Psalm 88 Discourse
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Among the Dead
Psalm 88
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
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 88:
- YHWH's outbursts of wrath (חֲמָתֶךָ, חֲרוֹנֶיךָ v. 8a, 17a), YHWH's waves (ָמִ֝שְׁבָּרֶ֗יך v. 8b), YHWH's terrifying assaults (אֵמֶ֣יךָ, בִּ֝עוּתֶ֗יךָ v. 16b, 17b) are taken as YHWH's agents of destruction sent to afflict the psalmist (cf. common-ground assumption for v. 17b in Story Behind the Psalm for a more detailed argumentation). Since their role in the context of the psalm is identical with YHWH's, but they are not identical to him, they are considered related participants.
- The soul (נֶפֶשׁ) is often used as a substitute for a personal pronoun, particularly in poetry (e.g. Psa 11:1; 7:3; cf. comment next on נֶפֶשׁ in Semantics), while the eye (עֶיִן) may be used, like in v. 10a, as a synecdoche for the whole person (e.g. 1Sam 14:27, 29; Gen 27:1; Job 17:7; Ps 6:8; 38:11; cf. common-ground assumption for v. 10a in Story Behind the Psalm and comment on v. 10a in Semantics, esp. Goldingay 2007). Therefore, the psalmist's soul and the psalmist's eye are understood as synonymous participants of the Psalmist.
- In a similar way to YHWH's waves, outbursts of wrath and terrifying assaults, which were taken as YHWH's semi-independent agents and thus as related participants (see box above), we consider the psalmist's prayer as an agent acting on behalf of the psalmist in front of YHWH, as also indicated by virtue of it being the subject of a dynamic verb, and therefore define it as a related participant.
- The friends of the psalmist are not strictly agentive, but are still taken as participants for two reasons. First, they constitute the causee in both causative verbs of v. 9a and v. 19a (הִרְחַקְתָּ, "to make shun") and would therefore be the agents of a corresponding underlying non-causative clause. In this sense, they are similar to YHWH's messengers expounded in the previous paragraph. Second, they are pivotal to the message of the psalm, as their estrangement from the psalmist is a major reason for his misery.
- The slain have an identical function in the psalm to the one of the dead, as the psalmist's situation is compared to both of them. However, being a subset of the larger set of the dead, they are not identical with it. The specific choice of the slain in v. 6b is deliberate and meaningful (cf. common-ground assumption for v. 6b in Story Behind the Psalm for a more detailed argumentation) and they are therefore considered related, not synonymous, participants.
Participant Tracking Text
Participant Relations Diagram
The relationships among the participants may be abstracted and summarized as follows:
Participant Analysis Summary Distribution
Macrosyntax
The macrosyntax layer rests on the belief that human communicators desire their addressees to receive a coherent picture of their message and will cooperatively provide clues to lead the addressee into a correct understanding. So, in the case of macrosyntax of the Psalms, the psalmist has explicitly left syntactic clues for the reader regarding the discourse structure of the entire psalm. Here we aim to account for the function of these elements, including the identification of conjunctions which either coordinate or subordinate entire clauses (as the analysis of coordinated individual phrases is carried out at the phrase-level semantics layer), vocatives, other discourse markers, direct speech, and clausal word order.
For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Macrosyntax Creator Guidelines.
Macrosyntax Diagram
(For more information, click "Macrosyntax Legend" below.)
| Macrosyntax legend | |
|---|---|
| Vocatives | Vocatives are indicated by purple text. |
| Discourse marker | Discourse markers (such as כִּי, הִנֵּה, לָכֵן) are indicated by orange text. |
 |
The scope governed by the discourse marker is indicated by a dashed orange bracket connecting the discourse marker to its scope. |
 |
The preceding discourse grounding the discourse marker is indicated by a solid orange bracket encompassing the relevant clauses. |
| Subordinating conjunction | The subordinating conjunction is indicated by teal text. |
 |
Subordination is indicated by a solid teal bracket connecting the subordinating conjunction with the clause to which it is subordinate. |
| Coordinating conjunction | The coordinating conjunction is indicated by blue text. |
 |
Coordination is indicated by a solid blue line connecting the coordinating clauses. |
 |
Coordination without an explicit conjunction is indicated by a dashed blue line connecting the coordinated clauses. |
 |
Marked topic is indicated by a black dashed rounded rectangle around the marked words. |
 |
The scope of the activated topic is indicated by a black dashed bracket encompassing the relevant clauses. |
| Marked focus or thetic sentence | Marked focus (if one constituent) or thetic sentences[1] are indicated by bold text. |
 |
Frame setters[2] are indicated by a solid gray rounded rectangle around the marked words. |
| [blank line] | Discourse discontinuity is indicated by a blank line. |
| [indentation] | Syntactic subordination is indicated by indentation. |
 |
Direct speech is indicated by a solid black rectangle surrounding all relevant clauses. |
| (text to elucidate the meaning of the macrosyntactic structures) | Within the CBC, any text elucidating the meaning of macrosyntax is indicated in gray text inside parentheses. |
If an emendation or revocalization is preferred, that emendation or revocalization will be marked in the Hebrew text of all the visuals.
