Psalm 39 Discourse

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Psalm 39/Discourse
Jump to: navigation, search

Choose a PsalmNavigate Psalm 39


About the Discourse Layer

Our Discourse Layer includes four additional layers of analysis:

  • Participant analysis
  • Macrosyntax
  • Speech act analysis
  • Emotional analysis


For more information on our method of analysis, click the expandable explanation button at the beginning of each layer.

Participant Analysis

  What is Participant Analysis?

Participant Analysis focuses on the characters in the psalm and asks, “Who are the main participants (or characters) in this psalm, and what are they saying or doing? It is often helpful for understanding literary structure, speaker identification, etc.

For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Participant Analysis Creator Guidelines.

There are 4 participants/characters in Psalm 39:

Profile List

David (v. 1)
"a person" (v. 12)

YHWH (vv. 5, 13)
"Lord" (v. 8)

The wicked (v. 2)
"fools" (v. 9)

People (v.7)
"every person 'standing firm'" (v. 6)
"man" (v. 7)
"every person" (v. 12)

Profile Notes

  • The psalmist is identified as David in the superscription. He quotes himself twice (vv. 2, 5–6), being also the recipient of his inner speech in v. 2.
  • YHWH is the addressee David's prayer (the psalm itself) and the quoted speech of vv. 5–6. He is the object of David's hope (v. 8) and is addressed as "YHWH" in vv. 5 and 13 and "Lord" in v. 8
  • The wicked are mentioned only in passing (v. 2). David vows not to speak while in their presence, at the risk that they will either mock his afflicted state and consider him guilty, or mock the God who is apparently not answering his plea. If he were to speak, as fools, they would scorn him (v. 9).
  • The impersonal group of the psalm are described as "every person 'standing firm'" in v. 6c, followed by the generic אִישׁ and third-person plural impersonals in v. 7. Finally, the generic אִישׁ and "every person" are repeated again in v. 12.



Approved/39/Participants

  • v. 1. For the qere לִֽידוּת֗וּן and the ketiv לידיתון, see the textual note.
  • v. 14. For the revocalization *הֶשַׁ֣ע* (MT: הָשַׁ֣ע), see the lexical note.
  • v. 2. As an instance of inner speech, "the psalmist’s opening words are addressed to himself."[1]
  • Is the addressee in vv. 2–7 the congregation or YHWH?
It is possible that the addressee of vv. 2–7 are the psalmist's community.[2] YHWH is absent throughout vv. 2–7, with the exception of the quoted speech in vv. 5–6b. The shift of addressee between vv. 7–8 could be indicated by the interactional discourse marker "But now," as a conversation-management tool.[3] On the other hand, Occam's razor probably dictates that YHWH is the addressee throughout the psalm, so that is our preferred interpretation. It is also preferable that the two instances of the refrain (vv. 6c, 12c) be addressed to the same person (see below).
  • Is the addressee in v. 12c the congregation or YHWH?
If the addressee of vv. 2–7 were identified with the congregation, the same could plausibly be the case for the second refrain in v. 12c.

Participant Relations Diagram

The relationships among the participants may be abstracted and summarized as follows:

Participant Analysis Summary Distribution

Notes:

  • YHWH is present throughout the psalm, with the exception of v. 7 and the introduction of the psalmist's inner musings and vow of silence (vv. 2–4). David, predictably, appears in first-person speech throughout.
  • The wicked/fools appear once in each of the two larger poetic sections of the psalm (vv. 2–6b; 6c–12).
  • The concentrated presence of the generic people coincides precisely with the absence of the other three participants (v. 7).

Macrosyntax

  What is Macrosyntax?

