Jerome and Peshitta all interpret it adjectivally.

v. 130[ ]

v. 130a: Note that Symmachus reads ἡ πύλη for the MT's, פֵּ֖תַח (i.e., 'opening'), though the LXX's δήλωσις ('explanation'; LSJ), seems preferable.

Alternatively, the “opening of one’s words” could refer to the opening where the words come out, viz., the mouth.

For the borrowed language of the Aaronic blessing (especially Num 6:25: יָאֵ֨ר יְהוָ֧ה׀ פָּנָ֛יו אֵלֶ֖יךָ וִֽיחֻנֶּֽךָּ), see the use of יָאִיר here, פְּנֵה־אֵלַ֥י וְחָנֵּ֑נִי in v. 132 and פָּ֭נֶיךָ הָאֵ֣ר בְּעַבְדֶּ֑ךָ in v. 135.

Num 6:26 (יִשָּׂ֨א יְהוָ֤ה׀ פָּנָיו֙ אֵלֶ֔יךָ וְיָשֵׂ֥ם לְךָ֖ שָׁלֽוֹם) may even lend a clue concerning the nature of שָׁלוֹם in v. 165.

v. 131[ ]

On יאב:
- Lexicons:
  - desire, long for (SDBH, HALOT, DCH, BDB) = verlangen (Gesenius 2013, 430)

- Ancient versions:
  - ἐπιποθέω (LXX; cf. גרס in v. 20 and תאב in v. 174) = desiderare (Gall., Hebr.)
  - צבי (TgPss; 'want, desire', Sokoloff 2017, 519)

- Cognates:
  - Official Aramaic y᾽b, 'to desire' (Hoftijzer & Jongeling 1995, Vol I, 431)

v. 132[ ]

v. 132b: The use of מִשְׁפָט as 'custom' (see the Venn diagram in v. 1) is attractive here, though lacking an article and being modified by the לְ phrase, abstract 'justice' seems preferable. (Interestingly, JTS 611, 631 and 680 all seem to have an article on מִשְׁפָט). See v. 49 (זְכֹר־דָּבָ֥ר לְעַבְדֶּ֑ךָ עַ֝֗ל אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִֽחַלְתָּֽנִי) for the identification of a product of hope, in any case.

v. 133[ ]

v. 133b: Although a collocational hapax in the Bible (though see 11Q5 Col. xix: 15, as discussed in the lexical notes), the function of בְּ is as social contact, "often [with] a negative effect on the landmark" (BHRG 39.6.1.b.iii).

For the quantifier כָל with singular אַוֶן, see comments on v. 14.

For the permissive hiphil שׁלט in this verse, see Tigay (2017, 410). For the rare hiphil שׁלט plus בְּ (only here in BH), see also 11Q5 Col. xix: 15: אל תשלט בי שטן ורוח טמאה ('let not Satan or an evil spirit have dominion over me').

v. 134[ ]

Note that פדה in non-theological uses denotes acquiring someone/something specifically through payment from an injurious situation (e.g., Exod 13:13, 15; Lev 27:27; Num 18:15), whereas ישע typically denotes “rescue.” In theological uses-however, the two terms are more or less synonymous.

v. 135[ ]

v. 135: The use of הָאֵר פָּנֶיךָ followed by וְ֝לַמְּדֵ֗נִי אֶת־חֻקֶּֽיךָ seems to approximate the similar request חָנֵּנִי – see especially חִלִּ֣יתִי פָנֶ֣יךָ בְכָל־לֵ֑ב חָ֝נֵּ֗נִי כְּאִמְרָתֶֽךָ (v. 58), in the context of seeking YHWH's favor, as well as vv. 29 and 132.

v. 136[ ]

v. 136a: For argument structure see Grammar notes.

For the construct chain פַּלְגֵי־מַיִם, container-content comes the closest, though, of course, פֶּלֶג is not technically a container, but rather a quantitative measure.