| Emendations/Revocalizations legend | |
|---|---|
| *Emended text* | Emended text, text in which the consonants differ from the consonants of the Masoretic text, is indicated by blue asterisks on either side of the emendation. |
| *Revocalized text* | Revocalized text, text in which only the vowels differ from the vowels of the Masoretic text, is indicated by purple asterisks on either side of the revocalization. |
(Click diagram to enlarge)
Paragraph Divisions
The two selah instances in vv. 8b and 11b do not seem to play a role on the macrosyntactic level in this psalm and thus do not contribute to paragraph division. They do, however, play a role in the poetic structure of the psalm (see Poetic Structure)
- vv. 2-5: follows the superscription and begins with a vocative and temporal frame setter.
- vv. 6-7: beings with a focal בַּמֵּתִים, paralleled in v. 11.
- vv. 8-10: beings with a focal עָלַי, paralleled in v. 17.
- vv. 11-13: beings with a focal בַּמֵּתִים, paralleling v. 6; dominated by a series of yes-no questions.
- vv. 14-16: begins with a topic-shift to first person.
- vv. 17-19: beings with a focal עָלַי, paralleling v. 8.
Word Order
- v. 2b: יוֹם is fronted not in order to mark argument focus but as a temporal frame setter. Additionally, its initial position in the clause sets up expectation of the word pair (יום/לילה), standing in a balanced position to the focal בַּלַּיְלָה. As for the fronting of בַּלַּיְלָה, it marks scalar focus: "even at night".
- v. 4b mirrors 4a.
- 'v. 6a': The fronting of בַּמֵּתִים is for marked scalar focus: "not only in the society of the living, but even in the society of the dead I am an outcast".
- v. 6c: The fronting of the subject הֵמָּה marks the beginning of the second part of the coordinated relative clause and the new syntactic role of the antecedent in this part (direct object in the first part; subject in the second part). מידך is in marked focus.
- v. 8a: Fronting of עָלַי is for exclusive focus. The word order supporting a focal reading matches the subtext of this verse implying the status of the psalmist as a scapegoat chosen by YHWH of all people (cf. common-ground assumption for v. 8a in Story-Behind).
- v. 8b: Fronting of כָל-מִשְׁבָּרֶיךָ is for marked focus, highlighting the total and merciless character of YHWH's affliction of the psalmist, not sparing a single "wave" from him. Phrases with כל are often fronted for marked focus (cf. Lunn 2006:198).
- v. 10a: The SV word-order is an indication of either an argument-fronting or a sentence-focus. As shown in Story-Behind (cf. common-ground assumptions for v. 10a), the eye here is a synecdoche for the whole body with an emphasis on the vitality and health of a person. Given the latter and the direct context of the line, a marked focus is not plausible here. A topic shift is also implausible here, since the eye represents the psalmist who is already the activated topic. We therefore prefer to read this clause as a sentence-focus (thetic): following a long list of accusations directed towards YHWH with a detailed breakdown of the afflictions the psalmist is enduring, comes the bottom line announcing the consequence of this whole affair: "Look now, I am depleted of vitality because of all this endless misery (a result of everything I have stated just now)."
- v. 10b is rhetorical highlighting following a post-nucleus vocative for confirming focus (cf. note under "vocatives" above): "yes, every day indeed I have been calling you!".
