Back to Psalm 38 overview page.

Welcome to the Verse-by-Verse Notes for Psalm 38!

The Verse-by-Verse Notes present scholarly, exegetical materials (from all layers of analysis) in a verse-by-verse format. They often present alternative interpretive options and justification for a preferred interpretation. The Verse-by-Verse Notes are aimed at consultant-level users.

The discussion of each verse of this psalm includes the following items.

A link to the part of the overview video where the verse in question is discussed.
The verse in Hebrew and English.^[1]
An expanded paraphrase of the verse.^[2]
A grammatical diagram of the verse, which includes glosses for each word and phrase.^[3]
A series of notes on the verse, which contain information pertaining to the interpretation of the psalm (e.g., meaning of words and phrases, poetic features, difficult grammatical constructions, etc.).

Background

One potential setting for this psalm in David's life could be Absalom's coup. For more information on how Ps 38 might relate to Absalom's coup, see the note in Story Behind. However, this is by no means the only context in which to understand this psalm.

Superscription (v. 1)

v. 1

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
1	מִזְמ֖וֹר לְדָוִ֣ד לְהַזְכִּֽיר׃	A psalm. By David. To bring to remembrance.

Expanded Paraphrase

A psalm. By David. To bring David to God's remembrance so that he will act and help.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

Psalm 38 is an individual lament.^[4]
The superscription to bring to remembrance (לְהַזְכִּיר), which also appears in Ps 70, provides the purpose for this psalm. This likely is used to refer to David bringing his situation to God's remembrance and attention. David is not implying that God has forgotten him, but is using this psalm to galvanize YHWH into action. This is supported by the content of both Ps 38 and 70. For more detail on the meaning of לְהַזְכִּֽיר, see The Meaning of לְהַזְכִּיר in Ps 38:1.^[5]

My suffering (vv. 2-9)

This first section of the psalm describes David's suffering as a result of YHWH's discipline for his sin. Throughout this section it is unclear whether David's suffering is caused solely by physical pain, emotional pain, or guilt, or by a mixture of all three.

v. 2

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
2a	יְֽהוָ֗ה אַל־בְּקֶצְפְּךָ֥ תוֹכִיחֵ֑נִי	YHWH, do not rebuke me when you’re angry,
2b	וּֽבַחֲמָתְךָ֥ תְיַסְּרֵֽנִי׃	or discipline me when you’re wrathful!

Expanded Paraphrase

YHWH, I have sinned, and I deserve to be rebuked and disciplined. But I ask that you do not rebuke me as a judge when you're angry, or discipline me when you're wrathful so that I do not die!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

This verse parallels Ps 6:2, with the exception that angry (קֶצֶף) is replaced with "anger" (אַף).
The vocative YHWH (יְהוָה) in v. 2 is clause-initial, used here to grab God's attention to answer this urgent request.^[6]
Rebuke and discipline: The jussives in this verse are functioning as requests. The implication is that the psalmist is experiencing YHWH's rebuke right now but he is asking YHWH to stop rebuking him while YHWH is angry. Based on the word order, the negative particle "not" (אַל) scopes over the prepositional phrases "in your anger" and "in your wrath," not the entire clause.^[7] David is not asking for God to stop disciplining him entirely, but rather to stop disciplining while God is angry or wrathful.^[8] This petition to not correct or punish in wrath implies not acting rashly based just on emotions. The psalmist is petitioning God to consider his case and punish him in justice instead of in wrath (cf. Jer 10:24). Elsewhere in Scripture, discipline in wrath is seen as possibly leading to death (Ps 118:18; Jer 10:24), so David is begging God to relent from his harsh punishment so that David will not perish as a result.
The fronting of the prepositional phrases when you're angry (בְּקֶצְפְּךָ) and when you're wrathful (וּבַחֲמָתְךָ) are both contrastive focus. David accepts that YHWH will rebuke him, but he doesn't want YHWH to do it while he is angry, but rather justly (cf. Jer 10:24, Isa 11:4).
The word angry (קֶצֶף) appears 28 times in the Hebrew Bible. The majority of times it refers to the wrath of the Lord, often in response to when someone has disobeyed.^[9]
The root rebuke (יכח) appears 59 times in the Hebrew Bible. It generally occurs in the context of judicial judgments, decreeing the judgment in the case of disputes between people (e.g. Gen 21:25; Isa 2:4, 11:3) but also includes the argument of the case leading up to judgment (e.g. Job 16:21).^[10] In some cases it is verbal, taking the form of argument and counterargument (cf. Job 13:3).^[11] When God is the subject, the meaning often implies punishment or reproach.^[12] However, this word does not carry entirely negative connotations. Being rebuked by God is seen as a blessing because God does it out of love (Prov 3:12; Job 5:17). A noun from the same root occurs in v. 15 of this psalm (תּוֹכָחוֹת "arguments").
The word do not (אַל) is elided in v. 2b.^[13]
The two בְּ prepositions, translated when here, are functioning to show the situation of the punishment, namely in anger or wrath.^[14] This usage is metaphorical since anger and wrath are not physical places, so they have been translated as temporal, indicating the situation in which the psalmist does not want to be rebuked or disciplined.

v. 3

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
3a	כִּֽי־חִ֭צֶּיךָ נִ֣חֲתוּ בִ֑י	For your arrows have been shot into me,
3b	וַתִּנְחַ֖ת עָלַ֣י יָדֶֽךָ׃	and your hand has struck me.

Expanded Paraphrase

For you have disciplined me as if with intense sickness. Your arrows which bring death and sickness have been shot into me in order to discipline me, and your hand has struck me and so I feel as if I have been injured.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The for (כִּי) in this verse gives the reason why David is asking YHWH to stop rebuking him when he is angry.
The fronting of your arrows (חִצֶּיךָ) is likely motivated by information focus.^[15]
God's arrows (חִצֶּיךָ) bring death, sometimes on individuals in the form of sickness (Job 6:4; 16:13).^[16] This concept was also common in the surrounding nations, since the Canaanite deity of war and pestilence and later also Apollo were portrayed with arrows that made the target sick.^[17] The image of arrows being shot into David demonstrates how concerned David is that his death is near.

The verb נחת only appears 10 times total in the Hebrew Bible. Its base meaning is to go down or descend. The first use of this root in this verse is niphal, shot, describing what the arrows have done to David. The second use is qal, struck, describing what God's hand has done to David. The niphal is used for the first because the arrows don't shoot themselves, but are shot. This root is used in the piel to describe bending a bow of bronze in order to shoot (2 Sam 22:35; Ps 18:35). The use of נחת in v. 3b, describing how YHWH's hand affects David, creates a dynamic picture of YHWH's hand piercing David like an arrow.^[18]
The prepositional phrase into me (בִי) could either be adversative "against me" or simply locative "in/into me." While both are legitimate possibilities, it is probably best to understand this as a locative.^[19]
The use of the wayyiqtol in and...has struck (וַתִּנְחַת) in v. 3b indicates an action simultaneous with the previous line, a format used to set the stage for the following discourse (Judg 4:5).^[20]
Like with "into me" (בִי), the prepositional phrase (against) me (עַל) frequently has a hostile nuance.^[21] English prefers a direct object instead of a prepositional phrase for "struck," so the preposition is left untranslated in the CBC.
Like the imagery of arrows being shot into David, the imagery of God's hand striking David could also easily end with David's death, especially since it is a divine being striking and not just a human.

v. 4

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
4a	אֵין־מְתֹ֣ם בִּ֭בְשָׂרִי מִפְּנֵ֣י זַעְמֶ֑ךָ	There is no sound spot in my flesh because of your anger.
4b	אֵין־שָׁל֥וֹם בַּ֝עֲצָמַ֗י מִפְּנֵ֥י חַטָּאתִֽי׃	There is no well-being in my bones because of my sin.

Expanded Paraphrase

There is no sound spot in my flesh because of your anger and so every part of me is affected by your discipline and wrath. There is no well-being in my bones, the very core of my being, because of my sin, the reason why you are angry and why I am being disciplined and therefore the reason why I suffer. Therefore the very core of my being is in anguish.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The spiritual and physical worlds are closely, if not inextricably, connected in the Ancient Near East. As such, sickness was frequently tied to divine punishment.^[22] Because of this close connection, in this psalm, it is unclear whether the psalmist is physically suffering these wounds or if the psalmist is using the imagery of wounds and sickness to describe the anguish that he is feeling from God's discipline. The use of specific imagery to describe the sickness such as inflammation in the sides and the festering and rotting of wounds paints a clear physical picture. However, David uses sounds spot (מְתֹם) and well-being (שָׁלוֹם) to describe the extent of his affliction in v. 4. Both of these words have a connection beyond just the physical to the spiritual as well. Well-being (שָׁלוֹם) is frequently used to describe spiritual wholeness.^[23] Likewise, sounds spot (מְתֹם), while rare in Scripture, comes from the root תמם, which indicates someone or something that is perfect and blameless (Job 22:3).^[24] As such, it is used for both physical and spiritual soundness as well. In addition, one of the rare places מתם is used is Isa 1:6, where it is used to metaphorically describe the spiritual state of the nation of Israel. With all of these factors, it is most likely that the suffering David is experiencing in this psalm is a metaphor for his spiritual suffering and does not describe a literal disease.

The phrase because of (מִפְּנֵי) is a combination of the preposition "from" (מִן) and the noun "face" (פָּנִים). These words are frequently used together and have a more narrow definition, so BHRG categorizes them together as a preposition.^[25] Because these two words together are functioning as a preposition, they are diagrammed as such. This also occurs in verse 6.
The phrase because of (מִפְּנֵי) according to BHRG is used frequently in the context of hostility or threat.^[26] This holds true in this psalm as well since in v. 3 the psalmist is discussing being attacked by the Lord's arrows and hand. The preposition מִפְּנֵי has two frequent meanings. First, it could mean that someone flees from the presence of someone or something. Second, it could indicate that a situation is caused by someone or something. In this situation, although מִפְּנֵי is not a subordinating conjunction, because it is giving the reason for the clause, it is often translated like one in English: "because of."^[27]
Anger (זַעְמֶךָ) appears 22 times in Scripture. HALOT defines this word as "cursed by an indignant God."^[28] This could indicate a curse because of God's wrath.^[29]
The word bones (עֲצׂמִים) is often used to represent the essence of an individual (Job 20:11; Ezek 37:11; Ps 6:2).^[30] Thus pain in the bones expresses depth of anguish and is connected to sin and divine judgment (Job 30:17; Ps 6:2; 32:3; 51:8; Lam 1:13; 3:4). In a more physical sense, bones are considered the most durable, core part of a human, so they are often paralleled with strength and vitality (Pss 31:10; 35:9-10; see also Pss 51:8, 53:5). So the lack of well-being in David's bones indicates that he is weak and sick. Since עצם can be used for either the physical body or the soul, this could indicate the lack of either physical wholeness or spiritual wholeness. A verb from the same root is used in v. 20 referring to how the enemies have become numerous.

v. 5

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
5a	כִּ֣י עֲ֭וֺנֹתַי עָבְר֣וּ רֹאשִׁ֑י	For my iniquities have gone over my head.
5b	כְּמַשָּׂ֥א כָ֝בֵ֗ד יִכְבְּד֥וּ מִמֶּֽנִּי׃	Like a heavy burden, they are too heavy for me to handle.

Expanded Paraphrase

For my iniquities have fully gone over my head, overwhelming me. Like a heavy burden, they are utterly too heavy for me to handle even though I have tried. Without help, I will be crushed by them and die.

Grammatical Diagram

See diagram for v. 4.

Notes

The phrase my iniquities have gone over my head (עֲוֺנֹתַי עָבְרוּ) is interesting. Typically, when "to go/pass over" (עבר) is used with a word relating to sin or guilt, it is in the context of forgiveness: the sin is being "passed over," resulting in a reprieve from punishment. However, in this verse, the second line makes this interpretation not viable. In this instance, עבר retains its more literal sense of passing or going over, like drowning in a river (Jon 2:4).^[31] This aligns with other passages which describe iniquity as overwhelming the sinner (Pss 40:13 (12); 65:3).^[32] With the context of v. 5b, it could be that the heavy burden of his iniquities has been lifted above his head and the psalmist must try to carry it.
The noun iniquity (עָוֺן) is frequently glossed as either "iniquity" or "guilt." The noun has three basic components in its meaning: the deed of wrongdoing itself, the feelings of distress (guilt) resulting from that wrongdoing, and the punishment. "Iniquity" is not a commonly used word in English outside of religious circles, where it basically is a synonym for sin. While this does capture the idea of the deed of wrongdoing, it cannot include the feelings of distress or the punishment.

"Guilt," on the other hand, first and foremost includes those feelings of distress. Because of its use in judicial circumstances, "guilt" also can refer to the act of wrongdoing or crime as well. The only aspect that it does not include is the punishment for that wrongdoing.

Therefore, "guilt" is a better gloss than "iniquity" for the general meaning of עָוֺן. However, when the context is specifically focusing on the act itself, "iniquity" is a more accurate rendering.

The fronting of my iniquities (עֲוֺנֹתַי) is contrastive, indicating that it is not God's anger that has overwhelmed the psalmist, but his own iniquities.
The fronting of like a heavy burden (כְּמַשָּׂא כָבֵד), on the other hand, is motivated by poetic reasons. With the prepositional phrase fronted, the same word order is repeated in 5b as in 5a. In addition, the phonetics also emphasize this pattern, with the 3mp qatal and the 1cs suffix.
The imagery of a heavy burden demonstrates how overwhelmed the psalmist is as well as the danger that he feels he is in.

If used intransitively, as it is here, heavy (כבד) in the qal can only be understood as stative.^[33] The force of the yiqtol is the present continuing state, which lends itself to a continual aspect interpretation.^[34] If this verb were qatal, the force would emphasize that the psalmist's iniquities have become too heavy.
The combination of both the qatal of gone over and the yiqtol of are heavy in this verse form a merism that increases the intensity of the meaning more than just the qatal or the yiqtol alone could express. Together they give the intensity of the psalmist's iniquities having gone fully over his head and being utterly too heavy for him to bear.
The use of too...for me (מִמֶּנִּי) in this verse is a bit difficult. This preposition could either be locative, indicating that his iniquity is a heavy burden upon the psalmist,^[35] or a comparative use, indicating that it is heavier than the psalmist can endure.^[36] There is a slight difference in the meaning between these two options. The locative would imply that this is a burden the psalmist could carry, but is very difficult. The comparative, on the other hand, would imply that the psalmist is not capable of carrying this burden at all. Exod 18:18 and Num 11:14 both help elucidate the meaning of this expression. While they use the adjectival instead of the verbal form of כבד, the context clearly indicates that the subject is unable to carry the burden: "...for the thing is too heavy for you. You are not able to do it alone" (Exod 18:18 ESV). As such, it is most likely that this passage is similar and should be understood in the comparative sense.

v. 6

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
6a	הִבְאִ֣ישׁוּ נָ֭מַקּוּ חַבּוּרֹתָ֑י	My wounds have become foul with rot
6b	מִ֝פְּנֵ֗י אִוַּלְתִּֽי׃	because of my folly.