There is perhaps an echo of Ps 1:3 offered here, with the line-initial construct phrase, פַּלְגֵי־מַ֭יִם.

v. 136b: For the 3pl impersonal שָׁמְר֥וּ תוֹרָתֶֽךָ, the functionally-equivalent passive construction has been glossed, to avoid ambiguity with 'my eyes' as the subject.

v. 137[ ]

v. 137b: For the singular reading of מִשְׁפָּטֶךָ see the Grammar notes. Notice the singular/plural confusion on these 2ms-suffixed forms throughout the psalm, and particularly v. 175, where a mater-less וּֽמִשְׁפָּטֶ֥ךָ is followed by the plural יַעֲזְרֻֽנִי. Furthermore, both the LXX and Jerome (Gall. and Hebr.) read מִשְׁפָּטֶֽיךָ as singular (ἡ κρίσις σου; iudicium tuum).

For singular uses of מִשְׁפָּט as 'justice' (not 'judgments', rules,' etc.) in the vicinity, cf. vv. 121, 132 and 149.

v. 138[ ]

v. 138: For the pair צֶדֶק and אֱמוּנָה, see Isa 11:5 (וְהָ֥יָה צֶ֖דֶק אֵז֣וֹר מָתְנָ֑יו וְהָאֱמוּנָ֖ה אֵז֥וֹר חֲלָצָֽיו); Ps 96:13 (יִשְׁפֹּֽט־תֵּבֵ֥ל בְּצֶ֑דֶק וְ֝עַמִּ֗ים בֶּאֱמוּנָתֽוֹ); and, of course, v. 75: יָדַ֣עְתִּי יְ֭הוָה כִּי־צֶ֣דֶק מִשְׁפָּטֶ֑יךָ וֶ֝אֱמוּנָ֗ה עִנִּיתָֽנִי.

This is perhaps another 'justice cycle', in which the psalmist was afflicted (see vv. 141, 143), yet the psalmist wants the same justice applies to his adversaries (v. 139).

v. 139[ ]

The other instances of צָמַת make the 'put an end to', 'annihilate' reading quite likely. Notice the Arabic صَمَتَ as 'be silent' ('be/become silent', Lane Vol. II, 1725) and Symmachus' ἀπεσιώπησέ με ('silenced me'), presumably as a result of being annihilated. In any case, the hyperbole seems to be captured by the common 'be consumed' (cf. the cases of כלה as 'fade, waste away' in vv. 82-83 and 123). See also the LXX's ἐκτήκω ('melt, waste away'; LSJ) = Gall. tabescere; Syr. ܫܢܩܢܝ (pa. 'vex, torment, torture'; Sokoloff 2009, 1580-81) and TgPs מגר ('destroy'; CAL); Hebr. consumere; and the clearer case of אכל in כִּֽי־קִנְאַ֣ת בֵּיתְךָ֣ אֲכָלָ֑תְנִי (Ps 69:10). The sense is similar–albeit more extreme–to that of v. 53a (see note).

v. 140[ ]

v. 141[ ]

Although a unique instance of this word pair, the insignificance of being young/small is present in Judg 6:15; 1 Sam 9:21 and probably directly linked to wisdom in Job 30:1; 32:6. So, as in חֶרְפָּה וָבוּז in v. 22, we may have two facets of the same social status.
For צע׳׳ר as opposite of 'be honoured,' see וְהִכְבַּדְתִּ֖ים וְלֹ֥א יִצְעָֽרוּ (Jer 30:19).

SDBH defines uses of the niphal of בזה such as the one here as the “state in which someone considers someone or something else unworthy of attention or respect, and shows that by his/her actions ”. Thus while something like 'considered inferior' could reflect the psalmist's enemies' attitude towards him, the simple 'unworthy' seems to better reflect the self-abasing attitude of the psalmist throughout the poem (see his continual use of עֶבֶד and identification with the young man [נַעַר; v. 9] and simple people [פְּתָיִֽים; v. 130]).

v. 142[ ]

Although at first glance glaringly tautologous, none of the ancient versions make a distinction between צְדָקָה and צֶדֶק in this verse, so the salient constituent seems to be the adverbial לְעוֹלָ֑ם, captured aptly by the Syr. paraphrase: ܙܕܝܩܘܬܟ ܩܝܡܐ ܠܥܠܡ ('your righteousness remains forever', Taylor 2020, 523). See, however, TLOT, which claims: "A ṣedeq state can be not only the prerequisite (from the divine perspective) but also the result (from the human perspective) of ṣedāqâ."

v. 143[ ]

Although the maqqef is not visible in any of the major manuscripts, neither L nor Aleppo have an accent on צַר, and both צַר וּמָצ֥וֹק are written almost as one word, so they are obviously conceptually very proximal.
For the MT's מָצ֥וֹק, see Aquila's συνοχή ('conflict', LSJ), and Theodotion's more litteral στενοχωρία ('narrowness').

