About the Grammar Layer

The grammar layer visually represents the grammar and syntax of each clause. It also displays alternative interpretations of the grammar. (For more information, click "Expand" to the right.)

The grammatical diagram provides a way to visualise how different parts of a sentence work together. It represents the “surface-level” grammar, or morphosyntax, of a sentence. Morphosyntax includes both the form of words (morphology) and their placement in the sentence (syntax). This approach to visualising the text, based on the Reed-Kellogg diagramming method, places the grammatical subject in one slot, the verb in another slot, and modifiers and connectives in other slots.

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

Grammar Visuals for Psalm 31

The grammar layer visually represents the grammar and syntax of each clause. It also displays alternative interpretations of the grammar. (For more information, click "Grammar Legend" below.)

Visualization	Description
	The clause is represented by a horizontal line with a vertical line crossing through it, separating the subject and the verb.
	The object is indicated by a vertical line that does not cross the horizontal line of the clause. Infinitives and participles may also have objects. If the direct object marker (d.o.m.) is present in the text, it appears in the diagram immediately before the object. If the grammar includes a secondary object, the secondary object will appear after the object, separated by another vertical line that does not cross the horizontal line of the clause.
	The subject complement follows the verb (often omitted in Hebrew) separated with a line leaning toward the right. It can be a noun, a whole prepositional phrase or an adjective. The later two appear modifying the complement slot.
	When a noun further describes or renames the object, it is an object complement. The object complement follows the object separated by a line leaning toward the right.
	In a construct chain, the noun in the absolute form modifies the noun in the construct form.
	Participles are indicated in whatever position in the clause they are in with a curved line before the participle. Participles can occur as nominal, where they take the place of a noun, predicate, where they take the place of a verb, or attributive, where they modify a noun or a verb similar to adjectives or adverbs.
	Infinitives are indicated by two parallel lines before the infinitive that cross the horizontal line. Infinitive constructs can appear as the verb in an embedded clause. Infinitive absolutes typically appear as an adverbial.
	The subject of the infinitive often appears in construct to it. In this situation, the infinitive and subject are diagrammed as a construct chain.
	The object of the infinitive is indicated by a vertical line that does not cross the horizontal line of the infinitival clause.
	Modifiers are represented by a solid diagonal line from the word they modify. They can attach to verbs, adjectives, or nouns. If modifying a verb or adjective, it is an adverb, but if modifying a noun, it is an adjective, a quantifier, or a definite article. If an adverb is modifying a modifier, it is connected to the modifier by a small dashed horizontal line.
	Adverbials are indicated by a dashed diagonal line extending to a horizontal line. These are nouns or infinitives that function adverbially (modifying either a verb or a participle), but are not connected by a preposition.
	Prepositional phrases are indicated by a solid diagonal line extending to a horizontal line. The preposition is to the left of the diagonal line and the dependent of the preposition is on the horizontal line. They can modify verbs (adverbial) or nouns (adjectival).
	Embedded clauses are indicated by a "stand" that looks like an upside-down Y. The stand rests in the grammatical position that the clause fulfills. Extending from the top of the stand is a horizontal line for the clause. If introduced by a complementizer, for example כִּי, the complementizer appears before the stand. Embedded clauses can stand in the place of any noun.
	When clauses are joined by a conjunction, they are compound clauses. These clauses are connected by a vertical dotted line. The conjunction is placed next to the dotted line.
	Within a clause, if two or more parts of speech are compound, these are represented by angled lines reaching to the two compound elements connected by a solid vertical line. If a conjunction is used, the conjunction appears to the left of the vertical line. Almost all parts of speech can be compound.
	Subordinate clauses are indicated by a dashed line coming from the line dividing the subject from the predicate in the independent clause and leading to the horizontal line of the subordinate clause. The subordinating conjunction appears next to the dashed line.
	Relative clauses also have a dashed line, but the line connects the antecedent to the horizontal line of the relative clause. The relative particle appears next to the dashed line.
	Sentence fragments are represented by a horizontal line with no vertical lines. They are most frequently used in superscriptions to psalms. They are visually similar to discourse particles and vocatives, but most often consist of a noun phrase (that does not refer to a person or people group) or a prepositional phrase.
	In the body of the psalm, a horizontal line by itself (with no modifiers or vertical lines) can indicate either a discourse particle or a vocative (if the word is a noun referring to a person or people group). A discourse particle is a conjunction or particle that functions at the discourse level, not at the grammatical level. Vocatives can appear either before or after the clause addressed to them, depending on the word order of the Hebrew.
	Apposition is indicated by an equal sign equating the two noun phrases. This can occur with a noun in any function in a sentence.