Expanded Paraphrase

Because of how long this suffering has gone on, My wounds have become foul with rot because of my folly.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The verbs have become foul with rot (הִבְאִישׁוּ נָמַקּוּ) create a verbal hendiadys, a rhetorical device where two verbs combine to create a meaning greater than they had individually. Without the hendiadys, these verbs would literally mean "my wounds have become foul and rotted." However, when taken together as verbal hendiadys, the meaning is intensified.^[37]
The verb become foul (באשׁ) appears eighteen times in the Hebrew Bible. It refers to something going rancid and stinking because of it. It is also used metaphorically for being hated (because of the stench) (Gen. 34:30, Ex. 5:21, 1 Sam 13:4). This metaphorical usage is not in view here.
The noun wounds (חַבּוּרֹתָי) is rare, only appearing seven times in the Hebrew Bible. In most other verses it is in parallel to its synonym, "wound" (פצע; Gen 4:23; Ex 21:25; Isa 1:6; Prov 20:30). It is unclear what kind of wound חַבּוּרָה refers to, however, or how it was inflicted.
For the use of as because of (מִפְּנֵי), see v. 4.
The noun folly (אִוֶּלֶת) appears 25 times and only in Pss and Prov, but its verbal root, אול, has a broader distribution, occurring also in the prophets. It is frequently contrasted with wisdom and understanding.^[38] This word is associated with a lack of discipline, a short temper, and answering before thinking.^[39] Because of these connotations, this foolishness seems to have a moral component to it. This is not just a stupid mistake or something done out of lack of information.

v. 7

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
7a	נַעֲוֵ֣יתִי שַׁחֹ֣תִי עַד־מְאֹ֑ד	I have become completely contorted.
7b	כָּל־הַ֝יּ֗וֹם קֹדֵ֥ר הִלָּֽכְתִּי׃	I have walked about constantly mourning.

Expanded Paraphrase

I have become completely contorted because of my pain. I have walked about constantly mourning because of my suffering.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

Like the two verbs in v. 6, the first two verbs in v. 7, individually meaning "I have become twisted and am bowed down" (נַעֲוֵיתִי שַׁחֹתִי), form a verbal hendiadys. With the use of the verbal hendiadys, the meaning becomes even more intense: I have become contorted.^[40]
While the verbal form of "to be twisted" (עוה), part of the hendiadys, is not common, the word "iniquity" (עָוֹן) is derived from the same root.^[41] In the qal, this verb means to do iniquity or wrong. In this verse, this verb cannot mean "I have sinned," however, because it is in the niphal. While the niphal only appears four times in the Hebrew Bible, it still has a connection "with some sort of guilty or sinful involvement."^[42] In the piel, עוה can have the idea of someone twisting something (Isa 24:1, Lam 3:9). In addition, the Targum translates this word "to be crooked" (עקימית). Based on this use of the piel and the context, this verb could portray the psalmist writhing in pain, twisted and prone from his suffering.
In the niphal, the verb "to be twisted" (עוה) is stative.^[43] This verb is a stative qatal. Because of the verbal hendiadys with the following verb, it is translated as the onset and ensuing state, especially since "to be bowed down" (שׁחח) is not stative.
The verb "to be bowed down" (שחח) is also not common in the Hebrew Bible, appearing only 17 times. It is often used to describe someone bowing down because they have either been humbled or they are suffering.^[44] In this passage it could be a bit of both since the psalmist has sinned and is distraught about it (v. 4-5) and also is suffering because of that sin (v. 19).
The phrase completely (עַד־מְאֹד) is an idiom expressing the extreme extent to which David has become contorted.^[45]
The phrase constantly (כָּל־הַיּוֹם; literally "all the day") is frequently used to describe something that is continually happening (c.f. Gen. 6:5; Isa 52:5).^[46] In this verse, כָּל־הַיּוֹם is fronted as a frame setter, giving the temporal scope of the following clause.
The participle mourning (קֹדֵר) is expressing the manner that the psalmist is walking around. This verb frequently refers to grieving in response to death or, as in this case, suffering.^[47] This participle is fronted in order to introduce the new concept of the psalmist's emotional reaction to his suffering.
The verb I have walked about (הִלָּכְתִּי) is in continual aspect, as shown by the use of "constantly" (כָּל־הַיּוֹם). The focus of the verb "walk" (הלך) in the context is not on the motion, but rather that as David is living his life, he goes about mourning.^[48]

v. 8

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
8a	כִּֽי־כְ֭סָלַי מָלְא֣וּ נִקְלֶ֑ה	For my sides are full of inflammation,
8b	וְאֵ֥ין מְ֝תֹ֗ם בִּבְשָׂרִֽי׃	and there is no sound spot in my flesh.

Expanded Paraphrase

For my sides are full of inflammation, and there is no sound spot in my flesh.

Grammatical Diagram

See diagram for v. 7.

Notes

The noun sides (כְסָלַי) is rare in the Hebrew Bible. It appears seven times, five of which are used in the same phrase in the book of Leviticus, "and the two kidneys with the fat that is on them at the loins, and the long lobe of the liver that he shall remove with the kidneys" (Lev 3:4, 10, 15, 4:9, 7:4). These passages are discussing the offering of peace offerings, the sin offering for the priest, and the guilt offering. Job 15:27 is the other verse that uses this noun when it describes gathering fat on this part of the body. This word refers to the part of the body which accumulates fat between the ribs and the hips on the back, the lumbar region.^[49]
The fronting of my sides (כְסָלַי) is due to topic shift. Since the psalmist's body is already in the discourse here, this is not a new subject, but a shift to discuss a particular body part.
While the verb are full (מלא) can be either stative or fientive in the qal, when its object is an object of material (in this case the participle "inflammation" [נִקְלֶה]), it functions as a stative.^[50] As such, it is translated as present tense.
The root קלה, literally meaning "to roast," appears ten times in the Hebrew Bible, mostly referring to the roasting of grain. Here the imagery of roasted grain is applied to the psalmist's loin potentially as an image of fever or inflammation.^[51]
The participle inflammation (נִקְלֶה) functioning as an object of "to be full" (מלא) is not typical. We would expect a noun instead, so in this case the niphal participle is functioning substantivally, indicating something being burned. Despite how this participle is typically rendered in English, it is not an abstract noun in Hebrew.
For the clause and there is no sound spot in my flesh (וְאֵין מְתֹם בִּבְשָׂרִי), see v. 4.

v. 9

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
9a	נְפוּג֣וֹתִי וְנִדְכֵּ֣יתִי עַד־מְאֹ֑ד	I have become weak and have been crushed completely.
9b	שָׁ֝אַ֗גְתִּי מִֽנַּהֲמַ֥ת לִבִּֽי׃	I have been groaning because of the severe suffering of my heart.

Expanded Paraphrase

I have become weak and have been crushed completely. I have been groaning because of the severe suffering of my heart because of my pain and my sin.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

It is possible that I have become weak and have been crushed (נְפוּגוֹתִי וְנִדְכֵּיתִי) form a hendiadys, like the verbs in v. 6a and v. 7a (NRSV). However, these words are not as closely related as those verb combinations, so it is less likely. Sometimes when a weqatal like וְנִדְכֵּיתִי follows a qatal like נְפוּגוֹתִי, it expresses the same action.^[52] However, in this instance, the weqatal is likely just a waw + qatal, indicating another action in a list.
The verb I have become weak (פוג) appears 4 times in the Hebrew Bible. Only here does it appear in the niphal. This word likely means something along the lines of becoming weak potentially because of or felt through cold.^[53]
The verb I have been groaning (שׁאג) is often used to describe a lion roaring. It is also used of God (Jer 25:30; Amos 1:2). It has a nominal form as well, but the nominal form is never used in conjunction with the verb. Only in Pss and Job is the concept of roaring or groaning in suffering presented. The habitual aspect of this verb is inferred from the context.
The use of because of (מִן) in this verse indicates the reason for the roar--because the psalmist's heart is suffering severely.^[54]
The word severe suffering (נְהָמָה) is rare in Scripture. It only appears twice: here and in Isa 5:30, where it refers to the noise of the sea. It comes from the root נהם, which frequently refers to the growling of lions (Isa 5:29, Prov 28:15), similar to the other nominal form, נַהַם (Prov 19:12, 20:2).^[55] The verbal form is also used when humans are dying (Prov. 5:11) or suffering (Ezek. 24:23). While this word is typically glossed groaning, to make its usage in context clearer, it can be glossed as severe suffering.^[56]

My abandonment (vv. 10-15)

The second section discusses the abandonment David feels from his own body and also from his companions. This abandonment gives the opportunity for the enemies to attack. While David is overwhelmed and helpless before his enemies, he knows he has placed everything he longs for before God (v. 10).

v. 10

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
10a	אֲֽדֹנָי נֶגְדְּךָ֥ כָל־תַּאֲוָתִ֑י	My Lord, everything I long for is before you,
10b	וְ֝אַנְחָתִ֗י מִמְּךָ֥ לֹא־נִסְתָּֽרָה׃	and my moaning is not hidden from you.

Expanded Paraphrase

My Lord, everything I long for, especially relief from this suffering, is before you since you know the hearts of all, and my moaning is not hidden from you. Because you see what I long for and you are able to heal, you should help me. I have placed my situation and my longing before you and now I must wait for you to answer.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

While this verse may seem to interrupt the psalmist's complaint, especially with the continued description of David's body failing him in v. 11, this verse actually begins to foreshadow v. 16. Here David is stating that he knows YHWH is aware of his situation and his suffering and is placing the response in his care. In the following verses, we will see why David must trust YHWH alone in this situation: his strength has abandoned him (v. 11) and his friends are far away (v. 12).
David bases his statement in this verse in the knowledge that YHWH knows the hearts of everyone (Prov 15:11; Jer 32:19; Ps 139:15; Isa 40:27-31). He also knows that YHWH is able to help David and relieve his suffering because any wound God inflicts he can also heal (Deut 7:15; Job 5:18; Ps 41:1-4; Hos 6:1).^[57]
The clause-initial vocative my Lord (אֲדֹנָי) serves to reactivate YHWH as a participant in the psalm, since there has been no mention of him since v. 4, identifying the antecedent of the pronoun in נֶגְדְּךָ֥. The reintroduction as YHWH as a participant and the initial vocative אֲֽדֹנָי in this verse also indicate a paragraph break.
The fronting of before you (נֶגְדְּךָ) is confirming focus, emphasizing that it is in fact YHWH who knows everything David longs for.
The word before (נֶגֶד), while grammatically a noun, functions like a preposition to the extent that some lexicons classify it as a preposition.^[58]
The noun (what) I long for (תַּאֲוָה) appears 21 times in the Hebrew Bible. It is used generally of something someone desires or craves.
The fronting of And my moaning...from you (וְאַנְחָתִי מִמְּךָ) is for poetic reasons, mirroring the word order of the constituents in the first half of the verse.
When used in the passive sense, hidden (נִסְתָּרָה) is stative in meaning, and so indicates a present state.

v. 11

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
11a	לִבִּ֣י סְ֭חַרְחַר עֲזָבַ֣נִי כֹחִ֑י	My heart has been pounding. My strength has abandoned me,
11b	וְֽאוֹר־עֵינַ֥י גַּם־הֵ֝֗ם אֵ֣ין אִתִּֽי׃	and the light of my eyes, even that is not with me!

Expanded Paraphrase

My heart has been pounding. My strength has abandoned me, and the light of my eyes whose presence indicates life, even that is not with me, so I am close to death!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The fronting of my heart (לִבִּי) is topic switch, indicating that David is switching to speak about another body part.^[59]
The verb is pounding (סְחַרְחַר) is in the stem pe'alal, a very rare stem in Hebrew. This stem is only used here and in Ps 45:3. It is a variant of the piel, changed because of the lexical root.^[60] This is the only instance of the pe'alal form of סחר appearing in the Old Testament. The qal form is used to describe trading or carrying about business, often used of merchants who would travel to sell their wares (e.g. Gen. 37:28).^[61] Because the meaning of the qal is so different and this is the only usage of the pe'alal, it is difficult to determine the exact meaning of this word. However, scholars agree that the word is onomatopoeic, describing a racing heartbeat.^[62] The semantic meaning and the context for this verb indicates that this is either an iterative or continual action. Because of the use of the qatal here, the iterative interpretation makes the most sense.
The verb has abandoned (עזב) has a broader semantic scope than "abandon." It also includes things like freeing from captivity or entrusting with someone else. The gloss "leave" could be a better gloss, but at the cost of the specificity of "abandon." In this context, "abandon" works as a good gloss for עזב.

The fronting of the light of my eyes (אוֹר־עֵינַי), like with v. 11a, is topic shift, changing the topic to another body part: his eyes.
The phrase the light of my eyes (אוֹר־עֵינַי) is used to indicate life. Seeing light means being alive (see Job 33:28). On the other hand, the dead no longer see light (Ps 49:19).^[63] The psalmist is using hyperbole to declare that he is close to death.
The fronting of even that (גַּם־הֵם) is scalar focus, indicating that in the list of all of his body parts, even his eyes and the light in them have left him.
Even (גַּם) could either be modifying the verb (translated as "also") or modifying הֵם (translated emphatically "even"). However, גַּם typically immediately precedes whatever word or phrase it is modifying, so it is most likely modifying the pronoun הֵם.^[64]
The use of that (הֵם) (literally "them") is difficult in this verse. It would be expected to match the gender and number of the word it is in apposition to, whether "light" (אוֹר) or "my eyes" (עֵינַי). However, "light" (אוֹר) is singular and so cannot be the antecedent. "Eyes" (עַיִן) can be either masculine or feminine.^[65] However, since it is in construct to אוֹר, the grammar does not usually allow for הֵם to be in apposition to it.^[66] It is probably best to take it as a case of attraction, with the number matching the number of the nomen rectum עֵינַי, even though it is rare.^[67]

v. 12

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
12a	אֹֽהֲבַ֨י ׀ וְרֵעַ֗י	Those who love me, my companions,
12b	מִנֶּ֣גֶד נִגְעִ֣י יַעֲמֹ֑דוּ	are standing far away from my injury,
12c	וּ֝קְרוֹבַ֗י מֵרָחֹ֥ק עָמָֽדוּ׃	and my relatives have stood at a distance.