For the quite rare מָצוֹק, cf. the cannibalistic effects of the exile (Deut 28:53, 55, 57; Jer 19:9) and the profile of those who found refuge in David's camp during his years on the run (1 Sam 22:2). The choice of מָצוֹק is probably also for prosodic/phonetic purposes (see the poetic structure).

v. 144[ ]

The adoption of an adjectival for this noun, for lack of an adjectival form (GKC §141c), does not apply here in light of צָדִיק, as used in חֻקִּים צַדִּיקִים (Deut 4:8), despite Jerome's 'iusta' testimonia tua and the Syr. ܙܕܝܩܐ ܗܝ ܣܗܕܘܬܟ (adj. just, righteous), so in GKC's terms, 'the attribute is intended to receive a certain emphasis', i.e., an intensive focal nature of the equative construction: "Your testimonies are justice itself" >> "Your testimonies are totally just". See also vv. 75 and 86.
For the significance of צֶדֶק throughout (predictably) the צ–stanza, see TDOT: "When Ps. 119 repeatedly describes God’s commandments and ordinances as ṣeḏeq, it is probably referring first of all to Yahweh’s established order. The term ṣeḏeq describes what Yahweh appoints (Ps. 119:138), hears (Ps. 17:1), and speaks (Isa. 45:19); what one knows (Isa. 51:7), seeks (Zeph. 2:3), learns (Prov. 1:3; Isa. 26:9, 10), understands (Prov. 2:9), and says (Ps. 52:5[3]; 58:2[1]); Prov. 12:17)" (Ringgren & Johnson, “צָדַק,”).

v. 145[ ]

v. 145-146: For the variation and adjacent mention of נצר and שׁמר, see the precedent set in vv. 2-4: אַ֭שְׁרֵי נֹצְרֵ֥י עֵדֹתָ֗יו ... אַ֭תָּה צִוִּ֥יתָה פִקֻּדֶ֗יךָ לִשְׁמֹ֥ר מְאֹֽד׃.

v. 146[ ]

v. 147[ ]

v. 147a: For justification of 'before sunrise' see the lexical notes.
For a dynamic understanding of the first clause, cf. Symmachus' ὤρθριζον ἐγειρόμενος ὡς ἔτι σκότος καὶ ηὐχόην, ("I wake early, getting up when it is still dark, and pray"). The LXX's ἀωρία ("darkness" – but also possibly "midnight") probably supports this, as does Hebr. in tenebris ("in darkness").

Though transitive, compare the case of קדם in Ps 88:14 (וַאֲנִ֤י׀ אֵלֶ֣יךָ יְהוָ֣ה שִׁוַּ֑עְתִּי וּ֝בַבֹּ֗קֶר תְּֽפִלָּתִ֥י תְקַדְּמֶֽךָּ׃), similarly involving the morning (בֹּקֶר) and the verb שׁוע in the adjacent clause.

v. 148[ ]

v. 148b: The final form, though plural in the LXX and Jerome, is read as singular by TgPs and the Syr. The singular reading is also favored by the shortage of manuscripts displaying the mater yod (see VTH, Vol. 2, 420).