Macrosyntax Diagram

  Legend

Macrosyntax legend
Vocatives Vocatives are indicated by purple text.
Discourse marker Discourse markers (such as כִּי, הִנֵּה, לָכֵן) are indicated by orange text.
The scope governed by the discourse marker is indicated by a dashed orange bracket connecting the discourse marker to its scope.
The preceding discourse grounding the discourse marker is indicated by a solid orange bracket encompassing the relevant clauses.
Subordinating conjunction The subordinating conjunction is indicated by teal text.
Subordination is indicated by a solid teal bracket connecting the subordinating conjunction with the clause to which it is subordinate.
Coordinating conjunction The coordinating conjunction is indicated by blue text.
Coordination is indicated by a solid blue line connecting the coordinating clauses.
Coordination without an explicit conjunction is indicated by a dashed blue line connecting the coordinated clauses.
Marked topic is indicated by a black dashed rounded rectangle around the marked words.
The scope of the activated topic is indicated by a black dashed bracket encompassing the relevant clauses.
Marked focus or thetic sentence Marked focus (if one constituent) or thetic sentences[4] are indicated by bold text.
Frame setters[5] are indicated by a solid gray rounded rectangle around the marked words.
[blank line] Discourse discontinuity is indicated by a blank line.
[indentation] Syntactic subordination is indicated by indentation.
Direct speech is indicated by a solid black rectangle surrounding all relevant clauses.
(text to elucidate the meaning of the macrosyntactic structures) Within the CBC, any text elucidating the meaning of macrosyntax is indicated in gray text inside parentheses.

If an emendation or revocalization is preferred, that emendation or revocalization will be marked in the Hebrew text of all the visuals.

Emendations/Revocalizations legend
*Emended text* Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is indicated by blue asterisks on either side of the emendation.
*Revocalized text* Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is indicated by purple asterisks on either side of the revocalization.
(Click diagram to enlarge)




  • vv. 2–6 and v. 7 are separated by the discourse marker, Selah.
  • v. 7 and vv. 8–12 are separated by the discourse marker, But now.
  • vv. 8–12 and vv. 13–14 are separated by the discourse marker, Selah, and the structural refrain, headed by the sentence-adverbial Truly (cf. v. 6).
  • v. 3c. The fronting of "my pain" indicates its status as a newly-activated topic (hinted at, but only implicitly, by the preceding מִטּ֑וֹב).
  • v. 4b. The fronting of the prepositional phrase בַּהֲגִיגִ֥י provides a temporal frame-setter for the iterative burning (see verbal semantics)—"when I was sighing."
  • v. 5b. Because of the resumptive pronoun הִ֑יא, the phrase "the measure of my days" is best understood as left-dislocated (see the grammar note) and, thus, as topically activated.
  • v. 6a. The fronting of "handbreadths" indicates its status as a focal constituent, in this case scalar, as evident in translations such as the RJPS: "You have made my life just handbreadths long."
  • v. 7a. The fronting of "as a shadow" indicates its status as a focal constituent, in this case scalar, as evident in translations such as the RJPS: "Everyone walks about as a mere shadow."
  • v. 7b. Following the function of אַךְ as a restrictive focus particle, the fronted constituent, in vain, is naturally read as restrictive focus.
  • v. 8b. Because of the resumptive pronoun הִֽיא, the phrase "my hope" is best understood as left-dislocated (see the grammar note) and, thus, as topically activated. In response to the rhetorical question of the previous clause, the constituent "in you" (לך) completes the focal information, as illustrated by the SG21's cleft structure: "C’est en toi qu’est mon espérance."[6]
  • v. 9a. The fronting of מִכָּל־פְּשָׁעַ֥י is difficult, though as the first mention of the psalmist's sins, it may be topically activating this reality (cf. v. 12a). Further, it may provide topical contrast from the left-dislocated "my hope" in the previous line.
  • v. 9b. An Information-Structural explanation for the fronting in this clause is lacking and the best interpretation is poetic repetition with the preceding line, with 9 syllables each and the sentence stress (indicated by the strongest disjunctive accent) on the penultimate syllable (ēnî).
  • v. 10c. The overt pronoun indicates the selective focus of who acted—that is, "for it is you who have done it" (ESV) and my affliction was not ultimately caused by the wicked (v. 3) or fools (v. 9), for example.
  • v. 11b. An Information-Structural explanation for the double fronting in this clause is lacking and the best interpretation is poetic symmetry with the preceding line's finite verb (A), first-person reference (B), and second-person suffixed noun (C):
      // הָסֵ֣ר מֵעָלַ֣י נִגְעֶ֑ךָ
     מִתִּגְרַ֥ת יָ֝דְךָ֗ אֲנִ֣י כָלִֽיתִי׃
  • v. 12a. The phrase with punishments on account of sin is fronted as a selective focus of the confirmation of what the psalmist now understands to have been YHWH's dealing with sinful humanity all along.
  • v. 12c. The predication "[is] a breath" is placed in initial position following the discourse particle אַךְ to indicate scalar focus, as made transparent in the expansion of the CBC.
  • v. 13b. The order וְשַׁוְעָתִ֨י ׀ הַאֲזִינָה֮ provides a symmetrical structure to the preceding line's שִֽׁמְעָ֥ה־תְפִלָּתִ֨י ׀, with the intervening vocative (see the note below).
  • v. 13c. The order אֶֽל־דִּמְעָתִ֗י אַֽל־תֶּ֫חֱרַ֥שׁ provides a structure of repetition to the preceding line's complement-verb (וְשַׁוְעָתִ֨י ׀ הַאֲזִינָה֮).
  • v. 13d. The comment (גֵ֣ר) precedes the topic (אָנֹכִ֣י) to create the pattern of repetition with the following line's initial תּ֝וֹשָׁ֗ב, followed by its ballast variant (that is, other prosodic words filling the same intonational space: three syllables—אָנֹכִ֣י—followed by two—עִמָּ֑ךְ; two syllables—כְּכָל—followed by three—אֲבוֹתָֽי). The words גֵר and תּוֹשָׁב occur as a formulaic word pair throughout the Bible,[7] so it is no surprise that they occur in a structurally intentional pattern here.