Expanded Paraphrase

Those who love me, my companions, are standing far away from my injury, and my relatives have stood at a distance because they see my disease as a judgment from YHWH because of my sin and want to distance themselves from that judgment. Those who are supposed to be close to me are abandoning me instead of helping and supporting me. I am alone.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

Vv. 12-15 are all grouped together with וְ conjunctions according to semantic similarities.

The second paragraph break begins in this verse with the shift in topic from the psalmist to the people around him, marked by the fronted topic. In addition, vv. 12-15 are all connected by coordinating conjunctions, clearly setting them apart as a unit.
This tricolon matches the other tricolon in this psalm, v. 13. This creates greater cohesion between these verses. With these two verses grouped together at the center of the psalm, there are 20 lines before and after.^[68]
Disease could lead to ostracism because it is a result of divine judgment and because of the Levitical laws concerning some diseases that require the sick person to leave camp.^[69] In fact, Mowinckel notes that, "The sick person, - like everyone struck by disaster - was considered to be a secret sinner, whom God had unmasked, and over whom his enemies would therefore triumph, whereas his former friends would turn their backs on him."^[70]
The compound subjects those who love me (and) my companions (אֹהֲבַי וְרֵעַי) likely are two synonyms referring to the same group of people. Their fronting in this verse indicates a topic switch, moving from the abandonment of David's body to the abandonment of his companions.
The construct chain those who love me (אֹהֲבַי) is a participle form of אהב, which means to love, with a 1st person pronominal suffix. While many construct chains could be interpreted as either subjective or object, when אהב is in construct, it only takes an objective reading (cf. Exod 20:6; Prov 8:17). Based on the context that these people stand far away from him, it is likely that these are people who love or at least pretend to love the psalmist.
The prepositional phrase far away from my injury (מִנֶּגֶד נִגְעִי) literally translates "away from before (the presence of) my injury." The focus here is that the psalmist's friends are far away from him because he is sick. The use of מִן to give the reason or grounds does rarely occur.^[71] However, it is more likely that this is just the general use of מִן to indicate separation: "away from" (1 Sam 26:20; Amos 9:3).^[72]
The fronting of far away from my injury (מִנֶּגֶד נִגְעִי) is contrastive focus. David is emphasizing that his friends are not next to him, supporting him, but rather far away from his injury.
The word injury (נֶגַע) means either "injury" or "disease."^[73] It is often used to refer to leprosy (Num 13 and 14), but can also refer to any kind of physical injury (Deut 17:8). In the plural it can be used to describe suffering because of iniquity as a form of discipline (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 89:33).
The context and use of yiqtol in are standing (יַעֲמֹדוּ) indicates this is an iterative situation, where David's companions regularly stand far away from him.
The fronting of and my relatives...at a distance (וּקְרוֹבַי מֵרָחֹק) repeats the structure of v. 12a.^[74]
The use of both my relatives (וּקְרוֹבַי) and at a distance (מֵרָחֹק) creates an antithetical pairing, since וּקְרוֹבַי literally means "those close to me." The people who should be close to the psalmist, whether by blood or friendship, have stood at a distance from him! This is in contrast to how friends should be functioning (Prov 17:17).
The yiqtol and qatal pairing of both they are standing (יַעֲמֹדוּ) and have stood (עָמָדוּ) helps to emphasize the complete separation between the psalmist and his companions.

v. 13

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
13a	וַיְנַקְשׁ֤וּ ׀ מְבַקְשֵׁ֬י נַפְשִׁ֗י	And those who seek to take my life have set a trap,
13b	וְדֹרְשֵׁ֣י רָ֭עָתִי דִּבְּר֣וּ הַוּ֑וֹת	and those who pursue my harm have been speaking of disaster,
13c	וּ֝מִרְמ֗וֹת כָּל־הַיּ֥וֹם יֶהְגּֽוּ׃	and they are constantly muttering treachery.

Expanded Paraphrase

Because I am weak and my friends have abandoned me, my enemies have begun to take advantage of my weak state. And those who seek to take my life have set a trap, taking advantage of my weakness, and those who pursue my harm have been speaking of disaster, telling lies to destroy me, and they are constantly muttering treachery, covering up facts to hurt me.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The usage of the three different fientive conjugations in this verse (wayyiqtol, qatal, and yiqtol) poetically emphasizes that David is surrounded on all sides and at all times by his enemies.
The phrase seeking someone's life (מְבַקְשֵׁי נַפְשִׁי) means to pursue someone in order to kill them (1 Sam 25:26).^[75] Likewise, to pursue someone's harm means to pursue someone in order to do harm to them. Based on the context, this participle indicates people who frequently seek the psalmist's life, thus indicating habitual aspect.
Similar to "seeking someone's life" (מְבַקְשֵׁי נַפְשִׁי), the participle in pursue my harm (וְדֹרְשֵׁי רָעָתִי) also is habitual based on the context.
The fronting of pursuing my harm (וְדֹרְשֵׁי רָעָתִי) is for poetic reasons in order to mirror the word order in v. 13a.
The verb have been speaking (דִּבְּרוּ), because of the following clause, is most likely continuous aspect.
The noun disaster (הַוָּה) only appears in poetic literature. It frequently has the concept of lies resulting in destruction or ruin (Ps 5:10; Job 6:30).^[76] When in the plural, like it is in this verse, it is often used to refer to the fruits of evil desire.^[77]
Similar to "disaster" (הַוָּה), the noun treachery (מִרְמָה) also indicates the telling of lies, usually with explicit benefit to the one telling the lies, in which they conceal or cover up facts, damaging to a relationship (Gen 27:35, Hos 12:8, Jer 5:27).^[78]
Both disaster (הַוּוֹת) and treachery (וּמִרְמוֹת) are plural in this verse. Sometimes the plural is used to intensify the idea of the stem.^[79] In this instance, the plurality is emphasizing the magnitude of this betrayal and could even point to the large number of those opposing the psalmist (v. 20).
The fronting of treachery (וּמִרְמוֹת) is motivated by topic shift. Since this noun is semantically similar to "disaster" (הַוּוֹת), it is already active in the discourse.
The fronting of constantly (כָּל־הַיּוֹם), on the other hand, is information focus, emphasizing the constant nature of this muttering.
With the verb muttering (יֶהְגּוּ), the use of the phrase "constantly" (כָּל־הַיּוֹם) indicates that this is an ongoing situation, so the aspect is continuous.

v. 14

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
14a	וַאֲנִ֣י כְ֭חֵרֵשׁ לֹ֣א אֶשְׁמָ֑ע	But I, like a deaf person, cannot hear.
14b	וּ֝כְאִלֵּ֗ם לֹ֣א יִפְתַּח־פִּֽיו׃	And [I am] like a mute person [who] cannot open his mouth.

Expanded Paraphrase

But I, like a deaf person, cannot hear their accusations. And [I am] like a mute person [who] cannot open his mouth. There is nothing I can do to defend myself without making the situation worse, so I have chosen to ignore them and remain silent.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

One major question for vv. 14-15 is whether David is choosing not to speak or listen or whether he is simply unable to speak or listen. The context of the abandonment of his strength and all of his suffering from vv. 2-9 and 11 point to him being unable to speak. If this is the case, then these verses indicate that David cannot physically hear the treachery or form arguments against it. Even if the suffering is metaphorical rather than physical, mental or emotional suffering can just as easily impair one's ability to hear and respond to what other's say. On the other hand, v. 16 begins with "For/But YHWH, I have hoped for you" (כִּי־לְךָ יְהוָה הוֹחָלְתִּי). If v. 16 gives the reason for vv. 14-15, then it makes sense for David to be choosing not to speak.^[80] The answer to whether or not this is a choice or not actually can be found in vv. 17-19, however. David begins v. 17 by saying, "I thought," a qatal expressing an action in the past. While most of the psalm so far has been expressing David's current state, there are two past actions that this could be referring to. The first would be v. 16a, when David began hoping in YHWH. The second would be implied in vv. 14-15, the action where David chooses not to speak. This second option makes more sense in the context.^[81] If David had spoken up, then his enemies would have rejoiced over him and been victorious. So David's silence is not a bold confidence, but more of a resignation. He can't answer his enemies' accusations or he would be mocked and defeated. And so instead, he resigns himself to remain silent and instead hope for YHWH to answer on his behalf.
And I, like a deaf person, cannot hear (וַאֲנִי כְחֵרֵשׁ לֹא אֶשְׁמָע) could either be one clause, as represented here, split into two, or emended to include an elided relative clause, as in v. 14b.^[82] However, based on the textual evidence, the pattern of the surrounding clauses and the macrosyntax of this verse, it is likely that this phrase functions as one clause with the prepositional phrase functioning as adverbial.
The conjunction and pronoun But I (וַאֲנִי) in v. 14a sets vv. 14-15 apart in contrast with vv. 12-13. While David's enemies speak disaster and mutter treachery, David does not hear or respond to them.
The fronting of But I (וַאֲנִי) indicates a shift in topic from the enemies to David.
On the other hand, the fronting of like a deaf person (כְחֵרֵשׁ) is contrastive. From the previous context in v. 13, it would be more likely that David would be listening to everything his enemies have been muttering, so the comparison of David to a deaf person is unexpected.
Because it follows after the comparison of being like a deaf person, it follows that the modality of the verb cannot hear (אֶשְׁמָע) is ability. This is most likely hyperbole on the part of the psalmist.
The imagery of being deaf (חֵרֵשׁ) emphasizes David's helplessness.

Similar to v. 14b, the context of further describing a mute person indicates the modality of cannot open (יִפְתַּח) is ability.
Like being deaf, the imagery of being mute (אִלָם) also emphasizes David's helplessness.

v. 15

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
15a	וָאֱהִ֗י כְּ֭אִישׁ אֲשֶׁ֣ר לֹא־שֹׁמֵ֑עַ	And so I have become like a man who does not hear
15b	וְאֵ֥ין בְּ֝פִ֗יו תּוֹכָחֽוֹת׃	and who has no arguments in his mouth.

Expanded Paraphrase

And so I have become like a man who does not hear and so has no way of responding to the accusations and who has no arguments in his mouth. So I must rely on others to defend my case.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

See v. 14 for further discussion about whether this is a choice or inability to hear and speak.
The verb I have become (וָאֱהִי) can either have a stative meaning ("to be") or an incohative meaning ("to become"), indicating entering into a state. The stative meaning of היה is much rarer, however, so the inchoative reading is preferred here.^[83] The use of the wayyiqtol here does not indicate consecutive action but instead summarizes the previous section, indicating that section is complete. ^[84]
The participle hear (שֹׁמֵעַ) sometimes has the connotation of a witness at a judicial hearing (Judg 11:10, Prov 21:28).
While the participle hear (שֹׁמֵעַ) could indicate ability similar to v. 14b and d, because it is a participle unlike the yiqtols used in those verses, it is likely that the psalmist is simply indicating the more general state rather than ability.
The noun arguments (תּוֹכָחוֹת) is most frequently used to mean reproof, rebuke, or correction. However, this word and the verb it is derived from are commonly used in the context of judicial cases, where it "refers to a formal statement of one's position."^[85] As such, it is sometimes understood as a contradiction or retort.^[86] The verbal form is used in v. 2 of this psalm to describe YHWH rebuking the psalmist.

My only hope (vv. 16-23)

In this section, the psalmist reaches the culmination of his purpose in this psalm: to present his request before YHWH. Throughout this section, David gives the reason for his plea and his concern, as shown in the chain of כִּי clauses beginning vv. 16-19.

v. 16

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
16a	כִּֽי־לְךָ֣ יְהוָ֣ה הוֹחָ֑לְתִּי	But, YHWH, I have hoped for you.
16b	אַתָּ֥ה תַ֝עֲנֶ֗ה אֲדֹנָ֥י אֱלֹהָֽי׃	You yourself must answer, my Lord, my God.

Expanded Paraphrase

I cannot answer my enemies myself, but I will rely on you to speak for me. That's why, YHWH, I have hoped for you because I believe you are able to help and will act. You yourself are the one who must answer the accusations of my enemies, not me, my Lord, my God. You are the only one who can help.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

This verse is the one statement of confidence and ray of hope in this psalm. While everything around him may appear bleak, David continues to hope for YHWH, trusting that he will indeed answer.
This verse is the most prominent section of this psalm. This is indicated by the speech act analysis (statement of confidence) and emotional analysis (hope). Nowhere else in the psalm does David have a positive view of the future.^[87] This is also accentuated by the use of vocatives, where three vocatives are used in the span of seven prosodic words. While this is a moment of hope, it does not relieve the emotions David is feeling as can be seen in vv. 17-21. The central nature of this verse is shown poetically as well. Of the three occurrences of YHWH (יְהוָה), the middle occurrence is in v. 16. Similarly, the middle instance of the three occurrences of my Lord (אֲדֹנָי) is in v. 16. There are seven uses of כִי in this psalm, and the middle instance is also in v. 16. The first-person pronoun "I" (אֲנִי) appears equidistantly from v. 16, -- v. 14 and v. 18. Furthermore, v. 16 stands between vv. 4-5 and vv. 19-21, which have mirroring sequences of words/roots, marked in shades of green and teal in the image below.

With all of these elements together, v. 16 stands out as key in this psalm. It provides the grounding for David's lament: there is still hope in YHWH even when everyone has abandoned him. When surrounded by his own iniquity and sin, suffering deeply, and opposed by mighty enemies, his focus is on YHWH and the hope that YHWH will answer. For more information, see the Poetic Feature You must answer!.

The third paragraph in this psalm begins in v. 16. This paragraph break is indicated by the emphatic use of the pronoun, the three vocatives, the fronting of לְךָ֣, and the contrastive כִּֽי.
The but (כִּי) here could be functioning in one of three ways. First, it could be introducing a counter statement to the previous segment, contrasting the abandonment by humans and David's trust in God.^[88] This would mean, "I could not speak, but YHWH will answer." Second, it could be causal, giving the reason why David gives no arguments: because he has placed his hope in the Lord, not in any arguments he could make. This would mean, "I'm choosing not to speak because I trust YHWH will answer." Third, it could be causal, but subordinate to the following clause, giving the reason why YHWH will answer. This would mean, "YHWH answers because I have hoped for him." Because of the fronting of "for you" (לְךָ), the focus is on YHWH, not necessarily on the answer or the arguments, so the first analysis is more likely. For further analysis, see The Function of כִּי in Ps 38:16. The effect here is that David knows that nothing he can say can justify himself in the sight of his enemies, so he resigns himself to silence. Instead of trusting in his own power or his friends' support, he hopes for YHWH to answer on his behalf.
The prepositional phrase for you (לְךָ) is fronted as contrastive focus, indicating that David has hoped for God rather than man.
The vocative YHWH (יְהוָה) further emphasizes the prepositional phrase "for you" (לְךָ) as the focus (Miller 2010, 357).
The use of three vocatives (YHWH, my Lord, and my God) in the span of seven words indicates a tipping point in the psalmist's dependence upon God. Up to this point, the vocatives have appeared with only one per verse (vv. 2, 10). But in v. 16 and in vv. 22-23, the clustering of the vocatives in such a short space is significant. This increase shows the psalmist's increased dependence upon YHWH as the only one who can answer.

