Psalm 33 Macrosyntax

Choose a PsalmNavigate Psalm 33

Macrosyntax

What is Macrosyntax?

Macrosyntax Diagram

Legend

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.

(Click diagram to enlarge)

Verse 4: The section break is due to the because (כִּי) which functions as a discourse marker (see notes on v. 4 in the Discourse Markers section).
Verse 9: The section break is due to the because (כִּי) which functions as a discourse marker (see notes on v. 9 in the Discourse Markers section).
Verse 10: The section break is due to the thetic statement "YHWH thwarts the nations plans," which is a new, unexpected theme in the discourse.
Verse 18: The section break is due to the particle consider (הִנֵּה) which functions as a discourse marker to focus the attention upon what follows (see notes on v. 18 in the Discourse Markers section).

Verse 1b: The phrase for upright people (לַיְשָׁרִים) is in non-default position. In a verbless clause, the grammatical subject (in this case, "praise" תְהִלָּֽה) would be expected in the first position. The reason for the non-default position is likely "tail-head" linkage, in which the last term of one clause and the the first term of the next clause are linked. In this case, the linking is that both "in YHWH" and "for upright people" are prepositional phrases. This poetic structure does not reflect any information structure for the constituent order.
Verse 2b: The phrase with a ten-stringed harp (עָשׂוֹר) is fronted to form a poetic chiasm with v. 2a. The fronted position does not have an information-structural function.
Verse 5b: YHWH's loyalty (חֶסֶד יְהוָה) appears in a fronted position before the verb of the clause. The two clauses of v. 5 do not appear to form a chiasm or other poetic shape: while "YHWH's loyal-love" could match with "righteousness and justice", "he loves" does not match with "fills the earth." The semantic domain of YHWH's loyal-love has already been activated in v. 4b ("faithfulness") and in 5a ("righteousness" and "justice"), making YHWH's loyal-love accessible as a topic.
Verse 6a: YHWH's word (בִּדְבַר יְהוָה) and the heavens (שָׁמַיִם) are both fronted within the clause. One indicates a new topic, and the other indicates focus. Since "YHWH's word" already appeared in v. 4a, it is not likely a new topic in v. 6a. In contrast, the semantic domain that includes "the heavens" was activated in v. 5b by "the earth," and so "the heavens" is accessible as a new topic. "YHWH's word" is in focus, answering the question, "how were the heavens made?" Its usage also includes a suprising piece of information about the nature of "YHWH's word," which in v. 4a was described in terms of its moral character and not its creative power.
Verse 8: This verse follows an abc||bac poetic pattern. The fronting of because of him (מִמֶּנּוּ) in v. 8b does not have an information-structural function.
Verse 9: In both 9a and 9c, the independent personal pronoun (ה֣וּא) is in non-default word order, serving as subject but preceding the verb. Normally, this structure would indicate focus, answering the question, "who spoke?" or "who commanded?" But these questions have not been prompted by the preceding discourse. So the phrases "he spoke" and "he commanded" introduce entirely new information and are thus construed as thetics.
Verse 10a: The subject YHWH (יְהוָה) precedes the verb and is therefore in non-default word order. It is not in focus, since the question "who thwarted the nations' plan" is not prompted by the preceding discourse. Instead, "the nations' plan" and "thwarting" are entirely unexpected within the discourse. Therefore, the entire phrase "YHWH thwarts the nations' plan" is thetic. As a thetic utterance, the introduction of entirely new topical information indicates a section break.
Verse 11a: Both the terms YHWH's plan (עֲצַת יְהוָה) and forever (לְעוֹלָם) are in non-default word order, appearing before the verb. If YHWH's plan were in focus, it would answer the question, "what stands forever?" But this question has not been suggested by the preceding discourse. Therefore, YHWH's plan is the marked topic. It is accessible in the discourse, which has already spoken of the nations' plan in v. 10a. The term "forever" is in focus, responding to the question, "What happens to YHWH's plan" with the answer "it stands - forever!"
Verses 13a and 14a: the phrases from heaven (מִשָּׁמַיִם) and from his dwelling place (מִמְּכוֹן־שִׁבְתּוֹ) are fronted in their respective clauses to create poetic repetition. The position does not have an information-structural function. The question, "from where does YHWH look?" has not been prompted by the discourse, and neither of these terms is accessible as a topic based upon the preceding discourse.
Verse 16b: The term warrior (גִּבּוֹר) is fronted in order to maintain the parallelism with king in the previous clause. "King" appeared in the first position because a predicate (verbal) participle is preceded by its subject.
Verse 17b: The phrase by its great force (וּבְרֹב חֵילוֹ) is in non-default word order, appearing before the verb. The fronting is due to poetic mirroring of the terms by a great force (v. 16a) and by great might (v. 16b) which appear at the end of their respective clauses in the previous verse. The word order does not have information-structural function.
Verse 20: The phrase we ourselves (נַפְשֵׁנוּ) is in non-default word order, appearing before the verb. It is in focus, answering the question "who waits for YHWH?" This question has been prompted in vv. 18-19, which speaks of "those who wait for YHWH" but does not identify who they are.
Verse 21: The phrases in him (בוֹ) and in his name (בְשֵׁם קָדְשׁוֹ) are fronted. They are in poetic parallelism, but are probably also marked for focus. They answer the question, "in whom will we rejoice?" and "in whom will we trust?" These questions are prompted by the underlying narrative of vv. 16-17, which are a polemic against trusting in typical means of warfare, but which leave open the question of what (or who) is worthy of trust when in danger.