Hebrew text colors
Default preferred text	The default preferred reading is represented by a black line. The text of the MT is represented in bold black text.
Dispreferred reading	The dispreferred reading is an alternative interpretation of the grammar, represented by a pink line. The text of the MT is represented in bold pink text, while emendations and revocalizations retain their corresponding colors (see below).
Emended text	Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is represented by bold blue text, whether that reading is preferred or dispreferred.
Revocalized text	Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is represented by bold purple text, whether that reading is preferred or dispreferred.
(Supplied elided element)	Any element that is elided in the Hebrew text is represented by bold gray text in parentheses.
( )	The position of a non-supplied elided element is represented by empty black parentheses. For example, this would be used in the place of the noun when an adjective functions substantivally or in the place of the antecedent when a relative clause has an implied antecedent.

Gloss text colors
Gloss used in the CBC	The gloss used in the Close-but-Clear translation is represented by bold blue text.
Literal gloss >> derived meaning	A gloss that shows the more literal meaning as well as the derived figurative meaning is represented in blue text with arrows pointing towards the more figurative meaning. The gloss used in the CBC will be bolded.
Supplied elided element	The gloss for a supplied elided element is represented in bold gray text.

v. 1

See Lamnaṣṣēaḥ for a discussion of לַמְנַצֵּחַ.
See Ledavid for a discussion of לְדָוִד.
The LXX adds ἐκστάσεως ("alarm") after לְדָוִד ("by David"). This variant is not attested in any of the other ancient textual witnesses and none of the modern translations adopt it. The same word appears in v. 23 (ἐν τῇ ἐκστάσει ["in my alarm"]) reflecting the Hebrew phrase: בחפזי. The term's presence in v. 1 is most likely influenced by its appearance toward the end of the psalm (Craigie 2004, 257; Briggs 1906, 264).

v. 2

Most modern translations translate לְעוֹלָם ("for forever") as an adverb (e.g., NRSV: do not let me "ever" be put to shame; cf. NIV, ESV, NET, etc.). While this is an acceptable way to render the phrase idiomatically, it does not reflect the actual syntax of the verse. As deClaissé-Walford notes, "...intensive verbal forms are not used here. Instead, it is the preposition, leʿôlām, indicating a period of time 'until forever'" (deClaissé-Walford 2014, 301). Some translations don't render the phrase at all (NLT, CEV, HFA). The EÜ 2016 translates the prepositional phrase (Lass mich nicht zuschanden werden in Ewigkeit ["Let me not be put to shame forever"]).
Ps 31:1-4 are remarkably similar to Ps 71:1-3. Some of the textual variants in the first few verses are likely influenced by the similarities between the two psalms. Here in v. 2, the LXX adds καὶ ἐξελοῦ με ("and deliver me") which reflects והצילני (cf. Ps 71:2). Peter Craigie proposes two possible reasons for the variant: "the addition in G represents the accidental addition of (familiar) formulaic language, or presupposes a text with הצילני, a dittography based on v 3b" (Craigie 2004, 257). Additionally, it should be noted that the LXX of Ps 31:2 is contested with some witnesses following the MT.