For more notes on the use of the vocatives in Ps 38, see the Poetic Feature Intensified Dependence.

The qatal of I have hoped (הוֹחָלְתִּי) functions to describe David's continuing hope for YHWH, beginning at some point in the past and continuing even to now in his suffering.
The act of hoping for (הוֹחָלְתִּי) someone anticipates action (Pss 39:7; 130:5; Isa 8:17; Mic 7:7). In Scripture, hoping for God shows patience, submissiveness, and dependence upon him (Pss 27:14; 37:3; Lam 3:26). Hoping and waiting on God is rewarded (Prov 20:22; Isa 49:23; Lam 3:25).
The clause you yourself must answer, my Lord, my God (אַתָּה תַעֲנֶה אֲדֹנָי אֱלֹהָי) could either be directive, asking YHWH to answer, assertive, declaring that YHWH must answer, or expressive, demonstrating the psalmist's complete trust that YHWH will indeed answer. Because of the use of the yiqtol, the assertive is more likely, taking this verse as an expression of confidence that YHWH will indeed answer, even if the situation looks bleak at the moment.
The fronted yourself (אַתָּה) is confirming focus, indicating it is indeed YHWH who must answer. The use of this pronoun is not required for the grammar, making this clause even more emphatic.
The verb answer (ענה) can have the connotation of responding to legal accusations (Exod 20:16; 23:2; Deut 5:20; 19:16, 18; 21:7; Isa 3:9; Jer 14:7) or it could mean responding to a cry for help (Isa 58:9; 65:12, 24; 66:4; Jer 7:13).^[89] Because there is no explicit cry for help in the context and there are implications of accusations (see v. 21 especially), it is more likely that this verb has the connotation of responding to legal accusations.
The yiqtol of you must answer (תַעֲנֶה) describes an event where YHWH must answer David. David cannot answer his enemies satisfactorily and even if he did answer, he might make the situation worse. He can't rely on his friends to answer either, so YHWH must answer on David's behalf.^[90]
The use of both the qatal (I have hoped [הוֹחָלְתִּי]) and the yiqtol (you must answer [תַעֲנֶה]) of the verbs together could be functioning as a grammatical merism. If this were the case, the force would be that David always has and always will hope for YHWH and YHWH always has and always will answer David. While this is likely true, it is more likely the use of the qatal and yiqtol is motivated by semantic constraints. The qatal is used to clarify that David's hope for YHWH originated in the past, not the present (contrasting with the yiqtols in the previous verses). The yiqtol also demonstrates that YHWH has not yet answered David in this situation.
The two vocatives my Lord, my God (אֲדֹנָי אֱלֹהָי) serve to indicate line delimitation.^[91]
The double apposition of my Lord, my God (אֲדֹנָי אֱלֹהָי) is emphatic. The use of "my Lord" (אֲדֹנָי) describes God's role, while the use of "my God" (אֱלֹהָי) emphasizes the psalmist's relationship to him. The fact that both of these are used and there is an explicit second person pronoun here is striking.

v. 17

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
17a	כִּֽי־אָ֭מַרְתִּי פֶּן־יִשְׂמְחוּ־לִ֑י	For I thought that they would rejoice concerning me,
17b	בְּמ֥וֹט רַ֝גְלִ֗י עָלַ֥י הִגְדִּֽילוּ׃	[those who] have considered themselves superior to me when my feet slip.

Expanded Paraphrase

I have not spoken, for I thought that, even if I did, they would rejoice concerning me like they have in the past, mocking my feeble reply, [those who] have considered themselves superior to me when my feet slip, like they did when I sinned, leaving me vulnerable to attack.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

This verse is a thought that David had when he decided not to speak up. ^[92]
v. 17a literally reads, "I thought, 'Lest they rejoice over me.'" Grammatically, there is an elided phrase before "lest," but the content of this phrase is ambiguous. What is it the psalmist decided to do "unless..."? Since it most likely refers to the time period when David chose not to speak, it would make sense for the elided phrase to be something along the lines of "I have not answered/spoken."^[93] David's enemies have already considered themselves superior, since his feet slips when he had sinned previously, so anything that he says would be discredited. Thus David is afraid that if he defends himself, the situation will remain the same or become worse. Since the conjunction lest (פֶן) is frequently used without an explicit main clause (e.g. Gen 3:22; 26:9 (cf. 26:7 for the explicit main clause); 1 Sam 13:19), it is not uncommon for the main clause to be absent. This "lest" (פֶן) governs the rest of the clauses in this verse.
The phrase אָמַרְתִּי פֶּן, literally "I thought, 'Lest...'," functions as an idiom, meaning, "I am afraid that X would happen" (Gen 31:31; 38:11; 42:4; Num 16:34; and 1 Sam 27:11)^[94] While grammatically the elided phrase mentioned previously is implied, semantically the meaning focuses on the fear of what should be prevented, in this case the rejoicing of those who consider themselves superior to David. As such, it is translated here as "I thought that X would happen."
Lest (פֶן) introduces something the author does not want to happen.^[95] This negative wish carries over to the next two verbs. Because of the use of the phrase "I thought that X would happen" (אָמַרְתִּי פֶּן) this is expressing an event that has not happened yet, but David fears will happen soon.
The phrase they rejoice concerning me (יִשְׂמְחוּ־לִי) indicates the psalmist's enemies are maliciously rejoicing over his misfortune, his destruction, and their victory over him.
Rather than advantage, the concerning (לְ) expresses that this rejoicing is to the psalmist's disadvantage.
The phrase when my feet slip (בְּמוֹט רַגְלִי) is fronted as a frame setter, giving the temporal orientation for the rest of the clause.
The infinitive when...slip (בְּמוֹט) is temporal, as shown by the use of בְּ. This isn't a hypothetical "if" but a certain "when." There are two ways to interpret this phrase. Either it refers to something David is anticipating, but has not happened yet, or it refers to an event that has happened before and David anticipates will happen again (habitual/iterative). Either is possible from the context, but since it and the following main verb function as the subject of the previous clause, it is more likely this is the habitual reading.^[96]
The imagery of feet slipping has two potential interpretations with similar results. Either it indicates sin (as in Ps 17:5), or it indicates making a mistake (as in Deut 32:25). Both leave the one who slipped open for attack from enemies.^[97] In the context of confessing iniquity it makes the most sense for this to refer to sinning.

It is unclear from the context of this psalm whether foot slipping in this instance refers specifically to sinning or whether it is simply making a mistake that leaves David vulnerable to accusation and attack from his enemies. It seems the base meaning of the imagery of feet slipping is making a mistake, which is then applied in certain contexts to making a mistake in regard to obeying YHWH's commands, which results in sin. However, whether it is a mistake or a sin, the result of feet slipping is vulnerability which leaves one open to attack from enemies. Based on the fact that David has indeed sinned in this psalm, resulting in God's discipline, it is more likely that in this verse feet slipping refers to sinning.

The prepositional phrase to me (עָלַי) is fronted for poetic reasons, mirroring the word order in v. 17a.
The use of the qatal consider themselves superior (הִגְדִּילוּ) presents a challenge following "lest" (פֶן), since normally "lest" (פֶן) is followed by a yiqtol verb. There are three primary options: (1) it could also be governed by the conjunction פֶן, continuing the yiqtol, (2) it could be an independent clause, or (3) it could be an asyndetic relative clause.^[98] Because פֶן does not typically govern qatal clauses and the parallel with v. 17a, it is most likely that הִגְדִּילוּ is a verb in a headless relative clause.
In the phrase [those who] have considered themselves superior to me (עָלַי הִגְדִּילוּ), the preposition shows that the psalmist's enemies are viewing themselves as superior to him, which is to the psalmist's detriment (Jer 48:26).^[99] Another potential nuance is adversative, drawing out the hostile nature of this exaltation (1 Chr 21:10).^[100] However, the use of the verb גדל "consider superior" (lit. "make great") here lends itself to the superior usage.
The hiphil of consider superior (גדל) is functioning to indicate entering into the state (Ps 35:26). The qatal in this verse thus indicates entering into that state and continuing until the time of speech.^[101]

v. 18

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
18a	כִּֽי־אֲ֭נִי לְצֶ֣לַע נָכ֑וֹן	For I am certain to stumble,
18b	וּמַכְאוֹבִ֖י נֶגְדִּ֣י תָמִֽיד׃	and my pain is always before me.

Expanded Paraphrase

I have not spoken; for I am certain that I will stumble and so everyone will know I am still sick. They will think that you are still punishing me. And so I will be vulnerable to attack and any argument I make will still lead to my destruction. And my pain from my sin and discipline is always before me— yet another reason they will think you are still punishing me!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The conjunction for (כִּי) gives David's motivation for not speaking. This conjunction governs vv. 18-21.^[102]
The phrase certain to stumble (לְצֶלַע נָכוֹן) is interesting because "certain" (כון) contains the idea of being steadfast and sure, established, while "stumble" (צלע) has the exact opposite meaning of not being surefooted, but rather limping and being unstable. David is expressing the fact that he is expecting to stumble. This stumbling, whether physical or metaphorical, is likely caused by the suffering that David has been experiencing (vv. 2-9).
The prepositional phrase to stumble (לְצֶלַע) expresses the purpose of what the psalmist is certain of (Gen 31:52; Ps 119:5).^[103] This does not indicate that the psalmist is planning to stumble, but rather that he is certain that it will happen.
The fronting of to stumble (לְצֶלַע) is for confirming focus, further emphasizing his certainty that he will stumble.
The noun stumble (צֶלַע) comes from the root "to limp" (צלע), which is rare, but is usually used in the context of becoming lame or limping (Gen 32:32).^[104] These people were generally seen as outcasts (c.f. Mic 4:6, 7; Zeph 3:19).
The noun my pain (וּמַכְאוֹבִי) has the general meaning of pain or suffering, but can be figuratively expanded to sorrow caused by that pain or suffering.^[105] It is unclear from the context whether this pain is mental, physical, or both.

v. 19

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
19a	כִּֽי־עֲוֺנִ֥י אַגִּ֑יד	Although I confess my iniquity,
19b	אֶ֝דְאַ֗ג מֵֽחַטָּאתִֽי׃	I am distressed because of my sin.

Expanded Paraphrase

Although I publicly confess my iniquity, I am still distressed about what will happen because of my sin since my enemies can use it against me to support their accusations. My confession will not change my situation; I'm still suffering and so everyone thinks that I still have sin to be punished for. My sin still feels unresolved!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The although (כִּי) in this verse relates specifically to v. 19b, functioning as a concessive, showing that even though David is confessing his iniquity, it is basically useless, since he is still anxious about his sin.^[106]
The phrase I confess my iniquity (עֲוֺנִי אַגִּיד) in the context indicates that this confession is occurring in the present.^[107]
For comments on the meaning of my iniquity (עֲוֺנִי), see v. 5.
The noun my iniquity (עֲוֺנִי) is fronted for poetic purposes, mirroring the word order in v. 19b. This is further strengthened by the phonological similarity within the two verbs I tell (אַגִּיד; aggid) and I am anxious (אֶדְאַג; edag).^[108]
The use of the verb confess (אַגִּיד) with words relating to sin and iniquity is most commonly used in the prophetic books when God commands the prophets to publicly declare the sin of the people, confronting them with the truth of their iniquity (Isa 58:1; Mic 3:8). However, it is also used in the context of Israel boasting in their sin like Sodom (Isa 3:9). These contexts point to this proclamation of iniquity not as something private between the psalmist and God, but rather a public declaration of his sin. It could be that this public is motivated by the idea that confessing iniquity leads to prosperity and a merciful response (Prov 28:13).
The verb am distressed (דאג) appears seven times in the Hebrew Bible. It typically refers to being distressed, anxious, worried, or afraid (1 Sam 9:5; Isa 57:11). It often refers to be distressed about something that is unresolved. In this context, David's sin and everything that resulted from it or could result from it is causing him to be distressed.
The verb I am distressed (אֶדְאַג) could either have habitual aspect or be unmarked for aspect. Habitual aspect would indicate that the psalmist is frequently telling about his iniquity. The unmarked aspect would indicate that at this moment the psalmist is talking about his iniquity. While it is certainly true that the psalmist is currently discussing his iniquity and its results in this psalm, the use of תָמִֽיד in the recent context (v. 18) causes this verb to lean toward habitual aspect.
This use of because of (מִן) indicates the reason for the psalmist's anxiety.^[109] This is a similar usage to מִפְנֵי in v. 4.

v. 20

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
20a	וְֽ֭אֹיְבַי חִנָּם עָצֵ֑מוּ	And those who are my enemies for no reason are mighty,
20b	וְרַבּ֖וּ שֹׂנְאַ֣י שָֽׁקֶר׃	and those who hate me without cause are numerous.

Expanded Paraphrase

And those who are my enemies for no reason (they hate me even though I haven't sinned against them!) are mighty, but I am sick and weak. And those who hate me without cause are numerous. But I am alone and therefore defenseless so I cannot fight them. Because I haven't done anything against them and have confessed all the sin I am aware of, I don't think I have done anything to provoke these enemies. I don't deserve their hatred or their accusations!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The text of the MT reads "living" (חַיִּים)^[110] rather than for no reason (חִנָּם). The text of חִנָּם is preferred because it creates a clearer parallel within the verse itself, has older textual support, and its meaning is clearer. Its use also aligns with similar phrases in Pss 35:19 and 69:5. For further information on this textual issue, see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 38:20.
The fronting of those who are my enemies for no reason (וְאֹיְבַי חִנָּם) indicates a shift in topic from David back to his enemies.
The verb are mighty (עצם) only appears seventeen times in the Old Testament. It means either many or strong, but frequently it is difficult to tell which is in focus in the context.^[111] Potentially both are encapsulated in this term.^[112] Strength and numbers are related and often interchangeable (Gen 26:16; Exod 1:7, 20).^[113] It is usually associated in some way with hostility or conflict, whether the enemies or Israel are growing more numerous and powerful.^[114] This verb comes from the same root as the word "bones" (עֶצֶם) in v. 4.
In the qal, are mighty (עָצֵמוּ) can either be stative ("are mighty") or inchoative, indicating entering into a state ("have become mighty"). Either interpretation works in this context. The stative is slightly more preferred since the focus in this segment is not on the change of state but rather on the state itself.
Similar to "are mighty" (עָצֵמוּ), the verb are numerous (וְרַבּוּ) could either be stative ("are numerous") or inchoative ("have become numerous"). However, the stative is preferred since the state itself is the focus and not the entrance into that state. While the verb is weqatal in form, here it is more likely to be a simple waw+qatal, continuing the thought from the a line. It could be that this is a weqatal showing the result of the a line, but with the incredibly close semantic range of the two verbs this seems unlikely.
The context indicates that those who hate me (שֹׂנְאַי) refers to people who habitually hate the psalmist.
The word without cause (שָׁקֶר) here is used metaphorically. The base meaning is "lie" but when used adverbially it can mean "wrongfully" or "without cause."^[115]

v. 21

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
21a	וּמְשַׁלְּמֵ֣י רָ֭עָה תַּ֣חַת טוֹבָ֑ה	And those who repay with evil in response to good
21b	יִ֝שְׂטְנ֗וּנִי תַּ֣חַת רָֽדְפִי־טֽוֹב׃	accuse me in response to my pursuit of good.