- v. 11a: Fronting of לַמֵּתִים is for marked contrastive focus, serving as the clause constituent on which the rhetorical yes-no question focuses: "Is it for the dead that you perform wonders (or to the living)?"
- v. 11b: "A disjunctive question is sometimes a mere stylistic feature, used in cases of synonymous parallelism... especially in poetry: Is 10:15; Jb 4:17; 6:5)" (JM §161e). This device is used rhetorically with an expected negative answer on both parts of the disjunctive question. The fronting of רְפָאִים, which on its surface looks like a marked focus, results in fact in an ironic pseudo-focus which repeats, with a different word, the already activated focus of 11a (given the nature of this particular stylistic device of synonymous parallelism in a disjunctive question here; see above). This in turn further enhances the rhetorical force of this construction.
- v. 12b, 13b mirror 12a and 13a respectively with the verbs elided.
- v. 14a is topic-shift, from third to first person, with marked topic וַאֲנִי fronted. אֵלֶיךָ is fronted for marked restricting focus: "I have been crying out to you (only) for help, (because I know you are the only one who can save me)."
- v. 14b is fronting of בַּבֹּקֶר for marked exclusive focus: "in the morning (specifically, deliberately) my prayer will keep welcoming you in the morning.". This reading matches the subtext of this verse referring to morning time widely believed to be the time when YHWH appears to deliver (cf. common-ground assumption for v. 14b in Story-Behind). תפלתי marks topic activation. This word order (focus-topic) is attested in e.g. 2Kgs 19:23, Isa 28:17.
- v.15a: The question word למה is focused by virtue of the following vocative (cf. note under "vocatives" above), unsurprisingly as questions are by nature focal. Rhetorically it represents a negative directive speech act ("don't, YHWH, reject me"); cf. Speech Act Analysis.
- v. 16a: "A personal pronoun tends to occupy the second slot when no prominence is intended to be given to it... the predicate preceding a pronominal subject often does receive some prominence." (JM §154fa). In our case, עָנִי is a confirming focus: "Why do you keep rejecting me? I'm afflicted, as you know!"
- v. 17a is exclusive focus, cf. vs. 8a.
- v. 17b mirrors 17a.
Vocatives
The vocatives may also be accounted for poetically (cf. poetic feature 3). This poetic interpretation can be either alternative or overlapping with the following discursive one.
- v. 2: Prime addressee for urgent imperative. Structurally, the vocative opens the psalm (the superscription being ignored) and explicitly defines the addressee, YHWH, the only addressee throughout the whole psalm, thus serving as an opening formula to this direct personal "missive" to him.
- v. 10b: Post-nucleus vocative "providing rhetorical highlighting, though of a less specific nature [than focus]" (Miller 2010, 358). Following the lengthy lament in vv. 4-10a, the psalmist empowers his accusation of YHWH, by emphasizing the fact that he has been praying every day out of his extreme misery, and yet there was no reaction from YHWH.
- v. 14a: Post-fronted constituent vocative, focusing אֵלֶיךָ (cf. "word order" below).
- v. 15a: Post-fronted constituent vocative, focusing לָמָה (cf. "word order" below).
Conjunctions
- v. 5c: Followed by a noun, אֵין can form a sort of asyndetic relative clause, which serves as an attribute to the preceding noun, with the force of "without" (cf. JM §160o).
- v. 9c: The waw opens a clause of consequence ("so that...") in a co-subordinated structure (+dependent -embedded). Affirmative clauses of consequence require a volitive verbal form (cf. JM §116a), whereas negative ones have לא followed by a yiqtol-indicative form (ֹcf. JM §116j). Such clauses most commonly follow a volitive verb in the main clause, but other types of clauses are also possible, e.g. nominal clauses such as in our verse (cf. Nu 23:19: לֹא אִישׁ אֵל וִיכַזֵּב "God is not a man that he should lie"). For וְלֹא + yiqtol in a result clause, cf. Gen. 42.2, Lev. 10.9, Deut. 17.17 and 1 Kgs. 18.44.
- v. 14a: The waw opening the verse is a marker of a topic-shift from 3rd person back to 1st person, which also begins a new section in the psalm. “The discourse pragmatic function of wāw intersects with the use of word order to highlight a change of topic relating to one of the speech participants” (Miller 1999, 184).
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.