v. 3

Instead of הַצִּילֵנִי ("rescue me", the Peshitta has ˁny, which means "to answer me." This verb is not attested in any other ancient manuscript and no modern translation adopts it. The verb would make sense in this context. It is a natural extension of the psalmist's request that YHWH listen (הַטֵּה) to him. Additionally, if the emendation were adopted, the verse would be similar to Pss 69:18 and 102:3 (e.g., עֲנֵנִי ["answer me"] follows מהר ["to hasten"]). However, since the proposed emendation lacks substantial support in the ancient manuscripts and the attested verb makes sense in this verse, the variant should not be adopted.
Peter Craigie emends the text on the basis of two Hebrew manuscripts that have the divine name יהוה (“YHWH”) as a vocative after הַצִּילֵנִי ("rescue me") (Craigie 2004, 258). While it is possible that the word was omitted due to haplography, the textual evidence is insufficient to warrant adding the word back to the text.
The Hexaplaric reading of the Quinta (ε ́) reads κατοικητήριον (= מעון >> "dwelling" ) where the MT has מָעוֹז ("refuge"). The difference between the terms is only one letter which could be mistaken for each other. Additionally, the terms are close in meaning. While Psalm 71:3 reads לְצ֥וּר מָעֹ֡ון ("a rock of dwelling"), which may support the variant reading, some ancient manuscripts support reading Ps 71:3 as לְֽצוּר־מָ֭עֹוז ("a rock of refuge"). Consequently, that verse does not provide any solid insights for making a decision. Ultimately, the similarity of the terms, the easy explanation for the difference, and the widespread manuscript support for מָעוֹז, suggest the MT reading should be retained.
The parallel text in Ps 71:3 reads: לָבֹ֗וא תָּמִ֗יד צִוִּ֥יתָ ("to come continually you have commanded") instead of לְבֵית מְצוּדוֹת. However, the LXX of Ps 71:3 (εἰς τόπον ὀχυρὸν ["a strong place") reflects a vorlage similar to the Hebrew text of Ps 31:3 (לְבֵ֥ית מְצוּדֹ֗ות ["a fortress"]), which suggests the MT of Ps 71:3 was likely a late corruption in the text.

v. 4

There are two main options for how one should understand the grammatical function of כִּי in this passage: as (1) a conjunction or (2) an adverb.
- Conjunction
  - If כִּי functions as a conjunction, there are two ways of explaining its role in the passage.
    - In some situations, כִּי marks "the motivation given by speakers to explain something they have said. The causal relation is thus not due to natural laws but is due to the speaker’s own reasoning. כִּי can usually also be translated 'for'." (cf. ESV; NIV; NET; JPS 1984; EÜ; ELB; LUT; ZB; NBS; NVS; NVI; BTX; BHRG 1999, 302).
    - In other situations, כִּי refers back to a whole series of statements (i.e., the totality of v. 3). In those situations, translations often leave כִּי untranslated. (cf. NLT; CEV; GNT; REB; NJB; GNB; RVR95; DHH; BHRG 1999, §40.9.2.2).
- Clausal Adverb (Preferred)
  - When כִּי functions as an adverb, it can confirm "something the speaker has already said, an assumption or conviction (mostly in a sworn oath). In such instances it may be translated indeed, truly or yes" (BHRG 1999, §40.9.2.2) This is the preferred understanding of כִּי in this passage because the psalmist is affirming his request, which is based on confidence, that YHWH be his refuge in the previous verse (cf. NRSV; HFA; NGU; BDS; PDV; NFS; S21).
Some Hebrew MSS and the Peshitta add YHWH after שִׁ֝מְךָ֗ ("your name"). It's possible this was omitted by a scribe (cf., Craigie 2004, 258). However, the paucity of evidence and the insignificance of the variance to the meaning of the passage renders the variant inconsequential.
The Peshitta conflates the final verbs of this verse, תַּֽנְחֵ֥נִי וּֽתְנַהֲלֵֽנִי, into a single, alternative verb (possibly: תנחמני). The absence of the second verb in the Peshitta is either the result of an accidental omission by the scribe or was not present in the text he was copying. The alternative verb תנחמני means 'to comfort me' and is similar enough to תְנַהֲלֵֽנִי ("guide me") to suggest a scribal error (cf., Craigie 2004, 258; Taylor 2020, 105).

v. 5

As Joüon and Muraoka note, זוּ is seldom used as a demonstrative. Instead, it commonly marks a relative clause, especially in poetry (cf. Pss. 9.16; 10.2; 31.5; 32.8; 68.29; 143.8; Ex 15.13; Is 42.24; 43.21) (JM §145c). Interestingly, זוּ transitioned from a demonstrative to a relative marker over time as is evidenced in its usage in the HB. Ancient versions of Psalm 31:5 seem to have been aware of this and so make use of both the demonstrative and relative sense of the term. The LXX reads: ἐκ παγίδος ταύτης, ἧς ("out of this trap, which"). Likewise, the Vulgate has de laqueo hoc quem ("from this trap which") (Atkinson "Demonstratives" in OGBH, forthcoming).
There are two options for כִּי:
- Subordinate Conjunction (Preferred)
  - This use of כִּי is best understood as a subordinate conjunction. The psalmist explains the reason he requests that YHWH saves him from the trap. As Van der Merwe notes, כִּי marks "the motivation given by speakers to explain something they have said. The causal relation is thus not due to natural laws but is due to the speaker’s own reasoning. כִּי can usually also be translated for." (BHRG §40.9.2.2) (cf. ESV; NIV; NET; JPS 1984; EÜ; ELB; LUT; ZB; NBS; NVS; NVI; BTX).
- Clausal Adverb
  - When כִּי functions as an adverb, it can confirm "something the speaker has already said, an assumption or conviction (mostly in a sworn oath). In such instances it may be translated indeed, truly or yes" (BHRG §40.9.2.2). This is the preferred understanding of כִּי in this passage because the psalmist is affirming his request, which is based on confidence, that YHWH be his refuge in the previous verse.(cf. NRSV; HFA; NGU; BDS; PDV; NFS; S21).