Expanded Paraphrase

And because I am vulnerable and defenseless and they consider themselves superior to me and seek my destruction, those who repay with evil in response to good falsely accuse me in response to my pursuit of good. Even though I pursue good, they still attack me! They hope to destroy me with these accusations.

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The verb שלם in this verse means to repay, perhaps more literally translated "make complete (restitution)."^[116] This verb comes from the same root as the noun שָׁלוֹם, which was used in v. 4.
The use of the participle for those who repay (וּמְשַׁלְּמֵי) indicates that this has a habitual aspect.
The fronting of the phrase those who repay with evil (וּמְשַׁלְּמֵי רָעָה) matches the structure of v. 20a.
Both uses of in response (תַּחַת) in this verse are instances of substitution, where one thing takes the place of another.^[117] The preposition תַּחַת frequently occurs in the Pentateuch with the verb שׁלם with the meaning to repay something for something. In this verse, the first use of תַּחַת shows people repaying evil for good.
The verb accuse me (יִשְׂטְנוּנִי) comes from the root שׂטן, which means to oppose or be hostile toward someone. This could include falsely accusing them in a court of law (Ps 109:4, 20; Zech 3:1).^[118] In this passage it is unclear if judicial accusation is in the forefront or just hostility. There are some words scattered throughout this psalm, such as תוֹכִיחֵ֑נִי "rebuke" (v. 2) and תּוֹכָחֽוֹת "arguments" (v. 15) which could give the image of a court case.
The verb accuse me (יִשְׂטְנוּנִי) could either have unmarked aspect, simply noting a single event where the psalmist was accused, or it could be iterative, meaning that the psalmist has been accused repeatedly. The combined 'qatal forms from v. 20 and the yiqtol from this verse give the perspective that David's enemies have become mighty and numerous and have continued to accuse him.
The second use of in response (תַּחַת) is less clear than the first with the verb "repay" (שׁלם). In this second prepositional phrase, the same meaning is carried through, however, painting the picture of people repaying the good the psalmist is pursuing with hostility toward him.
The text of the Leningrad codex has the ketiv רְדוֹפִי instead of רָֽדְפִי my pursuit. The ketiv is a misspelling of the infinitive construct with a first-person singular pronominal suffix. The vowels align with the infinitive construct without a pronominal suffix. The vowels align with the infinitive construct without a pronominal suffix. Therefore, the qere in the Leningrad codex suggests that this should be read רָֽדְפִי instead, which is the correct spelling for the qal infinitive construct with a first-person singular pronominal suffix. The correct spelling is preferred here.^[119]
The infinitive my pursuit (רָֽדְפִי) has a habitual aspect which contrasts the habitual aspect of "those who repay" (וּמְשַׁלְּמֵי) in v. 21a. The habitual nature is further emphasized by the repetition of "in response" (תַּחַת) and "good" (טוב).

v. 22

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
22a	אַל־תַּֽעַזְבֵ֥נִי יְהוָ֑ה	Do not abandon me, YHWH!
22b	אֱ֝לֹהַ֗י אַל־תִּרְחַ֥ק מִמֶּֽנִּי׃	My God, do not be far from me!

Expanded Paraphrase

I cannot answer them myself, so do not abandon me, YHWH, unlike how my strength has abandoned me! My God, do not be far from me unlike how my friends are far from me! You are the only one left who can answer for me!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

This verse begins the final paragraph. This division is marked by the frequent use of vocatives in vv. 22-23 and the directives, binding these two verses together and setting them apart from what came before. The pattern the vocatives form across the clauses (final, initial, and then final) also solidifies this as its own paragraph. Also, the culmination of the three groups mentioned in vv. 20-21 also indicates that paragraph has closed, especially with the length of the fronted subject in v. 21.
The verb abandon (עזב) refers back to v. 11, where David's strength abandons him. For more information on the meaning of עזב, see v. 11.
The vocatives in vv. 22-23 are of special note since there are so many of them in short order. Both verses have two vocatives one after another: YHWH, my God (יְהוָה אֱלֹהַי) in v. 22 and "my Lord, my salvation" (אֲדֹנָי תְּשׁוּעָתִי) in v. 23. These four vocatives lend a sense of dependence to these directives. See also the note on v. 16 for more comments on the use of vocatives in Ps 38.
The vocative my God (אֱלֹהַי) grammatically could accompany either of the clauses in this verse, but based on line division it should modify v. 22b.
Similar to "abandon" (עזב), the verb far from me (רחק) refers back to v. 12, where David's friends and companions are said to be far from him.

v. 23

v.	Hebrew	Close-but-Clear
23a	ח֥וּשָׁה לְעֶזְרָתִ֑י	Hurry to help me,
23b	אֲ֝דֹנָ֗י תְּשׁוּעָתִֽי׃^[120]	my Lord, my salvation!

Expanded Paraphrase

I need help quickly since I expect to stumble at any moment. So hurry to help me like I trust that you will, my Lord, my salvation!

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

The verb hurry (חוּשָׁה) is the only imperative in this psalm. All the other commands are negatives and thus are jussives. The imperative in this verse is hurry (חוּשָׁה), not "help" because the psalmist already knows that YHWH will help (v. 16). The question is not whether YHWH will help the psalmist, but rather when.
The "to" (לְ) preposition in to help me (לְעֶזְרָתִי) indicates the purpose for YHWH to hurry: the psalmist requires help (see also Pss 40:14; 70:2; 71:12).
For comments on the vocatives my Lord, my salvation (אֲדֹנָי תְּשׁוּעָתִי), see the notes in v. 22 and v. 16.
The vocative my salvation (תְּשׁוּעָתִי) is the only vocative in this psalm which is not one of God's names or official titles. However, the use of this noun as a vocative addressing God sheds some light on how David views YHWH. In spite of the discipline and suffering and the feelings of abandonment, David still views YHWH as the ultimate source of his salvation.

Legends

Grammatical diagram

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.

Shapes and colors on grammatical diagram

(For more information, click "Phrase-level Legend" below.)

Expanded paraphrase

(For more information, click "Expanded Paraphrase Legend" below.)

Bibliography

Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, Walter Bauer, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. 2000. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Baethgen, Friedrich. 1904. Die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.

Delitzsch, Franz. 1871. Biblical Commentary on the Psalms: Vol. 2. Translated by Francis Bolton. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

Fokkelman, J.P. 2000. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis (Vol 2: 85 Psalms and Job 4–14). Vol. 2. Studia Semitica Neerlandica. Assen: Van Gorcum.

Gunkel, Hermann. 1926. Die Psalmen. 4th ed. Göttinger Handkommentar Zum Alten Testament 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

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

Hupfeld, Hermann. 1868. Die Psalmen. Vol. 2. Gotha: Friedrich Andreas Perthes.

Jenni, Ernst. 1992. Die Hebräischen Präpositionen Band 1: Die Präposition Beth. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.

Kim, Young Bok. 2022. Hebrew Forms of Address: A Sociolinguistic Analysis. Atlanta: SBL Press.

Keel, Othmar. 1997. The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.

Labuschagne, Casper J. 2008. “Psalm 38 - Logotechnical Analysis.” Numerical Features of the Psalms and Other Selected Texts. August 5, 2008.

Leveen, J. 1971. “Textual Problems in the Psalms.” VT 21: 48–58.

Lugt, Pieter van der. 2006. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: With Special Reference to the First Book of the Psalter. Vol. 1 of 3 vols. Oudtestamentische Studiën 53. Leiden: Brill.

Mowinckel, Sigmund. 1962. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship. Oxford: Blackwell.

Rashi. Rashi on Psalms.

Ryken, Leland, Jim Wilhoit, Tremper Longman, Colin Duriez, Douglas Penney, and Daniel G. Reid, eds. 1998. Dictionary of Biblical Imagery. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Wolff, Hans Walter. 1974. Anthropology of the Old Testament. Translated by Margaret Kohl. Philadelphia: Fortress.

Smend, Rudolf. 1888. "Ueber das Ich der Psalmen." In Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 8. Giessen: J. Ricker'sche Buchhandlung.

Terrien, Samuel L. 2003. The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary. ECC. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Footnotes

