Psalm 23 Macrosyntax

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Psalm 23/Macrosyntax
Jump to: navigation, search


Psalm 23 Navigation
Psalm 23 HomeListen & ReadPsalm 23 Overview
Layers
Browse LayersGrammar & SemanticsStory BehindDiscoursePoetry
Helps
Verse-by-Verse NotesExegetical IssuesTranslation Aids


Macrosyntax

What is Macrosyntax?

The macrosyntax layer rests on the belief that human communicators desire their addressees to receive a coherent picture of their message and will cooperatively provide clues to lead the addressee into a correct understanding. So, in the case of macrosyntax of the Psalms, the psalmist has explicitly left syntactic clues for the reader regarding the discourse structure of the entire psalm. Here we aim to account for the function of these elements, including the identification of conjunctions which either coordinate or subordinate entire clauses (as the analysis of coordinated individual phrases is carried out at the phrase-level semantics layer), vocatives, other discourse markers, direct speech, and clausal word order.

For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Macrosyntax Creator Guidelines.

Macrosyntax Diagram

(For more information, click "Macrosyntax Legend" below.)

Macrosyntax legend
Vocatives Vocatives are indicated by purple text.
Discourse marker Discourse markers (such as כִּי, הִנֵּה, לָכֵן) are indicated by orange text.
Macrosyntax legend - discourse scope.jpg The scope governed by the discourse marker is indicated by a dashed orange bracket connecting the discourse marker to its scope.
Macrosyntax legend - preceding discourse.jpg The preceding discourse grounding the discourse marker is indicated by a solid orange bracket encompassing the relevant clauses.
Subordinating conjunction The subordinating conjunction is indicated by teal text.
Macrosyntax legend - subordination.jpg Subordination is indicated by a solid teal bracket connecting the subordinating conjunction with the clause to which it is subordinate.
Coordinating conjunction The coordinating conjunction is indicated by blue text.
Macrosyntax legend - coordination.jpg Coordination is indicated by a solid blue line connecting the coordinating clauses.
Macrosyntax legend - asyndetic coordination.jpg Coordination without an explicit conjunction is indicated by a dashed blue line connecting the coordinated clauses.
Macrosyntax legend - marked topic.jpg Marked topic is indicated by a black dashed rounded rectangle around the marked words.
Macrosyntax legend - topic scope.jpg The scope of the activated topic is indicated by a black dashed bracket encompassing the relevant clauses.
Marked focus or thetic sentence Marked focus (if one constituent) or thetic sentences[1] are indicated by bold text.
Macrosyntax legend - frame setter.jpg Frame setters[2] are indicated by a solid gray rounded rectangle around the marked words.
[blank line] Discourse discontinuity is indicated by a blank line.
[indentation] Syntactic subordination is indicated by indentation.
Macrosyntax legend - direct speech.jpg Direct speech is indicated by a solid black rectangle surrounding all relevant clauses.
(text to elucidate the meaning of the macrosyntactic structures) Within the CBC, any text elucidating the meaning of macrosyntax is indicated in gray text inside parentheses.

If an emendation or revocalization is preferred, that emendation or revocalization will be marked in the Hebrew text of all the visuals.

Emendations/Revocalizations legend
*Emended text* Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is indicated by blue asterisks on either side of the emendation.
*Revocalized text* Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is indicated by purple asterisks on either side of the revocalization.
(Click diagram to enlarge)


Psalm 023 - Macrosyntax.jpg

Paragraph Divisions

The psalm divides into two paragraphs:

  1. vv. 1-5 - This paragraph presents the key discourse topic of the psalm (i.e., YHWH as David's shepherd), and it is characterized by instances of marked focus (cf. vv. 2-3), the presence of the subordinating marker גַּ֤ם כִּֽי "even when" (v. 4), and the only occurrence of a marked topic in Psalm 23 (cf. v. 4).
  2. v. 6 - The discourse marker אַ֤ךְ and the marked focus ט֤וֹב וָחֶ֣סֶד indicate the final paragraph. This paragraph has the only case of a coordinating marker (i.e., waw in v. 6b).