v. 6

v. 7

Most modern translations follow the MT (שָׂנֵ֗אתִי) and render the first verb in this verse as "I hate." However, there is substantial textual support from ancient manuscripts (LXX, Peshitta, Vulgate, De-Rossi, IV, 23) for reading the verb as a second masculine singular verb (שָׂנֵ֗אתָ = "you hate"). As Bratcher and Reyburn note, "Either wording can be defended; in favor of 'You hate' is the fact that but I trust the Lord in line b contrasts the psalmist with those who pay regard to vain idols. If 'I hate' is chosen, it may be better to begin line b with "and" and not but: 'and I trust in you' (the psalmist’s hatred for idolaters complementing his trust in Yahweh)." (Bratcher and Reyburn 1991, 292; cf., Craigie 2004, 258). The topic shift indicated by the marked word order in 31:7b also suggests the verb in 31:7a was likely a second masculine singular form. Finally, the addition of a yod to a word as a vowel is more common than the letter's omission in the transmission process. See The Text of Psalm 31:7.

v. 8

אֲשֶׁר often introduces a relative clause. However, it can also function as a subordinating conjunction providing the reason for a preceding statement (cf. 1 Sam 30:10; Gen 30:18; 34:13; Jos 4:23; 1 Kgs 15:5; Qoh 4:9; 8:11). Many of the Greek witnesses (LXX, Symmachus, Origen, Quinta) use ὅτι ("because") (HALOT, 99).
Aquila, Symmachus, Quinta, and Sexta reflect the MT with ἔγνως τὰς θλίψεις ("you know affliction"). However, the various manuscripts of the LXX all preserve a different reading of the text: ἔσωσας ἐκ τῶν ἀναγκῶν= הוֹשַׁעְתָּ מִצּ׳ ("you saved me from distress") instead of יָדַעְתָּ בְּצָרוֹת ("you knew distress"). While both readings are possible, the LXX likely preserves the better reading. The shift from "saving" (הוֹשַׁעְתָּ) to "knowing" (יָדַעְתָּ) may be an example of harmonization, because the word pair of "seeing" (רָאִיתָ) and "knowing" (יָדַעְתָּ) occurs frequently in the OT (41x; cf. Pss 31:12; 74:9; 138:6). While the word pair "seeing" (רָאִיתָ) and "saving" (הוֹשַׁעְתָּ) only occurs twice (cf., Judg 12:3; 1 Sam 9:16), it makes excellent sense in this context for three reasons. First, the psalmist appears to be reflecting on a previous time YHWH saved him from a desperate situation (vv. 8-9). Second, the psalmist's verb would help form a logical sequence of events in v. 8: YHWH saw the psalmist's distress, saved him from it, and then set him in a broad place. Finally, in v. 17, the psalmist asks YHWH to be saved (הֹ֖ושִׁיעֵ֣נִי) by YHWH's faithfulness (בְחַסְדֶּֽךָ). If the emendation is adopted, the correspondence between these parts of the psalm is even stronger.