38

↑ The Hebrew text comes from Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible, which presents the text of the Leningrad Codex (the Masoretic text). The English text is our own "Close-but-clear" translation (CBC). The CBC is a “wooden” translation that exists to provide a window into the Hebrew text. It is essentially an interlinear that has been put into English word-order. It is also similar to a “back-translation” (of the Hebrew) often used in Bible translation checking. It is important to remember that the CBC is not intended to be a stand-alone translation, but is rather a tool for using the Layer by Layer materials. The CBC is used as the primary display text (along with the Hebrew) for most analytical visualisations. It is also used as the display text for most videos.
↑ A legend for the expanded paraphrase is available near the bottom of this page, in the section titled "Legends."
↑ Legends for both the grammatical diagram and the shapes and colours on the grammatical diagram are available near the bottom of this page, in the section titled "Legends."
↑
Some scholars argue that many if not all of the psalms in the psalter are intended to be communal rather than individual, including laments.
- They often base this on the usage of the Psalter in liturgical contexts (Smend 1888, 56). This concept is supported by the Targum and Midrash, so it does have ancient support. The imagery of sickness and wounds is applied to entire nations and tribes elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (e.g. Hos 5:13). The use of first-person singular pronouns also does not preclude this psalm as a communal lament. Lam 1, especially vv. 11-22, very clearly describes a lament of Jerusalem using first-person singular pronouns. Rashi states that Ps 38 in particular was written "to recite... in time of distress, to make remembrance of the distress of Israel before the Holy One, blessed be He, and [David] recited it as relating to all Israel" (Rashi on Ps 38:1). In this interpretation, the illness of the psalmist is an allegory for persecution, especially since the only direct pleas in Ps 38 relate to being saved from enemies, not to the illness or the suffering itself (Smend 1888, 75-76).
- On the other hand, other scholars take the view that the communal reading should only be preferred in the contexts where he psalmist either makes it explicit from context (as in Lam 1) or where the meaning of the psalm demands it (as in Ps 129:1, "Let Israel now say"; Gunkel 1998, 122). In fact, Gunkel declares, "...the explanation of the "I" as the poet is so natural, even self-evident, that any deviation from it should be perceived as a tasteless error and should be resisted with all one's strength" (Gunkel 1998, 122). In Ps 38, nothing clearly indicates that this should be read as communal. In fact, quite the opposite is true. The psalmist's friends and relatives (presumably other Israelites) are said to be standing at a distance, which would make the communal reading of this psalm difficult and unnatural (Gunkel 1998, 123). While it could be argued that the friends here refer to Israel's allies, that does not fit the familial aspect as well. Throughout this psalm there is no mention of Zion or Jerusalem or any clear indications that this is referring to more than an individual's suffering (Hupfeld 1868, 269). As such, with the internal evidence in Ps 38, it is more likely that this is an individual lament rather than communal.
↑ The LXX adds "For the Sabbath" (περὶ σαββάτου) at the end of this verse. This could shed light on how the psalm was used, specifically in reference to the memorial offering offered each Sabbath (Lev 24:7-8). The LXX likely adds this to clarify the meaning of לְהַזְכִּיר. Since most manuscripts do not attest to this addition and no modern translations have included it, it is not represented in the diagram.
↑ Kim 2022, 213-217.
↑ BHRG §41.3.2.
↑ Because the negative particle (אַל) is elided in v. 2b, an argument could be made that תְיַסְּרֵֽנִי discipline me is a yiqtol and not a jussive, in which case it would be translated, "you will not discipline me when you're wrathful." However, the context and the content make more sense to be in parallel with the a line of the verse, so the jussive is a more likely interpretation.
↑ SDBH.
↑ See HALOT 410 and TDOT 6:67.
↑ SDBH.
↑ TDOT 6:67.
↑ Some Hebrew manuscripts and the versions add the אַל explicitly. Since the more difficult reading is its omission and elision, that reading is preferred.
↑ BHRG 2017, §39.6.3.f.
↑ However, the fronting could also be topic activation. If this line is topic activation, it could be paraphrased "For concerning your arrows, they have been shot into me." If this latter option is preferred, the arrows would need to be presupposed in the discourse, potentially from the concept of YHWH's wrath in the previous verse.
↑ Ryken et al. 1982, 206.
↑ Keel 1997, 85 and 221.
↑
V. 3b has a few variants regarding וַתִּנְחַ֖ת, which appears in the MT, coming from the same root as the first.
- The LXX has "and strengthened your hand against me" (καὶ ἐπεστήρισας ἐπʼ ἐμὲ τὴν χεῖρά σου), which BHS suggests would come from וַתְּנַחֵת, from the same root (נחת) but in the piel instead of qal. In addition, the LXX takes "hand" as the object of the verb rather than the subject. The shift to the piel would only necessitate a change to the vowels of the verb in the MT. While this is a viable option, the only textual support is the LXX, so it is unlikely to be original.
- The way the Syriac and the Targums translate this phrase indicates the word they are translating is וַתָּנַח, which comes from the root נוח "to rest." HALOT supports this reading (HALOT, 692). However, the imagery of someone's hand resting on someone is often used in imagery of blessing (c.f. Isa 25:10), which is not supported by the context of this psalm, since this line clearly has a negative implication. Since both verbs in the MT v. 3 come from the same root, it could be very easy for a scribe to become confused and replace the second verb with a similarly sounding verb. However, if that were the case, it is strange that no Hebrew manuscripts have a different root. For these reasons the text of the MT is preferred here. .
↑ See Jenni 1992, 197.
↑ BHRG 2017, §21.2.1.2.
↑ BHRG 2017, §39.20.3.b.
↑ Keel 1997, 85 and 221; Ryken et al. 1982, 736.
↑ DCH, Isa 26:3, Lam 3:17.
↑ See SDBH; HALOT; BDB; DCH. The word sounds spot (מְתֹם) only appears 4 times in the Hebrew Bible, half of which are in this psalm. It appears in Judg 20:48, but that text is difficult and has many textual variants so it is not reliable in determining the meaning of the word. The other passage is Isa 1:6, which reads, "From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness (מְתֹם) in it, but bruises and sores and raw wounds; they are not pressed out or bound up or softened with oil" (ESV). This verse confirms that מְתֹם is the opposite of an injury or wound. The LXX translates this as ἴασις, which refers to healing and restoration after an illness or injury (BDAG, 465). Similarly, the Targums translate this word as אָסוּ, which means either 'cure' or 'healing' (Targum Lexicon). The Peshitta translate it ܫܠܡܐ "wholeness," the same way שָׁלוֹם is translated in the b line. Because מְתֹם is from the root תמם, which means to finish or complete something, it is best to understand this word to mean a part of the body that is whole, complete, or sound (BDB, 1070; TDOT, 15:700). Because of the connection with תמם, which is used elsewhere to indicate someone who is blameless or perfect (Job 22:3), it could be that the psalmist is using this word to indicate not just physical injury, but also spiritual. This idea is supported by the parallel use of שָׁל֥וֹם in v. 4b.
↑ This is similar to the preposition לִפְנֵי. See BHRG 2017, §39.15.
↑ BHRG 2017, §39.15.
↑ DCH, 6:715; BHRG §39.15.2.
↑ HALOT, 277.
↑ SDBH.
↑ Ryken et al. 1982, 421.
↑ TDOT, 10:421.
↑ Ryken et al. 1982, 1222.
↑ SDBH; DCH 2011, 4:349.
↑ See BHRG §19.3.3; JM §113d.
↑ The locative use of מִן is supported by LXX and Jerome (see also Exod 20:18; BHRG 2017, §39.14.2a).
↑ This use of מִן happens when following an adjective or an intransitive verb (Exod 18:18; Num 11:14; Exod 12:4; JM 2006, §141i; GKC 1910, §133.c). A literal translation would be "they are heavy like a burden is heavy, heavier than I," meaning it is heavier than the psalmist can endure (Delitzsch 1871, 21). Many modern translations add a verb like "to bear" to draw out the comparison (NIV, NLT, NET, CSB). However, omitting the verb still allows the meaning to be clear. Thus, this prepositional phrase and verb could be translated "too heavy for me."
↑ Many translations place a conjunction between these verbs. This is supported by the LXX, so it has some merit, but since the meaning is not greatly affected, they are not diagrammed as emendations in the grammatical layer. Several modern translations include the conjunction in v. 6: ELB, BDS, NFC, GNT, EÜ, ZÜR, NBS, NVSR, and S21. The addition of the conjunction does not nullify the verbal hendiadys, however. Because there is not much textual support for the addition, the text of the MT has been preferred here.
↑ BDB, 17; DCH, 1:153; SDBH; see Prov 14:29, 15:21.
↑ SDBH; DCH, 1:153; Prov. 5:23, 14:17, 12:23.
↑ Many translations place a conjunction between these verbs (see ELB, BDS, and NFC). This is supported by the LXX, like v. 6, so it does have merit. The meaning is not affected by the addition, so it has not be included as an emendation. Because there is not much textual support for the addition, the text of the MT has been preferred here.
↑ See SDBH; HALOT, 796. Some scholars believe there are two roots that are homonyms, one which means "to do iniquity," which עָוֹן is derived from, and one which means "to bend or twist" (BDB, 730; DCH, 6:295). While this is a possibility, the idea of bending or twisting can also be understood in the breaking of the law and doing iniquity, so it may be best to simply understand these as different aspects of the same verb.
↑ TDOT, 10:548.
↑ SDBH.
↑ HALOT, 1458; see Isa 2:11 and Ps 35:14.
↑ HALOT; BHRG §39.19.3.
↑ JM 2006, 485.
↑ SDBH.
↑ SDBH.
↑ SDBH; TDOT, 7:264; HALOT, 489.
↑ DCH 2011, 5:227.
↑ SDBH.
↑ JM §119v.
↑ It appears in Gen 45:26 when Jacob learns that Joseph is still alive and "his heart became numb (פוג), for he did not believe them" (ESV). In Hab 1:4, the law is described with this verb in parallel with justice not going forth. The last place the verb appears is in Ps 77:3 where the psalmist's hand is stretched out and does not פוג, refusing to be comforted. The Syriac cognate means to be cold. The Aramaic cognate means to cease or be helpless (BDB, 806) or to be faint (Targum Lexicon). The LXX translates this with the aorist passive of κακόω, which means to be mistreated or to suffer (BDAG, 502).
↑ c.f. BHRG 2017, 363.
↑ Perhaps based on the verbs in this verse, some scholars have the emendation "lion" לָבִיא instead of "my heart" לִבִּי, changing the meaning from "the groaning/growling of my heart" to "the growling of a lion" (Gunkel 1926, 159; Baethgen 1904, 109). It makes more sense for a lion to growl than a heart, and the comparative מִן would parallel the use of עַד מְאֹד in the first line. However, the context is portraying the physical suffering of the psalmist, so it can still make good sense for the heart to be mentioned here. Elsewhere in this psalm, the psalmist has used מִן to give the reason for the main clause, so interpreting this prepositional phrase as the reason for the psalmist's groaning is not unreasonable (see v. 4 and v. 19 in particular). There is no textual support for this reading and no modern translations have taken this emendation as original.
↑ SDBH.
↑ Ryken et al. 1982, 3269.
↑ DCH, 5:603; c.f. BDB, 617; SDBH.
↑ It is possible that this is fronted for poetic reasons, mirroring the pattern in the latter half of the line: noun, verb, verb, noun.
↑ BHRG 2017, 80.
↑ BDB, 695.
↑ SDBH; HALOT, 750; Wolff, 1974, 42.
↑ TDOT, 1:158.
↑ BHRG 2017, 401.
↑ DCH 2011, 6:355; BDB 1977, 744; 2 Chr 7:15.
↑ The LXX reads καὶ αὐτό, where the singular pronoun aligns with the singular of אוֹר. Some Greek versions and the Syriac omit the phrase גַּם־הֵם entirely.
↑
There are four different options for how to understand this phrase.
- This could be a case of the pronoun matching the gender of the nomen rectum, the masculine plural form of עֵינַי. Although it is rare for an independent pronoun to not agree with its antecedent in gender and number, sometimes the independent pronoun matches the gender and/or number of the nomen rectum (JM 2006, §149c, a; Delitzsch 1871, 22).
- The second option makes "even them/that" גַּם־הֵם parenthetical, eliminating the need for it to match the gender and number of אור. However, this is more complicated and does not differ in meaning from the apposition.
- A third option is a corrupted text where the original was הוא, the masculine singular, but because וא can look similar to מ in some manuscripts, the scribe misread it, resulting in הם. However, this does not have any sure textual support (but see the singular of LXX, but which may be translational).
- The final option is that "and the light of my eyes" (וְאוֹר־עֵינַי) should be understood as part of a compound subject for the previous clause. In this case, הֵם would refer cataphorically to David's friends and loved ones in v. 12. However, this creates another issue with agreement since the number of the verb עזב is singular, whereas the compound subject כחי ואור עיני might expect a plural verb. The Masoretic accents argue against this interpretation, no modern translations take this as an option, and it does not fit the poetic parallelism of the verse, so it is not represented in the diagram. This also would break the parallelism within the verse.
↑ The tricolon reading is supported by the use of revia gadol and the line reading represented in the Aleppo Codex. Other analyze v. 12 as a bicolon. This reading is supported by the Greek manuscripts and the Hebrew manuscript Berlin Qu 680. Several scholars also take this view (Fokkelman 2000, 144; Van der Lugt 2006, 381). Also, it is worth noting that while there is a revia gadol, the vowel is not lengthened, which would point to reading this verse as a bicolon. The bicolon would have 5 words on the first line and 3 words on the second. While this is not an unlikely length, it would be the longest line in the entire psalm. Based on the cohesion with the other tricolon, v. 13, and the central position in this psalm, we have preferred the reading of the tricolon in this analysis.
↑ Ryken et al. 1982, 2182; Lev 13:46; 14:19-20; see John 9:1.
↑ Mowinckel 1962, 2:4.
↑ BHRG 2017, 363.
↑ BHRG 2017, 360.
↑ SDBH.
↑ It's possible this phrase has been fronted because of topic shift, but this is unlikely since it is semantically parallel with the companions in v. 12a.
↑ TDOT, 2:233.
↑ SDBH.
↑ TDOT 1978, 3:356.
↑ SDBH; TDOT 2004, 13:501.
↑ GKC §124.e.
↑ See the exegetical issue on the כִי in v. 16 for a more in-depth discussion of this matter: The Function of כִּי in Ps 38:16. If this is a choice rather than inability, the illocution types of the statements in vv. 14-15 could be commissives, indicating David's resolve not to speak, rather than expressive.
↑ If v. 17 is referring to the time period of v. 16a, then the two would mean that David hoped for YHWH otherwise his enemies would rejoice over him. But because David hoped in YHWH, now his enemies will not rejoice over him. But it is not just hoping in YHWH that results in David's enemies not triumphing; it is YHWH responding. As such, it makes more sense for v. 17 to be referring to the time when David chose not to speak. See v. 17 for further comments about the elided phrase there.
↑ The text of the Leningrad Codex has אֶשְׁמָע, which is a first-person yiqtol verb. If this is the case, there are two ways to understand the phrase וַאֲנִי כְחֵרֵשׁ לֹא אֶשְׁמָע. First, "I" אֲנִי could be the subject of "cannot hear" לֹא אֶשְׁמָע and the prepositional phrase could be adverbial. Second, "I ... like a deaf person" אֲנִי כְחֵרֵשׁ could be a verbless clause with the prepositional phrase functioning as the complement. In this case, לֹא אֶשְׁמָע would be an independent clause. A third possibility is that this text should be emended to the third-person yiqtol verb יִשְׁמָע, which three to ten Hebrew manuscripts support. If this third option is correct, 14a would follow the pattern of the clauses in 14b and 15, where the complement of the verb is a comparative prepositional phrase which is modified by a relative clause. However, the textual support is against this option, so either of the two previous options are more likely.
↑ JM 2006, §111i.
↑ Gen 2:1; BHRG 2017, §21.2.1.1.3; JM 2006, §118i.
↑ TDOT, 6:70.
↑ HALOT, 1698.
↑ See Labuschagne 2008, 4; Terrien 2003, 325-326.
↑ BHRG 2017, §40.21.2.
↑ SDBH.
↑ It is possible to take תַעֲנֶה as a jussive: "answer me." However, the form of ענה includes the III-ה, which would be typically dropped in a jussive, so the grammar does not allow for this to be a jussive (BHRG §15.5).
↑ Miller 2010, 360-363.
↑ Since this verse begins with אָמַרְתִּי, this could be a direct quote. However, based on the context, it seems best to take this as a thought that David thought (or spoke) to himself.
↑ The alternative is that this elided phrase could be either a yiqtol or an imperative of the verb "answer" (ענה) from v. 16b. This would imply that YHWH must answer otherwise David's enemies will rejoice over him. One scholar suggested "I will take heed of my ways" (אשׁמרה דרכי), but this does not have any textual support and seems to take liberties in the context (Leveen 1971, 56).
↑ See also Genesius' Dictionary, 678; GKC §152.w(i); JM §168g.
↑ JM 2006, §168g. For this reason, many modern versions translate the following verbs like jussives: "Don't let them rejoice over me" (CSB). This interpretation makes the negative wish explicit. Taking the conjunction this way removes the need for an elided clause, but does not reflect the Hebrew syntax.
↑ The other reading, where David is anticipating slipping, could be read as "For I am afraid that they might rejoice over me, those who will have considered themselves superior when my feet will slip."
↑ A chart comparing the two:
↑
There are three options.
- While it is rare, there are some cases where a qatal follows פֶן (cf. 2 Kgs 2:16; 2 Sam 20:6). If this is the case, this clause could be a compound with the previous clause "they rejoice concerning me." This is supported by many modern translations (NIV, NLT, GNT, NET, KJV, NJB, JPS, Luther 2017, HFA, NGÜ, ELB, GNB, ZÜR, RVR95, NVI DHH, BTX4, NBS, NVSR, BDS, PDV, NFC, S21). But when פֶן is used with the qatal, it typically refers to something that could have happened in the past, which is not the meaning here. While it is odd that the author would switch conjugations, it is not uncommon for a yiqtol and qatal to be parallel to one another in Hebrew poetry (e.g. v. 5, 16). Whenever the פֶן is followed with a compound clause cluster, the first is a yiqtol and the second is a qatal joined with a vav. Here we are missing the ו, but the omission of conjunctions is not uncommon in Hebrew poetry. However, since the meaning is different and there is no conjunction, this is unlikely.
- Second, if the clause עָלַי הִגְדִּילוּ is an independent clause, it would be translated, "They considered themselves superior to me when my foot slipped." However, this is unlikely because of the parallel line and the context. No modern translations take this approach.
- Third, the qatal could function in a headless asyndetic relative clause. This is supported by ESV, NASB, CSB, HCSB, NRSV, NEB, REB, EÜ, TOB. While asyndetic relative clauses usually have the verb at the beginning and the verb here is at the end, headless asyndetic relative clauses with verbs in the final position are not uncommon (Isa 54:1; Prov 8:32; see also Isa 42:24; Jer 2:11; JM 2006, §158d; Holmstedt 2002, 112).
↑ BHRG 2017, §39.20.2.a; JM 2006, §133f.
↑ BHRG 2017, §39.29.3.b.
↑ BHRG §19.2.2.
↑ It is possible that this segment could be subordinate to the "lest" (פֶן) clause in v. 17, in which case it would indicate the reason for why David's enemies are rejoicing.
↑ BHRG 2017, §39.11.6.d.
↑ SDBH.
↑ HALOT, 579; DCH, 5:265; BDB, 456; TDOT, 7:10. Some scholars interpret it as just meaning "wound," but that seems too general (SDBH).
↑ BHRG §40.29.1(1)d.
↑ By itself, this phrase could potentially be considered commissive, showing David's resolution to confess his iniquity, rather than assertive. If this were the case, David would be committing himself to tell others about his iniquity. However, the verbal semantics and the context indicate that this confession is occurring in the present rather than the future. Reading this as a commissive would also imply that in v. 19b David is anxious about telling about his sin. As such, the commissive reading is dispreferred.
↑ If not poetic, it could be topic reactivation, since "iniquity" (עֲוֺן) hasn't been mentioned since v. 4.
↑ Cf. BHRG §39.14.4.b.
↑ While the adjective חַי has the base meaning of "alive," it can also indicate that the person is healthy and/or thriving (DCH 3:202; SDBH; see TDOT 4:328, 333). This would create a clear contrast between David's sickness and his enemies' health. However, that contrast is already present in the context, so it is unnecessary to make it explicit.
↑ DCH, 6:533.
↑ SDBH.
↑ SDBH.
↑ TDOT, 11:294.
↑ DCH, 8:588.
↑ See HALOT and SDBH.
↑ BHRG §39.21.3.
↑ DCH 8:122; TDOT, 14:75.
↑ The Qumran manuscript 4Q83 has דבר instead of רְדוֹפִי, which would change the meaning of the prepositional phrase to "in recompense for something good." This is not likely to have been an accidental change, but has more likely been changed to make better sense of the phrase.
↑ The Qumran manuscript of this psalm, 4Q83, tacks Ps 71 onto the end of this psalm (DJD XVI 2003). This is not likely original. It could have been attached because of the similar beginning and theme of Ps 70.

