Psalm 88 Discourse
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
About the Discourse Layer
Our Discourse layer includes four analyses: macrosyntax, speech act analysis, emotional analysis, and participant analysis. (For more information, click 'Expand' to the right.)
Discourse Visuals for Psalm 88
Macrosyntax
- ** for revocalization see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 88:19b (MT: מַחְשָֽׁךְ).
- ** for emendation see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 88:16b (MT: אָפֽוּנָה).
- ** for emendation see the verse-by-verse note on v. 17b (MT: צִמְּתוּתֻֽנִי).
Notes
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).
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).
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.
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.
Speech Act Analysis
Summary Visual
Speech Act Chart
- ** for revocalization see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 88:19b (MT: מַחְשָֽׁךְ).
- ** for emendation see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 88:16b (MT: אָפֽוּנָה).
- ** for emendation see the verse-by-verse note on v. 17b (MT: צִמְּתוּתֻֽנִי).
Emotional Analysis
Summary visual
Emotional Analysis Chart
Participant analysis
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 Relations Diagram
The relationships among the participants may be abstracted and summarized as follows:
The psalmist has two "embodiments" as far as his relations to the other participants are concerned:
- A living one, represented by the bottom vertex. The psalmist is at the gates of Sheol, severely afflicted, but still not dead, not inside Sheol. He prays to YHWH as long as it is still possible, while continuing to endure YHWH's afflictions.
- A dead one, represented by the left-hand vertex. In the words of the psalmist he is "considered with those who go down to the Pit" (v. 5a), excommunicated and avoided as a leper, lepers being considered dead in ancient times (cf. Nu 12:12).
Participant Analysis Table
- ** for revocalization see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 88:19b (MT: מַחְשָֽׁךְ).
- ** for emendation see The Text and Meaning of Ps. 88:16b (MT: אָפֽוּנָה).
- ** for emendation see the verse-by-verse note on v. 17b (MT: צִמְּתוּתֻֽנִי).
Summary Distribution
Bibliography
- Goldingay, John. 2007. Psalms: Psalms 42–89. Vol. 2. BCOT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
- Lunn, Nicholas P. 2006. Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster.
- Miller, C. L. 1999. “The Pragmatics of Waw as a Discourse Marker in Biblical Hebrew Dialogue.” Zeitschrift für Althebraistik 12, no. 2: 165–91
- Miller, C. L. 2010. “Vocative Syntax in Biblical Hebrew Prose and Poetry: A Preliminary Analysis.” Semitic Studies 55 (1): 347–64.