v. 9

v. 10

Modern translations all render כִּי צַר־לִי as "I am in distress." This translation alters the emphasis of the Hebrew. As deClaissé-Walford notes, "the distress is the main noun with lî as the dependent preposition" (deClaissé-Walford 2014, 301). A better translation would be "because of my distress." This recognizes that לִי indicates the psalmist's "ownership" of the distress.
Most English translations identify עֵינִי ("my eye") as the subject of עָשְׁשָׁה ("waste away") (see the alternative diagram). While this is an acceptable understanding of the grammar, it forces the translator to assume an elided verb for the following terms (נַפְשִׁי וּבִטְנִי ["my throat and my belly"]) or to translate the rest of the verse idiomatically. As Waltke & O'Connor note, however, "the wāw can be attached to all of the nouns in a series or simply the last in the series" (IBHS 39.2). Additionally, as deClaissé-Walford notes, "The singular verb is not uncommon with multiple subjects if they are related, especially since the person is considered a unified whole without the division of body and soul" (deClaissé-Walford 2014, 301). Consequently, translations that recognize these three terms as a list of items functioning as the subject of the verb are preferred (cf. EU, ELB, NBS, NVS, BDS, S21, NVI, DHH, BTX IV).

v. 11

The כִּי in 31:11 can be understood as either a conjunction or an adverb.
- Conjunction
  - If it functions as a conjunction, it provides a further explanation (i.e., v. 11) for the situation described in 10b. The psalmist is wasting away because his life and years are ending with a sigh and grief. In that case, כִּי marks "the motivation given by speakers to explain something they have said. The causal relation is thus not due to natural laws but is due to the speaker’s own reasoning. כִּי can usually also be translated for." (BHRG §40.9.2.2) (cf. NRSV, ESV, NET, NJB, EU, LUT).
  - In other situations, כִּי refers back to a whole series of statements (i.e., the totality of v. 10b). In those situations, translations often leave כִּי untranslated (BHRG §40.9.2.2) (cf. NIV, NLT, CEV, GNT, REB, JPS 1984, ELB, GNB, HFA, NGB, ZU, NBS, NVS, BDS, PDV, NFS, S21, RVR, BTS, DHH).
- Adverb (Preferred)
  - When כִּי functions as an adverb, it can confirm "something the speaker has already said, an assumption or conviction (mostly in a sworn oath). In such instances it may be translated indeed, truly or yes." This is the preferred understanding of כִּי in this passage because the psalmist is further affirming the negative events in his life (BHRG §40.9.2.2)(cf. NRSV; HFA; NGU; BDS; PDV; NFS; S21).
Some modern translations (NRSV; GNT; REB; NJB; GNB; DHH) follow the LXX (ἐν πτωχείᾳ = "in poverty") and Peshitta (ܒܡܣܟܢܘܬܐ = "in poverty") instead of the MT (בַּעֲוֺנִי "because of my iniquity"). The variant evidenced by the LXX and Peshitta can be explained by the similarity between עֳנִי ("poverty") and , עֲוֺנִי ("my iniquity") (cf., Bratcher and Reyburn 1991, 294; Taylor 2020, 107). The two words are separated by one consonant and a different vocalization. However, since the vav is sometimes used as a vowel in texts without the vowel pointing both readings are plausible. Since the differences are so slight, the translation of this word should consider the context closely. Verses 10-11 have a unique poetic structure in Psalm 31. The psalmist describes his terrible plight with a series of reasons marked with the same construction: bet plus noun. The first of these blames the psalmist's situation on his anger (see lexical discussion). Consequently, while much of the psalm focuses on the psalmist's enemies, in vv. 10-11 the psalmist ascribes partial blame for his situation to his anger. Set within this context, the MT's reading (בַּעֲוֺנִי) makes sense. Ultimately, both readings are plausible and provide a coherent reading of the psalm. In the absence of any decisive evidence, retaining the MT is the option preferred here. However, it would be equally acceptable to emend the text.

v. 12

The BHS offers several possible conjectural emendations for this verse (מָגוֹר ["horror"], מָדוֹן ["strive"], מָנוֹד ["shaking the head"], or מֹרָא ["soiled"] ). Those who adopt this suggestion argue that מְאֹד does not make sense in this verse because it is an incomplete thought (cf. NRSV, NLT, NET, REB, NJB, LUT, NBS, NVS, BDS). The Peshitta (ܚܣܕܐ "dread") provides some evidence for מָגוֹר. A number of LXX manuscripts omit the term entirely (Symmachus, Aquila, Quinta, Sexta, Θ). מְאֹד does make sense in this verse, however. As Waltke notes, "meʾōḏ also expresses degree as above." Thus, it is best to supply the elided verb and complement and treat מְאֹד as an adjective. (IBHS 11.2.12.c; deClaissé-Walford 2014, 301). See The Text and Meaning of Ps 31:12 for a full discussion of this issue.
The prepositional phrase בַּחוּץ could refer to the location of those who see the psalmist ("they [while being in the street] see me") or the location of the psalmist himself ("they see me [in a state of my being] in the street"). In reality, both the psalmist and those who see him would be "in the street." The simplest translation, therefore, is to refer to the psalmist physically being in the street and allow the context to imply that those seeing the psalmist are also in the street.

