Macrosyntax

(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.
	The scope governed by the discourse marker is indicated by a dashed orange bracket connecting the discourse marker to its scope.
	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.
	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.
	Coordination is indicated by a solid blue line connecting the coordinating clauses.
	Coordination without an explicit conjunction is indicated by a dashed blue line connecting the coordinated clauses.
	Marked topic is indicated by a black dashed rounded rectangle around the marked words.
	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.
	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.
	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.

v. 1 Rhetorical questions in the b-cola that follow the attributive clauses in the a-cola could support paragraph delimitation: "the functions of rhetorical questions... and their pragmatically motivated implied meaning at several levels... can open or close a section and thus play a part in the segmentation and structuring of poetry... Rhetorical questions have more than one level of implied meaning, as they do not only reinforce presupposed information as such but often call for certain behaviour as well" (L. de Regt, Linguistic Coherence in BiblicalHebrew Texts, 18; cf. H. Magin, "An Analysis of Psalm 27," GIALens [2010]: 1-12).
v. 2b There is marked focus with הֵ֖מָּה fronted ("it is they ironically").
v. 3 The b-cola could be viewed as recursions of the rhetorical questions of the first verse. If this is the case, "in this I will be trusting" is related to "my heart will not fear". "The conditional clauses in each utterance in verse 3 serve to highlight the two lines as having a base-restatement relation... verse 2 consists of the grounds – the experience – on which David makes these conclusions in verses 1 and 3" (Magin, 2, 3).
v. 3b There is marked focus ("in this, particularly"). 'This' likely refers back to v 1, as a recursion of 1e (see note for v 3).
v. 4a There is marked (restrictive) focus ("just this one thing and nothing else"). The shift from the conditional clauses could support paragraph delimitation here.
v. 4b There is marked focus (I seek it, above all).
v. 5c בְּ֝צ֗וּר is fronted (unlike the PPs in 5a and 5b), indicating marked focus - epexegetical (on a rock, that is, he will lift me).
v. 6 attah is primarily an adverb that refers to a point in time concurrent with the speech time of an utterance, i.e. "now."... weattah is predominately a conjunctive adverb functioning as a discourse marker... nearly always in reported speech (BHRG 452). The adverb עַתָּ֨ה "expresses continuation and signifies some relationship between the former and the latter utterances" (Magin, 8). Like the NIV, we treat this similarly to reported speech and translate attah as "then" in order to indicate posteriority to the reference point and temporal concurrence with the former utterances.
v. 7 There is a clause-medial vocative (YHWH), slowing down the online processing. This may also support paragraph delimitation here, which is also signalled by the shift from 3MS to 2MS, and a group of imperatives providing verbal focus structure. This is also the dividing point between the 2 parts of the psalm.
v. 8a There is marked focus ("for you, speaking on your behalf).
v. 8 There is a clause-medial vocative (YHWH).
v. 8c There is marked focus (Your face, specifically). The vocative may function here to slow down the online processing.
v. 9c There is marked focus (my help you have been).
v. 9e There is a clause-final vocative (God of my salvation), which may be maintaining the floor for the interlocutors.
v. 10c There is marked focus (even my own father and even my own mother).
v. 10d There is marked focus (but in contrast YHWH in a unique way).
v. 11 There is a clause-medial vocative (YHWH).
v. 13 לׅׄוּלֵׅׄ֗אׅׄ provides discourse grounds for paragraph delimitation here.
v. 14 The epexegetical waw stands before a clause to clarify or specify the sense of the preceding clause... in some cases it compensates for gapping of the initial verb or as an emphatic waw" (WO'C 39.2.4.b.4 [652-653]; cf. H. A. Brongers, "Alternative Interpretationen des sogennanten Waw copulativum," ZAW 90.2 [1978]: 273-77; E. Vogt, "Zur Geschichte der hebräischen Sprache," Biblica 52.1 [1971]: 72-78; Mitchell Dahood, Hebrew-Ugaritic Lexicography XI, Biblica 54.3 [1973]: 351-66; James Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry, 51; "Yes, wait for the Lord!" Craigie, 229).

Speech Act Analysis

For Visual, click "Expand" to the right

Expand

Affect Analysis

For Visual, click "Expand" to the right

Expand

↑ 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.
↑ 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.

[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.

[1]

[2]

Psalm 27 Discourse

Macrosyntax

Speech Act Analysis

Affect Analysis