For אַשְׁמֻר֑וֹת as 'near dawn', cf. the LXX's πρὸς ὄρθρον. The psalmist has already spoken up being up at midnight (v. 62).

v. 149[ ]

v. 149a: The Syr. plural form ܪ̈ܚܡܝܟ ('your mercies') is unattested in Heb. manuscript evidence. The same is not true for ܕܝܢ̈ܝܟ ('your judgments') in v. 149b (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectiones: Vol. 4, 80), though it is still the only plural reading among the ancient versions.

v. 150[ ]

While the nominal זִמָּה can simply mean 'wickedness' (BDB; DCH; SDBH), the more concrete sense derived from the verbal root זמם, 'to plan', fits the context of the psalm. His oppressors have spoken against him (v. 23), insulted and derided him (vv. 42, 51), laid traps for him (vv. 61, 110), dug pits for him (v. 85) and waited to kill him (v. 95).

v. 151[ ]

v. 152[ ]

The use of קֶדֶם for what amounts to 'for a long time' produces a chronological hyperbole not out of place in the psalm, in light of the central importance of temporal adverbs and eternity past/future as characteristic of YHWH and his justice (see the poetic feature). See, similar, the use of מֵעוֹלָם in the alternative of v. 52a (זָ֘כַ֤רְתִּי מִשְׁפָּטֶ֖יךָ מֵעוֹלָ֥ם׀ יְהוָ֗ה), in which the ongoing (and ancient) remembering of these משׁפטים is a possible reading of the other ancient versions and unambiguously following by the CSB and REB; see also the similar use of בִּ֣ימֵי קֶֽדֶם in Ps 44:2.

v. 153[ ]

v. 154[ ]

v. 154a: The construct chain רִ֭יבִי is analysed as entity-malefactor, i.e., 'the case (brought against) me'.
For the construction רִיבָ֣ה רִ֭יבִי in the context of the shaming of Babylon, see Jer. 51:36 – לָכֵ֗ן כֹּ֚ה אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ֔ה הִנְנִי־רָב֙ אֶת־רִיבֵ֔ךְ וְנִקַּמְתִּ֖י אֶת־נִקְמָתֵ֑ךְ וְהַחֲרַבְתִּי֙ אֶת־יַמָּ֔הּ וְהֹבַשְׁתִּ֖י אֶת־מְקוֹרָֽהּ
Cf., also, the combination of both ריב רִיב and גאל in Jer. 50:(33-)34 – כֹּ֤ה אָמַר֙ יְהוָ֣ה צְבָא֔וֹת עֲשׁוּקִ֛ים בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֥ל וּבְנֵי־יְהוּדָ֖ה יַחְדָּ֑ו וְכָל־שֹֽׁבֵיהֶם֙ הֶחֱזִ֣יקוּ בָ֔ם מֵאֲנ֖וּ שַׁלְּחָֽם׃ גֹּאֲלָ֣ם׀ חָזָ֗ק יְהוָ֤ה צְבָאוֹת֙ שְׁמ֔וֹ רִ֥יב יָרִ֖יב אֶת־רִיבָ֑ם לְמַ֙עַן֙ הִרְגִּ֣יעַ אֶת־הָאָ֔רֶץ וְהִרְגִּ֖יז לְיֹשְׁבֵ֥י בָבֶֽל׃
Further, the context of YHWH fighting on David's behalf against Nabal, instead of him taking matters into his own hands (1 Sam 25:39): וַיֹּ֡אמֶר בָּר֣וּךְ יְהוָ֡ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר רָב֩ אֶת־רִ֨יב חֶרְפָּתִ֜י מִיַּ֣ד נָבָ֗ל וְאֶת־עַבְדּוֹ֙ חָשַׂ֣ךְ מֵֽרָעָ֔ה וְאֵת֙ רָעַ֣ת נָבָ֔ל הֵשִׁ֥יב יְהוָ֖ה בְּרֹאשׁ֑וֹ
v. 154b: For normative lamed see BHRG §39.11.6.c (cf. Exod 17:13; Jer 30:11).
The use of גאל in the context of 'defending a case' probably alludes to the "gate scene frame," already activated by the mention of the leaders in יָֽשְׁב֣וּ שָׂ֭רִים בִּ֣י נִדְבָּ֑רוּ (v. 23; see notes there), who are about to reappear in v. 161.

v. 155[ ]

v. 156[ ]

v. 157[ ]

v. 157a: This is the only instance in the Bible of the combination רדף and צָר. It may be that רֹדְפִים is a hyponym of the set of צָרִים, the latter an intensification of רֹדְפִים, or even a re-evaluation, i.e., constituting the same set. Since there is no external evidence for the relationship between these two lexemes, however, the simple additive waw has been maintained. See also vv. 63 and 79 for the positive counterparts of characteristic actions.