The vocative righteous people in v. 1a comes between an imperative verb and its direct object. When this happens, the normal unmarked word order is broken, and the direct object, which has become detached from its verb, becomes marked for information focus (Kim 2022, 234-5). In this case, the focus is on the fact that the rejoicing should happen "in YHWH."
The vocative YHWH in v. 22 comes within the core of the clause, and the constituent(s) immediately following are marked for information focus (Kim 2022, 235). In this case, the constituent in focus is "us," reflecting the psalmist's desire that YHWH should favor his people among the nations (cf. vv. 12, 18-19).

Verse 4: The because (כִּי) has "scope over larger segments of text" (in this case, vv. 4-19), it "is not required for the grammaticality" of vv. 3b-4a, and it "does not add to the propositional content" of v. 4. The combination of these three factors means that it serves as a discourse marker and not a marker of a grammatically subordinate clause (Locatell 2017, 272). Still, it indicates a logical connection between the section that preceded and what follows as an "argument coordinator" (Aejmeleaus 1993, 181). In this case, what follows is the grounds for the call to praise in vv. 1-3. As a discourse marker which joins large segments of text, it indicates a section break.
Verse 9: The for (כִּי) has "scope over larger segments of text" (in this case, vv. 6-8), it "is not required for the grammaticality" of vv. 8-9, and it "does not add to the propositional content" of v. 8. The combination of these three factors means that it serves as a discourse marker and not a marker of a grammatically subordinate clause (Locatell 2017, 272). Still, it indicates a logical connection between the section that preceded and what follows as an "argument coordinator" (Aejmeleaus 1993, 181).
Verse 12: The relative term whose (אֲשֶׁר) is unusual for poetry. Witte writes that the particle often serves as a "stanza-introducing text marker in poetry" (Witte 2002, 523). His view is to be preferred over that of Podechard, who thinks that the relative particle אשׁר is a useless grammatical gloss that overloads the verse (Podechard 1949, 141). 4QPs-q has a larger space after v. 12 than after other verses (Ibid.)
Verse 18: The particle consider (הִנֵּה) is a discourse marker that focuses attention; here it functions to demand that the audience apply the information in the preceding discourse to themselves. This focus permeates the section that follows (vv. 18-22). The particle therefore indicates a section break.
Verse 21: The first because (כִּי) marks purpose or result; it is similar to a causal כִּי in that it marks a logical connection between two clauses. However, the verb in the clause is a yiqtol indicating time after the verb of the main clause, rendering strict cause improbable (Locatell 2017, 248-9). Verse 21a is subordinate to verse 20b, which is a verbless clause; or, if v. 20b is parenthetical, then v. 21a is subordinate to v. 20a, which contains a qatal verb. The second because (כִּי) marks cause, which is the most common usage of כִּי (Aejmelaeus 1986, 199-203; Locatell 2017, 243). Thus, v. 21b is subordinate to v. 21a.
Verse 22: The word just as (כַּאֲשֶׁר) marks v. 22b as a comparative subordinate clause (IBHS §38.5).

(There are no notes on conjunctions for this psalm.)

↑ 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 33 Macrosyntax

Contents

Book 1

Book 2

Book 3

Book 4

Book 5

YHWH's Plan Stands Forever

Psalm 33

Macrosyntax

Macrosyntax Diagram