The three vocatives in the psalm (YHWH, Lord, YHWH)[8] occur on the first line of the quoted speech (vv. 5–6b) and the first lines of the discourse units 8–12 and 13–14.

  • v. 5. The vocative is post-verbal, drawing attention/focussing the following sentence constituent.[9]
  • vv. 8, 13. The vocatives in these verses delimit their lines phonologically and, thus, aid in correctly processing the syntax,[10] which is particularly ambiguous in v. 13 (see the grammar note).
  • v. 6a. The deictic discourse marker Look (הִנֵּ֤ה) introduces the argumentative content of v. 6a-b, until the following אַ֤ךְ.
  • vv. 6b, 7a, 12c. Each of these three instances of אַךְ functions as a sentence-level adverbial of affirmation, in that it "confirms possible implications of a preceding assertion."[11] The scope of the preceding discourse governed by the affirmation has been indicated in each case on the visual above.[12]
  • v. 7b. While this instance of אַךְ could also function as the other three in the psalm, the restrictive focus particle makes better sense in this case. Compare, for example, the NFC: "il s'agite, mais ce n'est que du vent."
  • v. 8. But now (וְעַתָּ֣ה) at the beginning of this verses functions as an interactional discourse marker in terms of conversation management, in order "to readdress God,"[13] such that it is more interactional than logical, which would be more structurally significant. As such, this interactional discourse marker can easily fall within the poetic section of vv. 6c–12 (see poetic structure).</ref>
  • v. 13c. Since the content of all three preceding clauses are grounded by the because (כִּ֤י) in this verse, it is best considered a discourse marker, rather than a syntactic subordinator.
  • v. 2d. The prepositional adverb while (בְּעֹ֖ד) introduces the subordinate temporal clause of the time in which the psalmist remained silent.
  • v. 5b. This clause is best understood as a parenthetical.[14] Although explicit coordination is not present in prototypical parenthetical statements, it is indeed attested among the broad category of parentheticals in general, albeit more peripheral instantiations.[15]
  • vv. 5d, 7e. Although they are unmarked morphologically, these two subordinate clauses are the content of what was known (ידע) in each case.
  • v 10. Although there is no explicit conjunction between the first two clauses on this verse, their conceptual coordination is highly probable, such that the third clause is subordinate to them both.[16]


Speech Act Analysis

What is Speech Act Analysis?