v. 158[ ]

The root בגד often refers to objective transgression of a legal standard (see e.g., Exod 21:8; Judg 9:23; 1 Sam 14:33). In its theological usage, as is the case here, בגד is used to describe members of the covenant community who sin against God (see e.g., 1 Sam 14:33; Isa 24:16; 48:8; Jer 3:8, 11; 12:1; Pss 25:3; 78:57). We therefore use the term “unfaithful” to express this idea.
On hithpol קוט:
- Lexicons:
  - loathe, be disgusted with (SDBH)
  - feel disgust (HALOT, DCH, BDB)
  - 'sich ekeln, grausen' ('feel disgusted, horrified,' Gesenius 2013, 1156)

- Ancient versions:
  - ἐκτήκω (LXX; cf. צמת in v. 139 above!) = tabescere (Gall.)
  - maerere (Hebr.; grieve, mourn)
  - vexare (A', so Field, from Syro-Hex. ܘܡܬܥܣܩ ܗܘܝܬ; 'be agitated, disturbed'; Sokoloff 2009, 1120)
  - דון (TgPs. Either G 'judge' or Gt., 'contest, argue with'; Sokoloff 2017, 134)

- Cognates:
  - Ugaritic qwṭ as 'loathe, feel repugnance' (Del Olmo Lete & Sanmartín 2015, 709)

- Shared root:
  - By-form of קוץ.

v. 159[ ]

v. 160[ ]

v. 160a: The construct chain רֹאשׁ־דְּבָרְךָ֥ is analysed as specification of undivided whole, in similar manner to other quantifiers, such as כֹּל.
For this use of רֹאשׁ as "sum," "total," (so BDB) cf. Ps 139:17 (וְלִ֗י מַה־יָּקְר֣וּ רֵעֶ֣יךָ אֵ֑ל מֶ֥ה עָ֝צְמוּ רָאשֵׁיהֶֽם) and Job 22:12 (הֲֽלֹא־אֱ֭לוֹהַּ גֹּ֣בַהּ שָׁמָ֑יִם וּרְאֵ֤ה רֹ֖אשׁ כּוֹכָבִ֣ים כִּי־רָֽמּוּ) and Dan 7:1 (בֵּאדַ֙יִן֙ חֶלְמָ֣א כְתַ֔ב רֵ֥אשׁ מִלִּ֖ין) as "contents." The Pentateuchal uses are particularly prevalent (see Exod 30:12; Num 1:2, 49; 4:2, 22; 26:2; 31:26, 49).

v. 161[ ]

v. 161a: For discussion of שָׂרִים in the psalm, see v. 23.
v. 161b: For לב as the "locus where the reaction to a threatening situation is physically experienced", see van der Merwe (2023, 300). Though something like 'be in awe' (DCH) could seem more natural with YHWH's word as the object, it is contrasted with the (potential) fear of those leaders who persecute him in the first clause. See, further, clear contexts of even stronger senses of fear with YHWH's word in view, such as Isa 66:2 (וְאֶת־כָּל־אֵ֙לֶּה֙ יָדִ֣י עָשָׂ֔תָה וַיִּהְי֥וּ כָל־אֵ֖לֶּה נְאֻם־יְהוָ֑ה וְאֶל־זֶ֣ה אַבִּ֔יט אֶל־עָנִי֙ וּנְכֵה־ר֔וּחַ וְחָרֵ֖ד עַל־דְּבָרִֽי׃).
v. 161b: For another פחד plus מִן construction, see Ps 27:1.

v. 162[ ]

v. 162a: The preposition עַל represents the 'focus of attention' regarding "the expression of emotions by a trajector" (BHRG §39.20.6).
In light of other passages such as v. 14 (בְּדֶ֖רֶךְ עֵדְוֺתֶ֥יךָ שַׂ֗שְׂתִּי כְּעַ֣ל כָּל־הֽוֹן); v. 72 (טֽוֹב־לִ֥י תֽוֹרַת־פִּ֑יךָ מֵ֝אַלְפֵ֗י זָהָ֥ב וָכָֽסֶף) and v. 127 (אָהַ֣בְתִּי מִצְוֺתֶ֑יךָ מִזָּהָ֥ב וּמִפָּֽז), the quantitative aspect of רָב is probably in view here.

v. 163[ ]

The preference of 'falsehood' over 'unfaithfulness' for שֶׁקֶר is supported by Jerome's shift from iniquitatem (Gall.) to mendacium (Hebr.) and ψεῦδος in both Aquila and Symmachus.

