Psalm 24/Notes/Grammar.v. 8.405924

v. 8 – The two alternative diagrams above represent two distinct readings of מִ֥י זֶה֮ מֶ֤לֶךְ הַכָּ֫ב֥וֹד.

The more plausible of the two is that זֶה֮ functions as a clitic following the interrogative מִ֥י, such that the clause reads "Who is the King of glory" (JPS). As formulated by BHRG: “Demonstrative pronouns combined with interrogative pronouns sometimes express the discontent of the speaker about a state of affairs in the form of a rhetorical question” (§36.2.2). Although the question could seem rhetorical (i.e., it is unlikely that the speaker did not know the answer), for the purposes of the psalm, the next clause provides the answer. More crucial, however, are the prosodic observations. Since both מִ֥י and זֶה֮ contain their own nuclear stress, זֶה֮ does not follow the definition of clitic here, which should be conjoined by a maqqef (cf. וּמִי־זֶ֣ה רֹעֶ֔ה in Jer 49:19 and מִי־זֶ֣ה הָ֭אִישׁ יְרֵ֣א יְהוָ֑ה in Ps 25:12). Further, as seen in both Jer 49:19 and Ps 25:12, this cliticized phrase is typically conjoined to the following phrase with a conjunctive accent, whereas זֶה֮ carries a tsinnor accent—a significant disjunctive. Finally, the construction is extended to מִ֤י ה֣וּא זֶה֮ מֶ֤לֶךְ הַכָּ֫ב֥וֹד in v. 10. As discussed there, it is highly unlikely that both ה֣וּא and זֶה֮ can be considered enclitics, such that the same syntactic result should hold there as it does here.

On the other hand, the demonstrative זֶה֮ has been read as an attributive in a number of modern and ancient translations: "Who is this King of glory?" (NIV). Nevertheless, the phrase מֶ֤לֶךְ הַכָּ֫ב֥וֹד is grammatically definite, whereas the demonstrative is not. Exceptions to the expected pattern are limited to 1 Kgs 14:14, Ezek 40:45 and Ezra 3:12. Garr (2022, 378) considers זֶ֤ה הַבַּ֙יִת֙ in Ezra 3:12 as cataphoric, i.e., "this one, the house," and, indeed, the phenomenon could elsewhere be considered apposition. The result is similar to our preferred reading above.