Word Order

  • v. 1 - The mention of YHWH as David's shepherd initiates the discourse, and it activates the contextual domain of shepherding.
  • vv. 2-3 - The prepositional phrases בִּנְא֣וֹת דֶּ֭שֶׁא (in green pastures) and עַל־מֵ֖י מְנֻח֣וֹת (to waters of resting places >> to water where I can rest) as well as נַפְשִׁ֥י (my life) are fronted for focus.[3] בִּנְא֣וֹת דֶּ֭שֶׁא (in green pastures) and עַל־מֵ֖י מְנֻח֣וֹת (to water where I can rest) provide the focal selection of ways in which YHWH shepherds David, namely, he leads him to food, water, and rest. The fronting of נַפְשִׁ֥י (my life) is for scalar focus as it reinforces that YHWH takes care of David's needs in a most plentiful way so that his whole life is restored.[4]
  • v. 4 - Left dislocation: Syntactically, the compound subject שִׁבְטְךָ֥ וּ֝מִשְׁעַנְתֶּ֗ךָ (your rod and your staff) is dislocated from the matrix clause and resumed in the main clause by the resumptive pronoun הֵ֣מָּה (they). The compound subject שִׁבְטְךָ֥ וּ֝מִשְׁעַנְתֶּ֗ךָ (your rod and your staff) signals the activation of this entity as the topic of the sentence (cf. BHRG §48.2.1, "Most typical [dislocated constructions] are instances where the activated referent is the primary topic of the subsequent clause"). Moreover, this topic introduces new participants; YHWH's rod and staff are personified as the agents responsible for dispensing YHWH's care, protection, and guidance.[5]
  • v. 6a - ט֤וֹב וָחֶ֣סֶד (goodness and loyalty) are fronted for completive focus. Of all of the things that could pursue David such as disaster (Prov 13:21); the angel of the Lord (Ps 35:6); sword, famine, and pestilence (Jer 29:18); and adversaries (Ps 71:10-11), it is YHWH's goodness and loyalty that pursues David.

(There are no vocatives in this psalm.)

Discourse Markers

  • v. 4a: גַּ֤ם כִּֽי ("even when") occurs only here in the Psalter (for other instantiations of גַּם כִּי in the Hebrew Bible, see Isa 1:15; Hos 8:10, 9:16; Prov 22:6; Lam 3:8; etc.). גַּם כִּי is a compound conjunction that introduces a concessive conditional sentence (the particle כִּי can occur in compound conjunctions such as גַּם כִּי [even though[6]], עַל כִּי [because[7]], אַף כִּי [indeed, really[8]). Some particles such as the כִּי can be used for both conditional and concessive clauses.[9] Moreover, concessive clauses, especially hypothetical ones, can be considered as a specific category of the conditional clause. For this reason, some כִּי-clauses are regarded as concessive by some authors, whereas others regard them as conditional. For instance, Zechariah 8:6 is considered to be conditional by Schoors, whereas JM §171b and BDB explain it as concessive.[10] Likewise, the כִּי in Psalm 23:4 is regarded as concessive by JM §171c but conditional by GKC §159bb. We render גַּם כִּי as a concessive conditional reading.[11] As Locatell has noted, the crucial point here is that the כִּי displays the characteristics of a typical conditional construction.[12] Rendering גַּם כִּי ("even though/if/when") as a concessive conditional reading "maintains the potentiality of the conditional, while adding the concessive characteristic of asserting that normally incompatible events would coincide if this potential were realized.[13] It is this potentiality that continues to distinguish it from a genuine concessive (cf. NET)."[14] In other words, "walking in a valley of darkness" and "fearing no harm" are incompatible events that will coincide if the potential of the conditional is realized. Locatell has further noted that "concessive conditional readings are constrained even more when conditional כִּי is immediately preceded by the focus particle גם."[15] Although "even if" and "even though" are plausible glosses for גַּם כִּי, if understood as hypothetical or concessive, we have chosen to render it as "even when" in order to convey the likelihood of the conditional actually happening. The alternatives maintain the possibility of the conditional, but they can too readily be understood as suggesting that the conditional (such a difficult time) is unlikely to ever happen. The particle גַּם, as is typical of its function as a focus particle, contributes a scalar implicature, though here to the concessive כִּי and, only by extension, to the whole clause. It thus maintains its independent contribution, though as modifying only the כִּי. Hence, we have represented it as part of the conjunction for simplicity's sake, rather than a discourse marker over the whole sentence, which would not accurately capture its function. The ancient versions' inclusion of καὶ, et, ברם and ܐܦ, though most naturally rendered 'also' (as an isomorphic translation of גַּם), nonetheless exhibit the independent contribution of גַּם (LXX: ἐὰν γὰρ καὶ - "for even if,"[16] Jerome Hebr.: sed et si - "but even if," Targum: ברם כד "even when,"[17] and Peshitta: ܐܦܢ - "even if"[18]).
  • v. 6: אַךְ is a focal particle that may be interpreted in two different ways:[19]
    • Option 1 (preferred): אַךְ can be treated as an asseverative particle,[20] which can be translated as "surely,"[21], "certainly,"[22] or "indeed."[23] We favored this option for two main reasons. First, surely expresses a confidence in God's goodness and loyalty that is not explicit in the alternative translation, "only." Taking into account that Ps 23 is widely regarded as a psalm of confidence/trust,[24] "surely" fits better than "only." Second, as an asseverative particle, אַךְ has a broad scope; i.e., it encompasses the whole clause. The psalmist expresses deep confidence that YHWH's goodness and loyalty will pursue him throughout life. This option is supported by the majority of modern translations (e.g., NIV, NLT, ESV, NET, etc.).
    • Option 2: אַךְ can be treated as a restrictive particle translated as "only."[25] Two main reasons support this position. First, "אַךְ is primarily a focus particle, governing one constituent ('only x')."[26] Second, this reading fits the context of Ps 23. The verb רדף ("be behind, follow after, pursue, persecute"[27]) is normally something that enemies do. However, in Ps 23 (where the psalmist experiences YHWH’s protective hospitality), the only 'enemies' that pursue the psalmist are "goodness and loyalty" ("In YHWH’s house, I am safe and sound, and only goodness and loyalty [and no real enemies] will pursue me"). Although this option is plausible, we have opted for option 1 because the scope in a restrictive אַךְ ("only") is restricted to goodness and loyalty instead of encompassing the whole clause (which would include the length of YHWH's pursuit - "all the days of the psalmist's life"). Therefore, this rendering loses some of the nuances that are present with the asseverative rendering.[28] For modern translations supporting this rendering, see CSB and YLT. Moreover, the contrast between "YHWH's goodness and loyalty" pursuing David instead of other things (such as adversaries) pursuing him is still evident in the focus-fronting of ט֤וֹב וָחֶ֣סֶד (see the word order notes below), even when אַךְ is interpreted as having scope over the whole clause, as we have preferred.