v. 13

v. 14

There are two options for how to translate the phrase דִּבַּ֥ת רַבִּים֮:
- "the many whispers"
  - NLT and BDS translate this phrase as "many whispers." This translation understands רַבִּים as an adjective.
- "the whispers of many" (Preferred)
  - However, it is better to follow the majority of translations and take the phrase as a construct chain. The 3mp suffix on the infinitive construct (בְּהִוָּסְדָם "when they conspired") seems to refer to people and not to an abundance of rumors. Consequently, it seems that the psalmist has a large number of enemies in mind. While this would equate to many whispers, that is not what is intended by the phrase.
There are two options for how to translate the phrase מָג֪וֹר מִסָּ֫בִ֥יב:
- As speech of the many who whisper (NIV, CEV, NVI, DHH)
  - The phrase can represent a quotation of the whisperer's speech. This is similar to the second option, because the phrase remains a nominal clause, but it is understood as speech. If this phrase were direct speech, one would expect a second person suffix. "Terror is all around you!" As it stands in the text, the speech does not make much sense.
- An independent nominal clause (NRSV, ESV, NLT, NET, GNT, JPS, ELB, GNB, HFA, LUT, NGU, ZB, NBS, BDS, PDV, NFS, S21, RVR95, BTX)
  - This is by far the most common translation of the phrase. It is the preferred reading. It does not require one to interpret the phrase as the content of the speech. Instead, it functions as a parenthetical statement about the psalmist's situation (i.e., he is in a terrifying situation).

v. 15

v. 16

v. 17

v. 18

Several ancient versions (LXX, Peshitta, Vulgate) offer a different reading in this verse. The LXX reads καὶ καταχθείησαν ("and may they be brought down"), and the Peshitta has ܘܢܚܬܘܢ ("may they go down"). Respectively, these reflect passive or active jussive forms of the verb ירד instead of יִדְּמ֥וּ. The REB, NJB, and NBS adopt this variant in their translations. The Vulgate provides evidence for both readings. Jerome's translation from the Greek text follows the LXX (et deducantur “may they be brought down”). However, the translation from the Hebrew reflects a Vorlage similar to the MT (taceant “let them be silent”). The Targum conflates the two readings with ישתקון ויחתון ("may they be silent and go down"), a translation adopted by some modern translations (cf., ESV, NRSV). With evidence for both readings and the feasibility of graphic confusion in either direction, context is key to determining which reading should be preferred. The idea of "going down to Sheol" is common in the Old Testament (Gen 37:35; 42:38; 44:29; Numb 16:30, 33; 1 Sam 2:6; 1 Kgs 2:6, 9; Isa 5:14; 14:11, 15; Ezek 31:15-17; 32:21, 27; Pss 55:16; Job 7:9; 17:16; Prov 1:12; 5:5; 7:27). Since the phrase is so common, it is possible that a scribe harmonized Ps 31:18 with this idiom. The desire to see his enemies go to Sheol in silence makes sense in the context of the psalm. According to v. 14, the psalmist hears the slanderous whispers of his enemies. Additionally, in the following verse, the psalmist requests that lying lips be unable to speak (v. 19).

In support of the MT reading, see a similar use of the following terms: דמם and רָשָׁע appear together in 1 Sam 2:9 and Ps 31:18.

v. 19

v. 20

There are two ways to understand the grammar of Ps 19:20.
- אֲשֶׁר introducing a compound subordinate clause (cf. NRSV, ESV, NIV, JPS, ELB, LUT, ZB, NBS, NVS, BDS, RVR, BTX).
  - This the preferred understanding of the grammar. God's "goodness" is the implied direct object of both verbs (פָּעַלְתָּ "you perform" and צָפַנְתָּ "you store up"). Two pieces of evidence support this reading of the grammar. First, the second verb does not have an explicit direct object. It appears to be related to טוּבְךָ ("your goodness"). Second, the structure of the verse suggests both verbs are related to טוּבְךָ (i.e., both verbs are followed by a lamed preposition attached to a substantive).
- אֲשֶׁר introducing one subordinate clause with an independent clause after (NLT, NET, GNT, EU, NGU, PDV, NFS).
  - This is a plausible understanding of the grammar. The second clause is more developed. Additionally, the maqqeph only connects the relative particle to the first verb. However, since the direct object is not supplied for this verb this translation is not preferred.