The Speech Act layer presents the text in terms of what it does, following the findings of Speech Act Theory. It builds on the recognition that there is more to communication than the exchange of propositions. Speech act analysis is particularly important when communicating cross-culturally, and lack of understanding can lead to serious misunderstandings, since the ways languages and cultures perform speech acts varies widely.

For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Speech Act Analysis Creator Guidelines.

Summary Visual

Speech Act Analysis Chart

The following chart is scrollable (left/right; up/down).

  Legend

Verse Hebrew CBC Sentence type Illocution (general) Illocution with context Macro speech act Intended perlocution (Think) Intended perlocution (Feel) Intended perlocution (Do)
Verse number and poetic line Hebrew text English translation Declarative, Imperative, or Interrogative

Indirect Speech Act: Mismatch between sentence type and illocution type		 Assertive, Directive, Expressive, Commissive, or Declaratory

Indirect Speech Act: Mismatch between sentence type and illocution type		 More specific illocution type with paraphrased context Illocutionary intent (i.e. communicative purpose) of larger sections of discourse

These align with the "Speech Act Summary" headings		 What the speaker intends for the address to think What the speaker intends for the address to feel What the speaker intends for the address to do



If an emendation or revocalization is preferred, that emendation or revocalization will be marked in the Hebrew text of all the visuals.

Emendations/Revocalizations legend
*Emended text* Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is indicated by blue asterisks on either side of the emendation.
*Revocalized text* Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is indicated by purple asterisks on either side of the revocalization.

Emotional Analysis

  What is Emotional Analysis?

This layer explores the emotional dimension of the biblical text and seeks to uncover the clues within the text itself that are part of the communicative intent of its author. The goal of this analysis is to chart the basic emotional tone and/or progression of the psalm.

For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Emotional Analysis Creator Guidelines.


Emotional Analysis Chart

  Legend

If an emendation or revocalization is preferred, that emendation or revocalization will be marked in the Hebrew text of all the visuals.

Emendations/Revocalizations legend
*Emended text* Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is indicated by blue asterisks on either side of the emendation.
*Revocalized text* Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is indicated by purple asterisks on either side of the revocalization.

Summary Visual

(Click visual to enlarge).


Affective Circumplex

  What is the affective circumplex?

The affective circumplex locates emotions on two axes: (1) positive vs. negative valence; and (2) active vs. passive activation. Since emotional terminology often carries unintended cultural connotations, the purpose of the circumplex is to ease translation of emotions across different languages and cultures.