[1] The Hebrew text comes from Open Scriptures Hebrew Bible, which presents the text of the Leningrad Codex (the Masoretic text). The English text is our own "Close-but-clear" translation (CBC). The CBC is a “wooden” translation that exists to provide a window into the Hebrew text. It is essentially an interlinear that has been put into English word-order. It is also similar to a “back-translation” (of the Hebrew) often used in Bible translation checking. It is important to remember that the CBC is not intended to be a stand-alone translation, but is rather a tool for using the Layer by Layer materials. The CBC is used as the primary display text (along with the Hebrew) for most analytical visualisations. It is also used as the display text for most videos.

[2] A legend for the expanded paraphrase is available near the bottom of this page, in the section titled "Legends."

[3] Legends for both the grammatical diagram and the shapes and colours on the grammatical diagram are available near the bottom of this page, in the section titled "Legends."

[4] Some scholars argue that many if not all of the psalms in the psalter are intended to be communal rather than individual, including laments.
They often base this on the usage of the Psalter in liturgical contexts (Smend 1888, 56). This concept is supported by the Targum and Midrash, so it does have ancient support. The imagery of sickness and wounds is applied to entire nations and tribes elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (e.g. Hos 5:13). The use of first-person singular pronouns also does not preclude this psalm as a communal lament. Lam 1, especially vv. 11-22, very clearly describes a lament of Jerusalem using first-person singular pronouns. Rashi states that Ps 38 in particular was written "to recite... in time of distress, to make remembrance of the distress of Israel before the Holy One, blessed be He, and [David] recited it as relating to all Israel" (Rashi on Ps 38:1). In this interpretation, the illness of the psalmist is an allegory for persecution, especially since the only direct pleas in Ps 38 relate to being saved from enemies, not to the illness or the suffering itself (Smend 1888, 75-76).

On the other hand, other scholars take the view that the communal reading should only be preferred in the contexts where he psalmist either makes it explicit from context (as in Lam 1) or where the meaning of the psalm demands it (as in Ps 129:1, "Let Israel now say"; Gunkel 1998, 122). In fact, Gunkel declares, "...the explanation of the "I" as the poet is so natural, even self-evident, that any deviation from it should be perceived as a tasteless error and should be resisted with all one's strength" (Gunkel 1998, 122). In Ps 38, nothing clearly indicates that this should be read as communal. In fact, quite the opposite is true. The psalmist's friends and relatives (presumably other Israelites) are said to be standing at a distance, which would make the communal reading of this psalm difficult and unnatural (Gunkel 1998, 123). While it could be argued that the friends here refer to Israel's allies, that does not fit the familial aspect as well. Throughout this psalm there is no mention of Zion or Jerusalem or any clear indications that this is referring to more than an individual's suffering (Hupfeld 1868, 269). As such, with the internal evidence in Ps 38, it is more likely that this is an individual lament rather than communal.

[5] They often base this on the usage of the Psalter in liturgical contexts (Smend 1888, 56). This concept is supported by the Targum and Midrash, so it does have ancient support. The imagery of sickness and wounds is applied to entire nations and tribes elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (e.g. Hos 5:13). The use of first-person singular pronouns also does not preclude this psalm as a communal lament. Lam 1, especially vv. 11-22, very clearly describes a lament of Jerusalem using first-person singular pronouns. Rashi states that Ps 38 in particular was written "to recite... in time of distress, to make remembrance of the distress of Israel before the Holy One, blessed be He, and [David] recited it as relating to all Israel" (Rashi on Ps 38:1). In this interpretation, the illness of the psalmist is an allegory for persecution, especially since the only direct pleas in Ps 38 relate to being saved from enemies, not to the illness or the suffering itself (Smend 1888, 75-76).

[6] On the other hand, other scholars take the view that the communal reading should only be preferred in the contexts where he psalmist either makes it explicit from context (as in Lam 1) or where the meaning of the psalm demands it (as in Ps 129:1, "Let Israel now say"; Gunkel 1998, 122). In fact, Gunkel declares, "...the explanation of the "I" as the poet is so natural, even self-evident, that any deviation from it should be perceived as a tasteless error and should be resisted with all one's strength" (Gunkel 1998, 122). In Ps 38, nothing clearly indicates that this should be read as communal. In fact, quite the opposite is true. The psalmist's friends and relatives (presumably other Israelites) are said to be standing at a distance, which would make the communal reading of this psalm difficult and unnatural (Gunkel 1998, 123). While it could be argued that the friends here refer to Israel's allies, that does not fit the familial aspect as well. Throughout this psalm there is no mention of Zion or Jerusalem or any clear indications that this is referring to more than an individual's suffering (Hupfeld 1868, 269). As such, with the internal evidence in Ps 38, it is more likely that this is an individual lament rather than communal.

[5] The LXX adds "For the Sabbath" (περὶ σαββάτου) at the end of this verse. This could shed light on how the psalm was used, specifically in reference to the memorial offering offered each Sabbath (Lev 24:7-8). The LXX likely adds this to clarify the meaning of לְהַזְכִּיר. Since most manuscripts do not attest to this addition and no modern translations have included it, it is not represented in the diagram.

[6] Kim 2022, 213-217.

[7] BHRG §41.3.2.

[8] Because the negative particle (אַל) is elided in v. 2b, an argument could be made that תְיַסְּרֵֽנִי discipline me is a yiqtol and not a jussive, in which case it would be translated, "you will not discipline me when you're wrathful." However, the context and the content make more sense to be in parallel with the a line of the verse, so the jussive is a more likely interpretation.

[9] SDBH.

[10] See HALOT 410 and TDOT 6:67.

[11] SDBH.

[12] TDOT 6:67.

[13] Some Hebrew manuscripts and the versions add the אַל explicitly. Since the more difficult reading is its omission and elision, that reading is preferred.

[14] BHRG 2017, §39.6.3.f.

[15] However, the fronting could also be topic activation. If this line is topic activation, it could be paraphrased "For concerning your arrows, they have been shot into me." If this latter option is preferred, the arrows would need to be presupposed in the discourse, potentially from the concept of YHWH's wrath in the previous verse.

[16] Ryken et al. 1982, 206.

[17] Keel 1997, 85 and 221.

[18] V. 3b has a few variants regarding וַתִּנְחַ֖ת, which appears in the MT, coming from the same root as the first.
The LXX has "and strengthened your hand against me" (καὶ ἐπεστήρισας ἐπʼ ἐμὲ τὴν χεῖρά σου), which BHS suggests would come from וַתְּנַחֵת, from the same root (נחת) but in the piel instead of qal. In addition, the LXX takes "hand" as the object of the verb rather than the subject. The shift to the piel would only necessitate a change to the vowels of the verb in the MT. While this is a viable option, the only textual support is the LXX, so it is unlikely to be original.

The way the Syriac and the Targums translate this phrase indicates the word they are translating is וַתָּנַח, which comes from the root נוח "to rest." HALOT supports this reading (HALOT, 692). However, the imagery of someone's hand resting on someone is often used in imagery of blessing (c.f. Isa 25:10), which is not supported by the context of this psalm, since this line clearly has a negative implication. Since both verbs in the MT v. 3 come from the same root, it could be very easy for a scribe to become confused and replace the second verb with a similarly sounding verb. However, if that were the case, it is strange that no Hebrew manuscripts have a different root. For these reasons the text of the MT is preferred here. .

[21] The LXX has "and strengthened your hand against me" (καὶ ἐπεστήρισας ἐπʼ ἐμὲ τὴν χεῖρά σου), which BHS suggests would come from וַתְּנַחֵת, from the same root (נחת) but in the piel instead of qal. In addition, the LXX takes "hand" as the object of the verb rather than the subject. The shift to the piel would only necessitate a change to the vowels of the verb in the MT. While this is a viable option, the only textual support is the LXX, so it is unlikely to be original.

[22] The way the Syriac and the Targums translate this phrase indicates the word they are translating is וַתָּנַח, which comes from the root נוח "to rest." HALOT supports this reading (HALOT, 692). However, the imagery of someone's hand resting on someone is often used in imagery of blessing (c.f. Isa 25:10), which is not supported by the context of this psalm, since this line clearly has a negative implication. Since both verbs in the MT v. 3 come from the same root, it could be very easy for a scribe to become confused and replace the second verb with a similarly sounding verb. However, if that were the case, it is strange that no Hebrew manuscripts have a different root. For these reasons the text of the MT is preferred here. .

[19] See Jenni 1992, 197.

[20] BHRG 2017, §21.2.1.2.

[21] BHRG 2017, §39.20.3.b.

[22] Keel 1997, 85 and 221; Ryken et al. 1982, 736.

[23] DCH, Isa 26:3, Lam 3:17.

[24] See SDBH; HALOT; BDB; DCH. The word sounds spot (מְתֹם) only appears 4 times in the Hebrew Bible, half of which are in this psalm. It appears in Judg 20:48, but that text is difficult and has many textual variants so it is not reliable in determining the meaning of the word. The other passage is Isa 1:6, which reads, "From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness (מְתֹם) in it, but bruises and sores and raw wounds; they are not pressed out or bound up or softened with oil" (ESV). This verse confirms that מְתֹם is the opposite of an injury or wound. The LXX translates this as ἴασις, which refers to healing and restoration after an illness or injury (BDAG, 465). Similarly, the Targums translate this word as אָסוּ, which means either 'cure' or 'healing' (Targum Lexicon). The Peshitta translate it ܫܠܡܐ "wholeness," the same way שָׁלוֹם is translated in the b line. Because מְתֹם is from the root תמם, which means to finish or complete something, it is best to understand this word to mean a part of the body that is whole, complete, or sound (BDB, 1070; TDOT, 15:700). Because of the connection with תמם, which is used elsewhere to indicate someone who is blameless or perfect (Job 22:3), it could be that the psalmist is using this word to indicate not just physical injury, but also spiritual. This idea is supported by the parallel use of שָׁל֥וֹם in v. 4b.

[25] This is similar to the preposition לִפְנֵי. See BHRG 2017, §39.15.

[26] BHRG 2017, §39.15.

[27] DCH, 6:715; BHRG §39.15.2.

[28] HALOT, 277.

[29] SDBH.

[30] Ryken et al. 1982, 421.

[31] TDOT, 10:421.

[32] Ryken et al. 1982, 1222.

[33] SDBH; DCH 2011, 4:349.

[34] See BHRG §19.3.3; JM §113d.

[35] The locative use of מִן is supported by LXX and Jerome (see also Exod 20:18; BHRG 2017, §39.14.2a).

[36] This use of מִן happens when following an adjective or an intransitive verb (Exod 18:18; Num 11:14; Exod 12:4; JM 2006, §141i; GKC 1910, §133.c). A literal translation would be "they are heavy like a burden is heavy, heavier than I," meaning it is heavier than the psalmist can endure (Delitzsch 1871, 21). Many modern translations add a verb like "to bear" to draw out the comparison (NIV, NLT, NET, CSB). However, omitting the verb still allows the meaning to be clear. Thus, this prepositional phrase and verb could be translated "too heavy for me."

[37] Many translations place a conjunction between these verbs. This is supported by the LXX, so it has some merit, but since the meaning is not greatly affected, they are not diagrammed as emendations in the grammatical layer. Several modern translations include the conjunction in v. 6: ELB, BDS, NFC, GNT, EÜ, ZÜR, NBS, NVSR, and S21. The addition of the conjunction does not nullify the verbal hendiadys, however. Because there is not much textual support for the addition, the text of the MT has been preferred here.

[38] BDB, 17; DCH, 1:153; SDBH; see Prov 14:29, 15:21.

[39] SDBH; DCH, 1:153; Prov. 5:23, 14:17, 12:23.

[40] Many translations place a conjunction between these verbs (see ELB, BDS, and NFC). This is supported by the LXX, like v. 6, so it does have merit. The meaning is not affected by the addition, so it has not be included as an emendation. Because there is not much textual support for the addition, the text of the MT has been preferred here.

[41] See SDBH; HALOT, 796. Some scholars believe there are two roots that are homonyms, one which means "to do iniquity," which עָוֹן is derived from, and one which means "to bend or twist" (BDB, 730; DCH, 6:295). While this is a possibility, the idea of bending or twisting can also be understood in the breaking of the law and doing iniquity, so it may be best to simply understand these as different aspects of the same verb.

[42] TDOT, 10:548.

[43] SDBH.

[44] HALOT, 1458; see Isa 2:11 and Ps 35:14.

[45] HALOT; BHRG §39.19.3.

[46] JM 2006, 485.

[47] SDBH.

[48] SDBH.

[49] SDBH; TDOT, 7:264; HALOT, 489.

[50] DCH 2011, 5:227.

[51] SDBH.

[52] JM §119v.

[53] It appears in Gen 45:26 when Jacob learns that Joseph is still alive and "his heart became numb (פוג), for he did not believe them" (ESV). In Hab 1:4, the law is described with this verb in parallel with justice not going forth. The last place the verb appears is in Ps 77:3 where the psalmist's hand is stretched out and does not פוג, refusing to be comforted. The Syriac cognate means to be cold. The Aramaic cognate means to cease or be helpless (BDB, 806) or to be faint (Targum Lexicon). The LXX translates this with the aorist passive of κακόω, which means to be mistreated or to suffer (BDAG, 502).

[54] .f. BHRG 2017, 363.