Conjunctions

  • v. 4a: See the discussion of גַּ֤ם כִּֽי above.
  • v. 4c: The כִּי clause provides the grounds of David's absence of fear; i.e., YHWH's presence (v. 4bc - "I will not fear harm because you [YHWH] are with me."[29]).
  • Coordinating lines within a verse: v. 6 (וְשִבְתִּי). v. 6b: ** for revocalization see exegetical issue The Text of Ps. 23:6b (MT: וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י).


  1. ↑ When the entire utterance is new/unexpected, it is a thetic sentence (often called "sentence focus"). See our Creator Guidelines for more information on topic and focus.
  2. ↑ Frame setters are any orientational constituent – typically, but not limited to, spatio-temporal adverbials – function to "limit the applicability of the main predication to a certain restricted domain" and "indicate the general type of information that can be given" in the clause nucleus (Krifka & Musan 2012: 31-32). In previous scholarship, they have been referred to as contextualizing constituents (see, e.g., Buth (1994), “Contextualizing Constituents as Topic, Non-Sequential Background and Dramatic Pause: Hebrew and Aramaic evidence,” in E. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Falster Jakobsen and L. Schack Rasmussen (eds.) Function and expression in Functional Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 215-231; Buth (2023), “Functional Grammar and the Pragmatics of Information Structure for Biblical Languages,” in W. A. Ross & E. Robar (eds.) Linguistic Theory and the Biblical Text. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 67-116), but this has been conflated with the function of topic. In brief: sentence topics, belonging to the clause nucleus, are the entity or event about which the clause provides a new predication; frame setters do not belong in the clause nucleus and rather provide a contextual orientation by which to understand the following clause.
  3. ↑ Cf. Lunn 2004, 302.
  4. ↑ Cf. VanGemeren 2008, 254. For other instances of scalar focus, see Ps 119:2.
  5. ↑ Cf. Craigie 2004, 207; VanGemeren 2008, 254. Cf. also Fokkelman 2003, 39, footnote 50.
  6. ↑ DCH 15. b.
  7. ↑ DCH 15. d.
  8. ↑ DCH 15. a.
  9. ↑ Cf. Schoors 1981, 271.
  10. ↑ Schoors 1981, 271.
  11. ↑ Cf. Locatell 2017, 255.
  12. ↑ Locatell 2017, 255.
  13. ↑ Cf. König 2006, 822.
  14. ↑ Locatell 2017, 255.
  15. ↑ Locatell 2017, 255.
  16. ↑ NETS.
  17. ↑ Stec 2004, 61.
  18. ↑ Taylor 2020, 81.
  19. ↑ Lunn 2006, 139.
  20. ↑ Cf. DCH 1. (3).
  21. ↑ Cf. NIV, ESV, NET, NLT; Perowne 1870, 241; Craigie 2004, 204; Ross 2011, 554; Bullock 2015, 169.
  22. ↑ GWT, NASB; Goldingay 2006, 467.
  23. ↑ Cf. Jacobson 2014, 240.
  24. ↑ Cf. VanGemeren 2008, 251; Goldingay 2006, 345; Gunkel 1998, 121, 191; Bullock 2015, 166; Perowne 1870, 238; etc.
  25. ↑ Scholars who favor this position include Alexander 1864,117; Delitzsch 1944,331; Kraus 1988, 304, 308.
  26. ↑ BHRG 40.8.
  27. ↑ TWOT 2124.
  28. ↑ Williams 1967, 391(ii), page 67.
  29. ↑ Cf. BHRG §40.29.2. (2).