Psalm 23 Discourse

Psalm Overview

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

About the Discourse Layer

Our Discourse layer includes four analyses: macrosyntax, speech act analysis, emotional analysis, and participant analysis. (For more information, click 'Expand' to the right.)

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.

Speech Act Analysis

The Speech Act layer presents the text in terms of what it does, following the findings of Speech Act Theory. It builds on the recognition that there is more to communication than the exchange of propositions. Speech act analysis is particularly important when communicating cross-culturally, and lack of understanding can lead to serious misunderstandings, since the ways languages and cultures perform speech acts varies widely.

For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Speech Act Analysis Creator Guidelines.

Emotional Analysis

This layer explores the emotional dimension of the biblical text and seeks to uncover the clues within the text itself that are part of the communicative intent of its author. The goal of this analysis is to chart the basic emotional tone and/or progression of the psalm.

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

Participant Analysis

Participant Analysis focuses on the characters in the psalm and asks, “Who are the main participants (or characters) in this psalm, and what are they saying or doing? It is often helpful for understanding literary structure, speaker identification, etc.

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

Discourse Visuals for Psalm 23

Macrosyntax

Notes

• v. 6c: ** for revocalization see exegetical issue The Text of Ps. 23:6b (MT: וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י).

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. 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.
• 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.
• 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.

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], עַל כִּי [because], אַף כִּי [indeed, really). Some particles such as the כִּי can be used for both conditional and concessive clauses. 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. 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. As Locatell has noted, the crucial point here is that the כִּי displays the characteristics of a typical conditional construction. 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. It is this potentiality that continues to distinguish it from a genuine concessive (cf. NET)." 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." 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," Jerome Hebr.: sed et si - "but even if," Targum: ברם כד "even when," and Peshitta: ܐܦܢ - "even if").
• v. 6: אַךְ is a focal particle that may be interpreted in two different ways:
  • Option 1 (preferred): אַךְ can be treated as an asseverative particle, which can be translated as "surely,", "certainly," or "indeed." 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, "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." Two main reasons support this position. First, "אַךְ is primarily a focus particle, governing one constituent ('only x')." Second, this reading fits the context of Ps 23. The verb רדף ("be behind, follow after, pursue, persecute") 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. 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.

Coordination & Subordination

• 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.").
• Coordinating lines within a verse: v. 6 (וְשִבְתִּי). v. 6b: ** for revocalization see exegetical issue The Text of Ps. 23:6b (MT: וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י).

Speech Act Analysis

Summary Visual

Notes

Psalm 23 is widely regarded as a psalm of confidence/trust which is in harmony with the global speech act. By depicting YHWH as his shepherd and host, the psalmist demonstrate his confidence in YHWH's provision, protection, and presence.

Speech Act Chart

Notes

• v. 3b: See The Text and Meaning of Ps. 23:3b for more details on the meaning of בְמַעְגְּלֵי־צֶדֶק ("paths of righteousness").
• v. 5a: For more information on the custom of a host providing protection to his guest, you may confer with Briggs and Briggs 1906–1907, 210.
• v. 6a: For the use of the verb "to pursue" with its typical sense of causing harm, you may confer Pss 7:1; 18:37; 69:26; 71:11; etc.
• v. 6c: ** for revocalization see exegetical issue The Text of Ps. 23:6b (MT: וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י).
• "To dwell in YHWH's house" is "a figure for living in YHWH's presence."

Emotional Analysis

Summary visual

Emotional Analysis Chart

Notes

• v. 6c: ** for revocalization see exegetical issue The Text of Ps. 23:6b (MT: וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י).
• Psalm 23 communicates the psalmist's steadfast confidence in YHWH's presence, provision, and protection.

Participant analysis

There are 3 participants/characters in Psalm 23:

• David (the psalmist): Psalm 23 is traditionally attributed to David, and he is named as the author in the superscription.
• YHWH: is depicted as David's shepherd and host who leads, protects, and provides for David's needs.
• YHWH's rod and staff are regarded as participants here because they are the subject of the verb "comfort" in v. 4, i.e., they are personified as the agents responsible for dispensing YHWH's care, protection, and guidance.
• YHWH's goodness and loyalty are regarded as participants here because they are the subject of the verb "pursue" in v. 6, i.e., they are personified as David's pursuers (cf. Venn diagram for רדף "to pursue").
• Harm (v. 4) and adversaries (v. 5) are not active participants in this psalm for they do not function as agentive subjects of a verb. Nevertheless, we have included them in the participant list because they play a relational role in the psalm.
  • It is not clear if the adversaries have any connection with the harm mentioned in v. 4. The harm could be inflicted by adversaries, but it could also be an unrelated misfortune or calamity. It is clear though that YHWH's presence with David instills him with confidence and drives out fear of external threats. Therefore, David expresses to YHWH that he is not afraid of danger because, "You are with me."
  • Meanwhile, the adversaries are David's opponents in whose presence YHWH prepares a feast for David (cf. v. 5). Although they opposed David, they seem to represent no threat to him for David has guest-right with Yahweh. "In accordance with Oriental customs, the host is obliged to protect his guest from all enemies, at all costs." Additionally, "There may be a tone of derision, as the psalmist taunts his enemies by reminding them that they cannot harm him."