[55] Perhaps based on the verbs in this verse, some scholars have the emendation "lion" לָבִיא instead of "my heart" לִבִּי, changing the meaning from "the groaning/growling of my heart" to "the growling of a lion" (Gunkel 1926, 159; Baethgen 1904, 109). It makes more sense for a lion to growl than a heart, and the comparative מִן would parallel the use of עַד מְאֹד in the first line. However, the context is portraying the physical suffering of the psalmist, so it can still make good sense for the heart to be mentioned here. Elsewhere in this psalm, the psalmist has used מִן to give the reason for the main clause, so interpreting this prepositional phrase as the reason for the psalmist's groaning is not unreasonable (see v. 4 and v. 19 in particular). There is no textual support for this reading and no modern translations have taken this emendation as original.

[56] SDBH.

[57] Ryken et al. 1982, 3269.

[58] DCH, 5:603; c.f. BDB, 617; SDBH.

[59] It is possible that this is fronted for poetic reasons, mirroring the pattern in the latter half of the line: noun, verb, verb, noun.

[60] BHRG 2017, 80.

[61] BDB, 695.

[62] SDBH; HALOT, 750; Wolff, 1974, 42.

[63] TDOT, 1:158.

[64] BHRG 2017, 401.

[65] DCH 2011, 6:355; BDB 1977, 744; 2 Chr 7:15.

[66] The LXX reads καὶ αὐτό, where the singular pronoun aligns with the singular of אוֹר. Some Greek versions and the Syriac omit the phrase גַּם־הֵם entirely.

[67] There are four different options for how to understand this phrase.
This could be a case of the pronoun matching the gender of the nomen rectum, the masculine plural form of עֵינַי. Although it is rare for an independent pronoun to not agree with its antecedent in gender and number, sometimes the independent pronoun matches the gender and/or number of the nomen rectum (JM 2006, §149c, a; Delitzsch 1871, 22).

The second option makes "even them/that" גַּם־הֵם parenthetical, eliminating the need for it to match the gender and number of אור. However, this is more complicated and does not differ in meaning from the apposition.

A third option is a corrupted text where the original was הוא, the masculine singular, but because וא can look similar to מ in some manuscripts, the scribe misread it, resulting in הם. However, this does not have any sure textual support (but see the singular of LXX, but which may be translational).

The final option is that "and the light of my eyes" (וְאוֹר־עֵינַי) should be understood as part of a compound subject for the previous clause. In this case, הֵם would refer cataphorically to David's friends and loved ones in v. 12. However, this creates another issue with agreement since the number of the verb עזב is singular, whereas the compound subject כחי ואור עיני might expect a plural verb. The Masoretic accents argue against this interpretation, no modern translations take this as an option, and it does not fit the poetic parallelism of the verse, so it is not represented in the diagram. This also would break the parallelism within the verse.

[72] This could be a case of the pronoun matching the gender of the nomen rectum, the masculine plural form of עֵינַי. Although it is rare for an independent pronoun to not agree with its antecedent in gender and number, sometimes the independent pronoun matches the gender and/or number of the nomen rectum (JM 2006, §149c, a; Delitzsch 1871, 22).

[73] The second option makes "even them/that" גַּם־הֵם parenthetical, eliminating the need for it to match the gender and number of אור. However, this is more complicated and does not differ in meaning from the apposition.

[74] A third option is a corrupted text where the original was הוא, the masculine singular, but because וא can look similar to מ in some manuscripts, the scribe misread it, resulting in הם. However, this does not have any sure textual support (but see the singular of LXX, but which may be translational).

[75] The final option is that "and the light of my eyes" (וְאוֹר־עֵינַי) should be understood as part of a compound subject for the previous clause. In this case, הֵם would refer cataphorically to David's friends and loved ones in v. 12. However, this creates another issue with agreement since the number of the verb עזב is singular, whereas the compound subject כחי ואור עיני might expect a plural verb. The Masoretic accents argue against this interpretation, no modern translations take this as an option, and it does not fit the poetic parallelism of the verse, so it is not represented in the diagram. This also would break the parallelism within the verse.

[68] The tricolon reading is supported by the use of revia gadol and the line reading represented in the Aleppo Codex. Other analyze v. 12 as a bicolon. This reading is supported by the Greek manuscripts and the Hebrew manuscript Berlin Qu 680. Several scholars also take this view (Fokkelman 2000, 144; Van der Lugt 2006, 381). Also, it is worth noting that while there is a revia gadol, the vowel is not lengthened, which would point to reading this verse as a bicolon. The bicolon would have 5 words on the first line and 3 words on the second. While this is not an unlikely length, it would be the longest line in the entire psalm. Based on the cohesion with the other tricolon, v. 13, and the central position in this psalm, we have preferred the reading of the tricolon in this analysis.

[69] Ryken et al. 1982, 2182; Lev 13:46; 14:19-20; see John 9:1.

[70] Mowinckel 1962, 2:4.

[71] BHRG 2017, 363.

[72] BHRG 2017, 360.

[73] SDBH.

[74] It's possible this phrase has been fronted because of topic shift, but this is unlikely since it is semantically parallel with the companions in v. 12a.

[75] TDOT, 2:233.

[76] SDBH.

[77] TDOT 1978, 3:356.

[78] SDBH; TDOT 2004, 13:501.

[79] GKC §124.e.

[80] See the exegetical issue on the כִי in v. 16 for a more in-depth discussion of this matter: The Function of כִּי in Ps 38:16. If this is a choice rather than inability, the illocution types of the statements in vv. 14-15 could be commissives, indicating David's resolve not to speak, rather than expressive.

[81] If v. 17 is referring to the time period of v. 16a, then the two would mean that David hoped for YHWH otherwise his enemies would rejoice over him. But because David hoped in YHWH, now his enemies will not rejoice over him. But it is not just hoping in YHWH that results in David's enemies not triumphing; it is YHWH responding. As such, it makes more sense for v. 17 to be referring to the time when David chose not to speak. See v. 17 for further comments about the elided phrase there.

[82] The text of the Leningrad Codex has אֶשְׁמָע, which is a first-person yiqtol verb. If this is the case, there are two ways to understand the phrase וַאֲנִי כְחֵרֵשׁ לֹא אֶשְׁמָע. First, "I" אֲנִי could be the subject of "cannot hear" לֹא אֶשְׁמָע and the prepositional phrase could be adverbial. Second, "I ... like a deaf person" אֲנִי כְחֵרֵשׁ could be a verbless clause with the prepositional phrase functioning as the complement. In this case, לֹא אֶשְׁמָע would be an independent clause. A third possibility is that this text should be emended to the third-person yiqtol verb יִשְׁמָע, which three to ten Hebrew manuscripts support. If this third option is correct, 14a would follow the pattern of the clauses in 14b and 15, where the complement of the verb is a comparative prepositional phrase which is modified by a relative clause. However, the textual support is against this option, so either of the two previous options are more likely.

[83] JM 2006, §111i.

[84] Gen 2:1; BHRG 2017, §21.2.1.1.3; JM 2006, §118i.

[85] TDOT, 6:70.

[86] HALOT, 1698.

[87] See Labuschagne 2008, 4; Terrien 2003, 325-326.

[88] BHRG 2017, §40.21.2.

[89] SDBH.

[90] It is possible to take תַעֲנֶה as a jussive: "answer me." However, the form of ענה includes the III-ה, which would be typically dropped in a jussive, so the grammar does not allow for this to be a jussive (BHRG §15.5).

[91] Miller 2010, 360-363.

[92] Since this verse begins with אָמַרְתִּי, this could be a direct quote. However, based on the context, it seems best to take this as a thought that David thought (or spoke) to himself.

[93] The alternative is that this elided phrase could be either a yiqtol or an imperative of the verb "answer" (ענה) from v. 16b. This would imply that YHWH must answer otherwise David's enemies will rejoice over him. One scholar suggested "I will take heed of my ways" (אשׁמרה דרכי), but this does not have any textual support and seems to take liberties in the context (Leveen 1971, 56).

[94] See also Genesius' Dictionary, 678; GKC §152.w(i); JM §168g.

[95] JM 2006, §168g. For this reason, many modern versions translate the following verbs like jussives: "Don't let them rejoice over me" (CSB). This interpretation makes the negative wish explicit. Taking the conjunction this way removes the need for an elided clause, but does not reflect the Hebrew syntax.

[96] The other reading, where David is anticipating slipping, could be read as "For I am afraid that they might rejoice over me, those who will have considered themselves superior when my feet will slip."

[97] A chart comparing the two:

[98] There are three options.
While it is rare, there are some cases where a qatal follows פֶן (cf. 2 Kgs 2:16; 2 Sam 20:6). If this is the case, this clause could be a compound with the previous clause "they rejoice concerning me." This is supported by many modern translations (NIV, NLT, GNT, NET, KJV, NJB, JPS, Luther 2017, HFA, NGÜ, ELB, GNB, ZÜR, RVR95, NVI DHH, BTX4, NBS, NVSR, BDS, PDV, NFC, S21). But when פֶן is used with the qatal, it typically refers to something that could have happened in the past, which is not the meaning here. While it is odd that the author would switch conjugations, it is not uncommon for a yiqtol and qatal to be parallel to one another in Hebrew poetry (e.g. v. 5, 16). Whenever the פֶן is followed with a compound clause cluster, the first is a yiqtol and the second is a qatal joined with a vav. Here we are missing the ו, but the omission of conjunctions is not uncommon in Hebrew poetry. However, since the meaning is different and there is no conjunction, this is unlikely.

Second, if the clause עָלַי הִגְדִּילוּ is an independent clause, it would be translated, "They considered themselves superior to me when my foot slipped." However, this is unlikely because of the parallel line and the context. No modern translations take this approach.

Third, the qatal could function in a headless asyndetic relative clause. This is supported by ESV, NASB, CSB, HCSB, NRSV, NEB, REB, EÜ, TOB. While asyndetic relative clauses usually have the verb at the beginning and the verb here is at the end, headless asyndetic relative clauses with verbs in the final position are not uncommon (Isa 54:1; Prov 8:32; see also Isa 42:24; Jer 2:11; JM 2006, §158d; Holmstedt 2002, 112).

[107] While it is rare, there are some cases where a qatal follows פֶן (cf. 2 Kgs 2:16; 2 Sam 20:6). If this is the case, this clause could be a compound with the previous clause "they rejoice concerning me." This is supported by many modern translations (NIV, NLT, GNT, NET, KJV, NJB, JPS, Luther 2017, HFA, NGÜ, ELB, GNB, ZÜR, RVR95, NVI DHH, BTX4, NBS, NVSR, BDS, PDV, NFC, S21). But when פֶן is used with the qatal, it typically refers to something that could have happened in the past, which is not the meaning here. While it is odd that the author would switch conjugations, it is not uncommon for a yiqtol and qatal to be parallel to one another in Hebrew poetry (e.g. v. 5, 16). Whenever the פֶן is followed with a compound clause cluster, the first is a yiqtol and the second is a qatal joined with a vav. Here we are missing the ו, but the omission of conjunctions is not uncommon in Hebrew poetry. However, since the meaning is different and there is no conjunction, this is unlikely.

[108] Second, if the clause עָלַי הִגְדִּילוּ is an independent clause, it would be translated, "They considered themselves superior to me when my foot slipped." However, this is unlikely because of the parallel line and the context. No modern translations take this approach.

[109] Third, the qatal could function in a headless asyndetic relative clause. This is supported by ESV, NASB, CSB, HCSB, NRSV, NEB, REB, EÜ, TOB. While asyndetic relative clauses usually have the verb at the beginning and the verb here is at the end, headless asyndetic relative clauses with verbs in the final position are not uncommon (Isa 54:1; Prov 8:32; see also Isa 42:24; Jer 2:11; JM 2006, §158d; Holmstedt 2002, 112).

[99] BHRG 2017, §39.20.2.a; JM 2006, §133f.

[100] BHRG 2017, §39.29.3.b.

[101] BHRG §19.2.2.

[102] It is possible that this segment could be subordinate to the "lest" (פֶן) clause in v. 17, in which case it would indicate the reason for why David's enemies are rejoicing.

[103] BHRG 2017, §39.11.6.d.

[104] SDBH.

[105] HALOT, 579; DCH, 5:265; BDB, 456; TDOT, 7:10. Some scholars interpret it as just meaning "wound," but that seems too general (SDBH).

[106] BHRG §40.29.1(1)d.

[107] By itself, this phrase could potentially be considered commissive, showing David's resolution to confess his iniquity, rather than assertive. If this were the case, David would be committing himself to tell others about his iniquity. However, the verbal semantics and the context indicate that this confession is occurring in the present rather than the future. Reading this as a commissive would also imply that in v. 19b David is anxious about telling about his sin. As such, the commissive reading is dispreferred.

[108] If not poetic, it could be topic reactivation, since "iniquity" (עֲוֺן) hasn't been mentioned since v. 4.

[109] Cf. BHRG §39.14.4.b.

[110] While the adjective חַי has the base meaning of "alive," it can also indicate that the person is healthy and/or thriving (DCH 3:202; SDBH; see TDOT 4:328, 333). This would create a clear contrast between David's sickness and his enemies' health. However, that contrast is already present in the context, so it is unnecessary to make it explicit.

[111] DCH, 6:533.

[112] SDBH.

[113] SDBH.

[114] TDOT, 11:294.

[115] DCH, 8:588.

[116] See HALOT and SDBH.

[117] BHRG §39.21.3.

[118] DCH 8:122; TDOT, 14:75.

[119] The Qumran manuscript 4Q83 has דבר instead of רְדוֹפִי, which would change the meaning of the prepositional phrase to "in recompense for something good." This is not likely to have been an accidental change, but has more likely been changed to make better sense of the phrase.

[120] The Qumran manuscript of this psalm, 4Q83, tacks Ps 71 onto the end of this psalm (DJD XVI 2003). This is not likely original. It could have been attached because of the similar beginning and theme of Ps 70.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79]

[80]

[81]

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86]

[87]

[88]

[89]

[90]

[91]

[92]

[93]

[94]

[95]

[96]

[97]

[98]

[99]

[100]

Visualization	Description
	The prepositional phrase is indicated by a solid green oval.
	The construct chain is indicated by a solid yellow oval.
	When the conjunction ו appears at the phrase-level (not clause-level), it is indicated by a solid light purple oval.
	The article is indicated by a solid blue oval.

Expanded paraphrase legend
Close but Clear (CBC) translation	The CBC, our close but clear translation of the Hebrew, is represented in bold text.
Assumptions	Assumptions which provide background information, presuppositions, entailments, and inferences are represented in italics.

Psalm 38 Verse-by-Verse

Background

Superscription (v. 1)

v. 1

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

My suffering (vv. 2-9)

v. 2

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 3

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 4

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 5

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 6

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 7

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 8

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 9

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

My abandonment (vv. 10-15)

v. 10

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 11

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 12

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 13

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 14

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 15

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

My only hope (vv. 16-23)

v. 16

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 17

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 18

Expanded Paraphrase

Grammatical Diagram

Notes

v. 19

Expanded Paraphrase