For the piel of תעב, HALOT defines “to abhor, treat as תּוֹעֵבָה something abominable.”

v. 164[ ]

v. 164a: Articular בַּ֭יּוֹם as the temporal frame of extent for שֶׁ֣בַע, i.e., throughout the day (see the LXX's genitive: ἑπτάκις τῆς ἡμέρας), as opposed to the distributive: 'every day >> a day', for which we would expect the accusative (Muraoka 2016, 180-181, contra NETS). The temporal frame is perhaps resuming the nighttime discussion in vv. 147-148.
For the bare שֶׁבַע for 'seven times' see also Lev. 26.18, 21, 24, 28, likewise rendered (with the exception of v. 21) as ἑπτάκις in the LXX (cf. שֶׁ֤בַע פְּעָמִים֙ in Lev 4:6 among others); and there may be an intertextual connection to Prov 24:16 (כִּ֤י שֶׁ֨בַע׀ יִפּ֣וֹל צַדִּ֣יק וָקָ֑ם וּ֝רְשָׁעִ֗ים יִכָּשְׁל֥וּ בְרָעָֽה).

v. 165[ ]

v. 165b: The preposition לְ could plausibly be malefactive (i.e., 'there is no stumbling block (to work) against them'), which would be a comment on their good position (enjoying great peace) or causal (BHRG §39.20.6.f; 'they do not cause a stumbling block'), thus, constituting a comment on their character. The former has been preferred in light of the ancient versions and modern translations, and contrast with the 'walking in a wide place' in v. 45. The causal function of לְ is also quite rare.

For the malefactor reading, see the Syr, ܘܠܝܬ ܠܗܘܢ ܟܪܝܗܘܬܐ ('there is no sickness in them'; Taylor 2020, 529) and TgPs: ולית להון תקלא לעלמא דאתי ('they have no stumbling block for the world to come'; Stec 2004, 218), CSB, CEB, ESV, GNT, NABRE, NASB, NET, NIV, NJPS, REB.

The sense of שָׁלוֹם is probably elucidated by the second clause, in which nothing will cause them to stumble. The generic gloss "peace" has been maintained, but an expanded CBC could mention "security" (Allen 2002, 191) and even "sure-footedness."

v. 166[ ]

v. 167[ ]

v. 168[ ]

v. 168b: 'before you', i.e., "epistemologically known" (Hardy 2022, 96).

v. 169[ ]

v. 170[ ]

v. 171[ ]

v. 172[ ]

v. 172a: On root ענה:
- LXX: φθέγγομαι – recount, tell, (LSJ), speak, utter, proclaim (BDAG) = pronuntiare (Gall.)
- Iuxta Hebr. loquetur – utter, speak
- TgPs: תוב – return ≈ answer
- Syr.: ܢܒܝ – produce, gush forth (CAL)

Modern translations vary between "declare" and "sing." Both "declare" and "sing" have precedence earlier in the psalm (e.g., v. 46: וַאֲדַבְּרָ֣ה בְ֭עֵדֹתֶיךָ נֶ֥גֶד מְלָכִ֗ים and v. 54: זְ֭מִרוֹת הָֽיוּ־לִ֥י חֻקֶּ֗יךָ) and elsewhere (Ps 138:5: וְ֭יָשִׁירוּ בְּדַרְכֵ֣י יְהוָ֑ה). "Sing" has been preferred, however, as a commonly attested use of the root ענה (cf. also Num 21:17; Jer 51:14, among others; for significance, see further Ringleben 2019, 179; 198).