Participant Relations Diagram

The relationships among the participants may be abstracted and summarized as follows:

Participant Analysis Table

Notes

v. 6c: ** for revocalization see exegetical issue The Text of Ps. 23:6b (MT: וְשַׁבְתִּ֥י).

vv. 1-3, 6: YHWH as the addressee?

• YHWH is directly addressee in vv. 4-5.
• The addressee for vv. 1-3, 6 is unspecified. Since YHWH is clearly the addressee in vv. 4-5, he is probably the addressee of vv. 1-3, 6, even though spoken of in the third person. Psalm 23 makes no reference to a potential addressee outside of YHWH himself. The portions which do not directly address YHWH (vv. 1-3, 6) are devoid of any 3rd or 1st person plural suffixes, vocatives, or references to a congregation. For instance, Ps 100:3 also employs the shepherd metaphor, but the psalmist includes himself among the people whom he is addressing (אֲנַ֑חְנוּ עַ֝מֹּ֗ו וְצֹ֣אן מַרְעִיתֹֽו - "we are his people and the sheep of his pasture"). In Ps 23:1, on the other hand, the psalmist refers only to himself (יְהוָ֥ה רֹ֝עִ֗י - "YHWH is my shepherd"). Therefore, the psalmist does not appear to be directly addressing any other person or group.

Moreover, the fact that YHWH is talked about in the third person should not exclude the possibility that he is the addressee of Ps 23. Alternating speech to and about a person is not infrequent in the psalms, and they may serve to enhance dramatic effect. For instance, the superscription of Ps 18 explicitly names YHWH as the direct addressee, yet portions of the psalm refer to him in the third person (vv. 3-14, 16-24, 28b, 29b-34, 46-48a, 50). Similarly, Ps 67 opens with a series of third-person references to YHWH (e.g., vv. 1-2) before beginning to alternate between second- and third-person references to YHWH. Nevertheless, YHWH remains the addressee throughout.

In Ps. 23, the psalmist addresses YHWH in the second person when he mentions the valley of darkness and his adversaries. This shift in address may serve the purpose of intensifying the psalmist's intimacy with YHWH in spite of trouble and danger.

Participant Distribution Table

The table below demonstrates the participant distribution throughout Psalm 23. The number "1" indicates that the participant speaks in first person. The number "2" indicates that the participant is addressed directly. The number "3" indicates that the participant is spoken of in third person.

Notes

The psalm begins and ends with YHWH and David. In the middle of the psalm, we have the mention of "harm" (v. 4) and "adversaries" (v. 5). Interestingly, they are mentioned precisely at the point where YHWH is the closest to the psalmist (i.e., where David addresses YHWH directly).

Bibliography

Alexander, Joseph Addison. 1864. Commentary on Psalms. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications.

Bratcher, Robert G., and William D. Reyburn. 1991. A Translator's Handbook on the Book of Psalms. New York: UBS Handbook Series.

Briggs, Charles Augustus, and Emilie Grace Briggs. 1906. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Book of Psalms, Vol. I. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons.

Bullock, C. Hassell. 2015. Psalms. Volume 1: Psalms 1-72. Teach the Text Commentary Series. Edited by Mark Strauss and John Walton. Grand Rapids: BakerBooks.

Buttenwieser, Moses. 1969. The Psalms: Chronologically Treated with A New Translation. New York: KTAV Publishing House, INC.

Craigie, Peter C. 2004. Word Biblical Commentary: Psalms 1–50. 2nd ed. Vol. 19. Nashville: Nelson Reference & Electronic.

Delitzsch, Franz Julius. 1883. A Commentary on the Psalms. New York: Funk and Wagnalls.

Fokkelman, J. P. 2000. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Hermeneutics and Structural Analysis. Studia Semitica Neerlandica. Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.

Goldingay, John. 2006. Psalms: Psalms 1-41. Vol. 1. BCOT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Gunkel, Herman. 1998. An Introduction to the Psalms: The Genres of the Religious Lyric of Israel. Translated by James D. Nogalski. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press.

Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. 1993. Die Psalmen I: Psalm 1–50. Neue Echter Bibel. Würzburg: Echter.

Jacobson, Rolf A. 2014. “Psalm 23: You Are with Me.” Pages 238-246 in The Book of Psalms. Edited by Nancy L. DeClaissé-Walford, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth Laneel Tanner. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans.

König, Ekkehard. 2006. "Concessive Clauses." In Brown, K. (ed). The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. 2nd Ed. Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 819-824.

Kraus, Hans-Joachim. 1988. Psalms 1–59. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Locatell, Christian S. 2017. "Grammatical Polysemy in the Hebrew Bible: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach to כי." Stellenbosch University.

Lunn, Nicholas P. 2006. Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster.

Malone, Andrew S. 2009. "God the Illeist: Third-Person Self-References and Trinitarian Hints in the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 52, pp. 499-518.

Perowne, J. J. Stewart. 1870. The Book of Psalms: A New Translation with Introductions and Notes, Explanatory and Critical. Vol. I. London: Bell and Daldy.

Ross, Allen P. 2011. A Commentary on the Psalms 1-41. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Kregel.

Schaefer, Konrad. 2001. Psalms. Berit Olam Studies in Hebrew Narrative and Poetry. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press.

Schoors, A. 1981. "The Particle כי." Oudtestamentische Studiën. Leiden: E. J. Brill. pp. 240-276.

VanGemeren, Willem. 2008. Psalms: The Expositor's Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Wilson, Gerald H. 2002. The NIV Application Commentary: Psalms. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.