v. 21

v. 22

Several ancient Hebrew MSS, the Peshitta, and Symmachus have אשׁר instead of כי. The emendation is unnecessary, however. כי can mark subordination just as אשׁר. YHWH is blessed in the psalmist's mind because of his wondrous actions. Both phrases (the MT and the variant) are attested in other Old Testament texts:

בָּרוּךְ יְהוָה כִּי appears here and in Psalm 28:26. בָּר֣וּךְ יְהוָ֔ה אֲ֠שֶׁר occurs 5 times (Exod 18;10; 1 Sam 25:39; 1 Kgs 8:56; Ruth 4:14; Ps 124:6 [שׁ]; cf. IBHS 38.3.c; Craigie 2004, 257).

The BHS offers several alternative proposals for understanding the end of this verse. The MT has בְּעִ֣יר מָצֹֽור ("in a besieged city") and all of the ancient translations follow the MT (LXX ἐν πόλει περιοχῆς ["in a city under siege"]; Targum: בקרתא כריכתא [in the fortified city]; Jerome (iuxta Hebr.): in citate munita [in a fortified city]; Peshitta: ܒܩܪܝܬܐ ܥܫܝܢܬܐ ["in the strong city"]). The vast majority of modern translations follow the ancient versions. Some modern translations adopt an alternative reading: "a time of trouble"(בְּעֵת מָצוֹק) (cf. REB, DHH, GNT). The rationale for adopting the proposed variant would rely on contextual evidence. They would argue that the "city" imagery doesn't make sense in this context. As Barthélemy notes, however, the image parallels several other Old Testament passages (2 Chr 8:5; Pss 60:11; 108:11). Therefore, retaining the MT reading is the preferred option (Barthélemy 2005, 179-180). For a fuller discussion of this issue, see The Text and Meaning of Ps 31:22.

v. 23

The exact reading of the text is unclear. There are three options:
- Retain the reading in the MT (נִגְרַזְתִּי "to be cut off").
- Some Hebrew manuscripts read נגזרתי ("to be cut off"). The ז and ר would be easily inverted by a scribe (cf. Lam 3:54). (Preferred)
- Other manuscripts have the word נגרשׁתי ("to be driven away" cf. Jon 2:5). In addition to the similarities to Jonah 2:5, the argument in favor of this reading is contextual. It makes more sense to be driven away from someone's sight than to be cut off from it. However, the contextual argument is not that strong (cf. Craigie 2004, 257; Barthélemy 2005, 180-184).

The meaning of the verse is not dramatically altered by either the spelling issue or the alternative word. The preferred reading is נגזרתי due to metathesis (i.e., the reversal of two letters).

v. 24

In modern English translations, the prepositional phrase עַל־יֶתֶר describes the abundant nature of YHWH's retribution against people who act pridefully. In contrast, according to the LXX (and all the Hexaplaric readings), the phrase modifies עֹשֵׂה גַאֲוָה ("those who act pridefully"). The Targum provides a different, dispreferred reading altogether (על דורבני = "the leaders"), and the Peshitta omits the phrase entirely. While both the LXX and the MT readings are possible, the context suggests the phrase is related to the nature of YHWH's retribution against those who act pridefully (i.e., MT). In v. 20, the psalmist has declared that YHWH's goodness is abundant. Nowhere in the psalm, does he describe his enemies as those who do evil excessively.

v. 25

Bibliography

Barthélemy, Dominique. 2005. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Vol. Tome 4: Psaumes. Fribourg, Switzerland: Academic Press.

Bratcher, Robert G., and William D. Reyburn. 1991. A Handbook on Psalms. UBS Handbook Series. New York: United Bible Societies.

Briggs, Charles A., and Emilie Briggs. 1906. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms. Vol. 1. ICC. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

Craigie, Peter C. 1983. Psalms 1–50. WBC 19. Waco, TX: Word.

DeClaisse-Walford, Nancy L., Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. 2014. The Book of Psalms. New International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Psalm 31 Grammar