'v. 172b: The adoption of an adjectival for this noun, for lack of an adjectival form, does not apply here in light of צָדִיק, as used in חֻקִּים צַדִּיקִים (Deut 4:8), so must be intended for the "emphasis" discussed in GKC §141c; cf. Jerome's mandata tua iusta' (see also the adverbial reading in Syr. ܒܙܕܝܩܘܬܐ, 'in righteousness'). For further, see notes above on אֱמוּנָ֑ה in v. 86.

v. 173[ ]

v. 173a: For the modal היה with לְ + infinitive, see discussion at v. 76.

v. 174[ ]

v. 175[ ]

v. 176[ ]

Verbal Semantics Chart[ ]

For legend, click "Expand" to the right

	Tense	Aspect	Reference point movement	Modality
Definition	A situation's location in time	Internal temporal constituency of a situation as portrayed	Whether or not the expected reference point in the discourse is updated after the situation.	Distinguishing between indicative, volitional and other forms of modality, as determined by morphology; word order; particles; context
Options	Relative: a situation's location in time relative to a reference point Absolute: a situation's location in time relative to the moment of speech	Continuous Habitual/iterative Stative	Expected movement: usually perfective No expected movement: usually imperfective	indicative jussive imperative cohortative wish purpose/result past (conditional) possible probable interrogative
Symbol

For steps to determine relative tense and reference point movement click "Expand" to the right:

				Do we expect reference point to move?
After reference point (Posterior)
	Imperative	What next?	Posterior (relative future)	Yes	⇐
	Yiqtol	What next? What now?	Posterior (relative future Simultaneous (relative imperfective present)	Yes	⇐
	Weqatal			Yes	⇐
	Weyiqtol			No	⇍
	Wayyiqtol			No	⇍
At reference point (Simultaneous)
	Yiqtol	What now?	Simultaneous (relative imperfective present)	No	⇍
	Participle
	Weyiqtol
	Infinitive
Before reference point (Anterior)
	Qatal	What next? What now?	Anterior (relative past) Simultaneous (relative imperfect present)	Yes	⇐
	Wayyiqtol	What next? What now?		No	⇍

Bibliography[ ]

Allen, Leslie, C. 2002. Psalms 101-150. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.

Amir, Yehoshua. 1985. "Psalm 119 als Zeugnis eines protorabbinischen Judentums." In Yehoshua Amir (ed.) Studien zum Antiken Judentum. Frankfurt & New York: Peter Lang.

BDB = Brown, Francis, Driver, Samuel R. & Briggs, Charles A. 1977. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Beentjes, P. C. 1997. The Book of Ben Sira in Hebrew: A Text Edition of all Extant Hebrew Manuscripts and a Synopsis of all Parallel Hebrew Ben Sira Texts. Leiden: Brill.

BHRG = Van der Merwe, C. H. J., Naudé, J. A., Kroeze, J. H. 2017. A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark.

CAD = Roth, Martha, T (ed.). 1956-2010. The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago, IL: Oriental Institute.

DCH = David J. A. Clines, David J. A. (ed). 1993-2011. The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

DeClaisse-Walford, Nancy in DeClaisse-Walford, Nancy et al. 2014. The Book of Psalms. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Deissler, Alfons. 1955. Psalm 119 (118) und seine Theologie. Munich: Karl Zink Verlag.

De-Rossi, Giovanni B. 2012 (1784). Variae Lectiones Veteris Testamenti, Vol. IV. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press.

Gesenius = Gesenius, W. Donner, H. Rüterswörden, U. Renz, J. Meyer, R. (eds.). 2013. Hebräisches und aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament. 18. Auflage Gesamtausgabe. Berlin: Springer.

GKC = Gesenius, Wilhelm & Kautsch, Emil. 1909. A. E. Cowley (trans.) Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Goldingay, John. 2008. Psalms 90-150. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

Ḥakham, Amos. 1979. ספר תהלים: ספרים ג–ה (in Hebrew; The Book of Psalms: Books 3-5). Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.

HALOT = Ludwig Koehler, Ludwig & Baumgartner, Walter et al. 1994-2000. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Leiden: Brill.

Harper's = E. A. Andrews, C. T. Lewis, C. Short. 1879. Harper's Latin Dictionary: A New Latin Dictionary Founded on the Translation of Freund's Latin-German Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Hoftijzer, J, Jongeling, K 1995. Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions. Leiden: Brill.