Speech Act Chart
(For more information, click "Speech Act Table Legend" below.)
| 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. |
(Click to enlarge)
Summary Visual
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
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)
Summary visual
Bibliography
- BDB = Brown, Francis, Driver, Samuel R. & Briggs, Charles A. Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977.
- BHRG = Merwe, Christo H.J. van der, Jacobus A. Naudé, and Jan H. Kroeze. A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar [2nd ed.]. New York: Bloomsbury, 2017.
- BHS = Schenker, Adrian. BIBLIA HEBRAICA STUTTGARTENSIA. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.
- Dahood, Mitchell J. Psalms II, 51-100: Introduction, Translation, and Notes. 3rd ed. AB 17. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1974.
- Eerdmans, Bernardus Dirk The Hebrew Book of Psalms. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1947.
- Gesenius, Wilhelm. Hebrew and Chaldee lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures, translated, with additions, and corrections from the author's Thesaurus and other works by Tregelles, Samuel Prideaux. London: Samuel Bagster & Sons, 1813-1875.
- GKC = Gesenius, Wilhelm & Kautsch, Emil. A. E. Cowley (trans.) Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1909.
- Goldingay, John. Psalms: Psalms 42–89. Vol. 2. BCOT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.
- Goulder, Michael D. The psalms of the sons of Korah. Sheffield:JSOT Press, 1982.
- HALOT = Koehler, Ludwig & Baumgartner, Walter et al. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1994-2000.
- Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. Psalms 2: A Commentary on Psalms 51-100. Translated by Linda M. Maloney. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005.
- IBHS = Waltke, Bruce, K. O'Connor, Michael O. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990.
- JM = Joüon P. and Muraoka T. A grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2018.
- Longacre, Drew and Strawn Brent A. "A New Identification of a Psalm Manuscript from Qumran: 4Q85 + 4Q98c". In Dead Sea Discoveries, 30/2, Leiden: Brill, 2022, pp. 152–159.
- Lunn, Nicholas P. Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2006.
- Miller, Cynthia. “The Pragmatics of Waw as a Discourse Marker in Biblical Hebrew Dialogue.” Zeitschrift Für Althebraistik 12, no. 2 (1999): 165–91.
- Miller, Cynthia L. “Vocative Syntax in Biblical Hebrew Prose and Poetry: A Preliminary Analysis.” Semitic Studies 55, no. 1 (2010): 347–64.
- Mowinckel, Sigmund. The Psalms in Israel’s Worship. Oxford: Blackwell, 1962.
- Skehan, Patrick W., Eugene Ulrich & Flint, Peter W. “4Q98c. 4QPst.” In Qumran Cave 4, XI: Psalms to Chronicles, 155, plate XIX. DJD 16. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2000.
- Stec, David M. The Targum of Psalms: Translated, with a Critical Introduction, Apparatus, and Notes. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2004.
- Tate, Marvin E. Psalms 51-100. WBC 20. Dallas, Tex: Word Books, 1998.
- Wendland, Ernst R. ‘“Darkness is my closest friend” (Ps 88:18b): Reflections on the saddest psalm in the Psalter’, Verbum et Ecclesia 37(1), Online Journal, 2016.
Footnotes
- ↑ When the entire utterance is new/unexpected, it is a thetic sentence (often called "sentence focus"). See our Creator Guidelines for more information on topic and focus.
- ↑ Frame setters are any orientational constituent – typically, but not limited to, spatio-temporal adverbials – function to "limit the applicability of the main predication to a certain restricted domain" and "indicate the general type of information that can be given" in the clause nucleus (Krifka & Musan 2012: 31-32). In previous scholarship, they have been referred to as contextualizing constituents (see, e.g., Buth (1994), “Contextualizing Constituents as Topic, Non-Sequential Background and Dramatic Pause: Hebrew and Aramaic evidence,” in E. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Falster Jakobsen and L. Schack Rasmussen (eds.) Function and expression in Functional Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 215-231; Buth (2023), “Functional Grammar and the Pragmatics of Information Structure for Biblical Languages,” in W. A. Ross & E. Robar (eds.) Linguistic Theory and the Biblical Text. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 67-116), but this has been conflated with the function of topic. In brief: sentence topics, belonging to the clause nucleus, are the entity or event about which the clause provides a new predication; frame setters do not belong in the clause nucleus and rather provide a contextual orientation by which to understand the following clause.