Bibliography

Alonso Schökel, Luis. 1988. "Todo Adán es Abel: Salmo 39," Estudios Bíblicos 46: 269–282.
Atkinson, Ian. 2025. "Parentheticals in Biblical Hebrew Prophetic and Poetic Literature." Vetus Testamentum. doi:10.1163/15685330-bja10226
Auffret, Pierre. 1990. "'Car toi, tu as agi' Étude structurale du psaume 39," Bijdragen 51 no. 2: 118–138.
Barthélemy, Dominique, et al. 2005. Critique textuelle de l’Ancien Testament: Tome 4. Psaumes. Fribourg / Göttingen: Vandenhoeck Ruprecht.
Bauer, Hans and Leander Pontus. 1922. Historische Grammatik der Hebräischen Sprache des Alten Testamentes. Halle: Max Niemeyer.
Beuken, Willem A. 2020. From Servant of YHWH to Being Considerate of the Wretched: The Figure David in the Reading Perspective of Psalms 35-41 MT. Leuven: Peeters.
Blau, Joshua. 2010. Phonology and Morphology of Biblical Hebrew: an Introduction. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Böhler, Dieter. 2021. Psalmen 1–50. Freiburg, Basel, Wien: Herder Verlag.
Botha, Phil. 2017. "Psalm 39 and its Place in the Development of a Doctrine of Retribution in the Hebrew Bible," OTE 30.2: 240–264.
Bratcher, Robert G. and Reyburn, William David. 1991. A Translator’s Handbook on the Book of Psalms, UBS Handbook Series. New York, NY: United Bible Societies.
Brockelmann, Carl. 1956. Hebräische Syntax. Neukirchen: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Erziehungsvereins.
Cohen, Shaye J. D., Goldenberg, Robert and Lapin, Hayim (eds). 2022. The Oxford Annotated Mishna: A New Translation of the Mishna with Introductions and Notes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen-Tzemach, David. 1996. "Chapter 39" (Hebrew). Pages 172–175 in Psalms: Volume 1. Olam HaTaNaKh. Tel Aviv: דודזון–עתי.
Crenshaw, James L. 2012. "The Journey from Voluntary to Obligatory Silence (Reflections on Psalm 39 and Qoheleth)." Pages 177–191 in Focusing Biblical Studies: The Crucial Nature of the Persian and Hellenistic Periods. Essays in Honor of Douglas A. Knight. Edited by Jon L. Berquist and Alice Hunt. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
Croft, William. 2022. Morphosyntax: Constructions of the World's Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Delitzsch, Franz. 1871. Biblical Commentary on the Psalms: Vol. 2. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
Dobbs-Allsopp, Frederick. W. 2005. Hebrew Inscriptions: Texts from the Biblical Period of the Monarchy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Fassberg, Steven E. 2019. An Introduction to the Syntax of Biblical Hebrew (Hebrew). Jerusalem: Bialik Institute.
Fokkelman, Jan P. 2003. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: at the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis. Volume III: The Remaining 65 Psalms. Assen: Royal Van Gorcum.
Gauthier, Randall X. 2014. Psalms 38 and 145 of the Old Greek Version. Leiden: Brill.
Gesenius 2013 = Gesenius, W. Donner, H. Rüterswörden, U. Renz, J. Meyer, R. (eds.). 2013. Hebräisches und aramäisches Handwörterbuch über das Alte Testament. 18. Auflage Gesamtausgabe. Berlin: Springer.
Ḥakham, Amos. 1979. The Book of Psalms: Books 1-2 (Hebrew). Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
Hoftijzer, J. & Jongeling, K 1995. Dictionary of the North-West Semitic Inscriptions. Leiden: Brill.
Ibn Ezra, Abraham. Ibn Ezra on Psalms.
Jastrow, Marcus. 1903. A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature. London: W.C. Luzac & Co.
Khan, Geoffrey. 2026. "Yiqṭol," in The Cambridge Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Edited by Geoffrey Khan et al. Cambridge: University of Cambridge and Open Book Publishers.
Khan, Geoffrey. 2026. "Qaṭal," in The Cambridge Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Edited by Geoffrey Khan et al. Cambridge: University of Cambridge and Open Book Publishers.
Kirkpatrick, Alexander, F. 1897. The Book of Psalms with Introduction and Notes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koev, Todor. 2022. Parenthetical Meaning. Oxford Studies in Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kynes, Will. 2012. My Psalm Has Turned into Weeping: Job's Dialogue with the Psalms. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Malbim. Malbim on Psalms.
Mena, Andrea K. 2012. “The Semantic Potential of עַל in Genesis, Psalms, and Chronicles.” MA Thesis, Stellenbosch University.
Messarra, John A. 2020. An Investigation of וְעַתָּה: Beyond the Temporal/Logical Bifurcation. MA Thesis, Stellenbosch University.
Mowinckel, Sigmund. 1962. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship. Two Volumes. Translated by D. R. Ap-Thomas. Oxford: Blackwell.
Notarius, Tania. 2013. The Verb in Archaic Biblical Poetry: A Discursive, Typological, and Historical Investigation of the Tense System. Leiden: Brill.
Porty, Tova. 2001. "The Image of the Moth: A Window into a Wisdom Psalm (Ps 39)" (Hebrew). Pages 319–331 in Homage to Shmuel: Studies in the World of the Bible. Edited by Z. Talshir, S. Yona and D. Sivan. Jerusalem: Bialik Institute.
Qafaḥ, Yosef. 1965. The Psalms with Translation and Commentary of Saadia Gaon (Hebrew). Jerusalem: The American Academy for Jewish Research.
Raabe, Paul R. 1990. Psalm Structures : A Study of Psalms with Refrains. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.
Radak. Radak on Psalms.
Ramond, Sophie. 2017. "L'expérience du Temps Éprouvé et le Registre Sapientiel du Psaume 39," Revue Biblique 124, no. 4: 490–506.
Sjörs, Ambjörn & Canu Højgaard, Christian. 2026. "Oblique Arguments," in The Cambridge Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Edited by Geoffrey Khan et al. Cambridge: University of Cambridge and Open Book Publishers.
van der Lugt, Pieter. 2006. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: with Special Reference to the First Book of the Psalter. Leiden: Brill.
Weiss, Meir. 1994. "Psalm 39" (Hebrew). Pages 627–646 in The Bible in Light of its Interpreters. Sarah Kamin Memorial Volume. Edited by Sara Japhet. Jerusalem: Magnes Press.
Weitzman, Michael. P. 1999. The Syriac Version of the Old Testament: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Footnotes