Ibn Ezra, Abraham on Psalms.

James, E. T. 2022. "The Asethetics of Biblical Acrostics." Pages 319-339 in JSOT 46(3).

Jastrow, Marcus. 1903. A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. London: W.C. Luzac & Co.

Jenni, Ernst. 1992. Die Hebräischen Präpositionen Band 1: Die Präposition Beth. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer.

________. 2000. Die Hebräischen Präpositionen Band 3: Die Präposition Lamed. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer.

Read:

Joüon, Paul & Muraoka, Takamitsu. 2006. A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico.

Keel, Othmar. 1997. The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Leiden: Brill.

Kraus, H. J. 1989. Psalms 60-150: A Commentary (trans.) H. C. Oswald. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.

LSJ = Liddel, Henry G., Scott, R. & Jones, Henry, S. 1996. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Mena, Andrea, K. 2012. The Semantic Potential of עַל in Genesis, Psalms, and Chronicles. MA Thesis, University of Stellenbosch.

Muraoka, T. 2016. A Syntax of Septuagint Greek. Leuven: Peeters.

NIDOTTE = VanGemeren, Willem (ed.). 1997. New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Procházková, Ivana. 2021. The Torah / Law is a Journey: Using Cognitive and Culturally Oriented Linguistics to Interpret and Translate Metaphors in the Hebrew Bible. Prague: Karolinum Press.

Revell, E.J. 2004. “A List of Pausal Forms in the TeNaK(Preliminary Version).” The Pericope Group.

Reynolds, Kent. 2010. Torah as Teacher: The Exemplary Torah Student in Psalm 119. Leiden: Brill.

Ringleben, Joachim. "Das Wort, Die Weg, und die Weisung: Systematische Analyse von Psalm 119." Kerygma und Dogma 65: 173-201.

Sjörs, Ambjörn. 2018. Historical Aspects of Standard Negation in Semitic. Leiden: Brill.

Sokoloff, Michael. 2009. A Syriac Lexicon: A Translation from the Latin, Correction, Expansion, and Update of C. Brockelmann's Lexicon Syriacum. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns & Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press.

________. 2017. A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period. Ramat Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press.

Soll, Will. 1987. "The Question of Psalm 119:9." JBL 106, no. 4: 687-688.

________. 1991. Psalm 119: Matrix, Form and Setting. Washington, DC: Catholic Biblical Association of America.

Stec, David M. 2004. The Targum of Psalms: Translated, with a Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press.

Talmy, Leonard. 2000. Toward A Cognitive Semantics: Concept Structuring Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Taylor, Richard A. in Bali, Joseph & George Kiraz (eds.). 2020. The Psalms According to the Syriac Peshitta Version with English Translation. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press.

TDOT = Botterweck, G. Johannes & Ringgren, Helmer (eds.). 1978. Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, Volume III. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Terrien, Samuel. 2003. The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Tigay, Jeffrey H. 2017. "On the Tolerative/Permissive Hiph῾il." Pages 397-414 in F. E. Greenspahn & G. A. Rendsburg (eds.) Le-ma‘an Ziony: Essays in Honor of Ziony Zevit. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books.

TLOT = Jenni, Ernst & Westermann, Claus (eds.). 1997. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, Volumes I-III. Trans. Mark E. Biddle. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

van der Lugt, P. 2013. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry III: Psalms 90-150 and Psalm 1. Leiden: Brill.

van der Merwe, C. H. J. 2009. "Another Look at the Biblical Hebrew Focus Particle גַּם." JSS 54, no. 2: 313-332.

________. 2023. "The Conceptualization of Heart as an Active Zone Body Part in Biblical Hebrew." Pages 294-318 in Hanneke van Loon and Pierre van Hecke (eds.) Where Is the Way to the Dwelling of Light? Studies in Genesis, Job and Linguistics in Honor of Ellen van Wolde. Leiden: Brill.

VTH = Benjamin Kennicott (ed.). 1776. Vetus Testamentum Hebraicum: cum variis lectionibus. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Zenger, Erich. 2011. A Commentary on Psalms 101-150. Linda M. Maloney (trans.). Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.

Psalm 119 Semantics