  1. ↑ Craigie 2004, 308.
  2. ↑ Weiss 1994, 634.
  3. ↑ Messarra 2020, 180.
  4. ↑ When the entire utterance is new/unexpected, it is a thetic sentence (often called "sentence focus"). See our Creator Guidelines for more information on topic and focus.
  5. ↑ Frame setters are any orientational constituent – typically, but not limited to, spatio-temporal adverbials – function to "limit the applicability of the main predication to a certain restricted domain" and "indicate the general type of information that can be given" in the clause nucleus (Krifka & Musan 2012: 31-32). In previous scholarship, they have been referred to as contextualizing constituents (see, e.g., Buth (1994), “Contextualizing Constituents as Topic, Non-Sequential Background and Dramatic Pause: Hebrew and Aramaic evidence,” in E. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Falster Jakobsen and L. Schack Rasmussen (eds.) Function and expression in Functional Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 215-231; Buth (2023), “Functional Grammar and the Pragmatics of Information Structure for Biblical Languages,” in W. A. Ross & E. Robar (eds.) Linguistic Theory and the Biblical Text. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 67-116), but this has been conflated with the function of topic. In brief: sentence topics, belonging to the clause nucleus, are the entity or event about which the clause provides a new predication; frame setters do not belong in the clause nucleus and rather provide a contextual orientation by which to understand the following clause.
  6. ↑ Alternatively, though less likely, is an exclusive interpretation, as read in the NET: "You are my only hope!" (cf. CJB, NABRE).
  7. ↑ See, e.g., Gen 23:4; Lev 25:23, 35, 47; Num 35:15; 1 Chr 29:15; cf. Watson 1986, 128–144.
  8. ↑ A number of manuscripts, however, have presumably corrected the rarer אדני to read יהוה (see De-Rossi, Variae Lectionis: vol. 4, 27).
  9. ↑ Kim 2022, 233–235.
  10. ↑ Miller 2010, 360–363.
  11. ↑ BHRG, 390; cf. Weiss 1994, 636.
  12. ↑ Alternatively, it is possible to read the first instance of אַךְ in v. 7a as a restrictive focus particle, as our preferred reading of that in v. 7b. Nevertheless, while the fronted position of the focal constituents makes its focal status clear and the restrictive implicature makes sense of v. 7b, it makes less sense in v. 7a (that is, it is unclear what "To walk around [only] as a shadow" could mean, as if it were exclusively selected among other ways one could walk around, a presuppositional theme which does not seem to be activated prior to this clause).
  13. ↑ Messarra 2020, 180.
  14. ↑ See the correspondence between the two ידע verbs in vv. 5a, c.
  15. ↑ See Atkinson 2025, 6; cf. Ezek 21:18; 28:2, 9; Pss 95:5; 109:4; 139:19.
  16. ↑ Indeed, one does find an explicit conjunction in the text of the LXX, Peshitta and Targum Psalms.