Macrosyntax[ ]

The visuals for psalm 9 and psalm 10 will be presented here since we understand them as one psalm.

Psalm 9 Visual[ ]

Psalm 10 Visual[ ]

Coordination and Subordination[ ]

The clauses אשמחה ואעלצה form a hendiadys
The כי of v. 5 probably grounds the two preceding yiqtols
The waw in v. 4 joins the two verbs within one poetic line.
Verses 6–7 have not been subordinated as part of the כי clause in v. 5 due to the shift in predicative participant.
The waw in v. 7 joins the two verbs within one poetic line.
We read MT 10:3ba (ובע...) as subordinate to what follows, which would therefore coordinate the main clause נאץ יהוה with what comes before.

Word Order[ ]

V.6b (שמם מחית לעולם). Lunn (2006, 296) lists as 'marked'. I interpret as sentence focus which provides a resultative effect (cf. Khan and Van der Merwe 2020, 387). The verb מחית is synonymous with אבדת, which rules out focus. 'Their name', semantically referring to their reputation, is inferable from the גוים and רשע themselves, which rules out topic.
vv. 7–8. The האויב and וערים are fronted because they are in parallel. Dik (1997, 460) calls this parallel focus, where 'there are two or more pairs of constituents...which are contrasted with each other.' But there does not necessarily have to be a contrast. Van Hecke (2011), expands the notion to allow parallel constituents to be fronted, as is the case here.
v. 8 ׳Lines A and C express a certain finality to their destruction, both by the verb תמו with its durative adverbial לנצח, and the phrase אבד זכרם. Line D comes as a stark contrast to the fate of the enemy. Here the topical...ויהיה contrasts with האויב, and the adverbial לעולם in connection with God's rule stands in direct opposition to the synonymous לנצח in line A concerning the destruction of the enemy. The latter is destroyed forever, whereas the Lord reigns forever.' (Lunn 2006, 85)
v. 9 Lunn (2006, 296) categorises הוא as marked word order, in agreement with the REB 'it is he who...' (153), although it the function is not clear.
v. 13. Marked by Lunn as defamiliarised. It seems rather to be an instance of sentence focus, with the purpose of explaining what precedes (so כי): '...the resultative thetic S-qatal clause is preceded by the conjunctive particle כִּי and presents the explanatory circumstances of the preceding events' (Khan and Van der Merwe 2020, 380). The אותם is fronted perhaps due to its cataphoric function, 'אותם, standing emphatically before its verb, points to those mentioned in what follows...' (Delitzsch 1883, 213). Another function, even admitted by Lunn (2006, 190) is that a defamiliarised, non-parallel colon can signal a textual boundary.
v. 17b בפעל כפיו. Marked focus, counter to expectations. Typically one is ensnared by someone else. 'By his (the wicked's) very own hands... he (YHWH) ensnares.
v. 19. Sentence focus marking closure (so Lunn 2006, 176; cf. Khan and Van der Merwe's comment above). Although possibly focus: ‘not forever’
10:2 Listed by Lunn as pragmatically marked. Marked focus is most likely, specifically on בגאות, having an additive function. Not only are the wicked persecuting the poor, they do so confidently, 'with pride' without fear of consequence, since YHWH is apparently absent (v. 1).
10:3b ובצע ברך. I read as sentence focus, explaining the negative value judgement upon הלל רשע על תאות נפשו. Praising a בצע—which the wicked clearly is in this psalm (vv. 8–9; cp. Prov 1:10–11)—means despising the Lord, even if that בצע is oneself.
10:4a Lunn reads רשע as pragmatically marked. The word is formally extraposed, as reflected by the suffix on אפו, and so will be marked as such in the text. Topic and focus cannot explain its fronting. The most likely explanation is that it opens a section. Although the description of the רשע began two verses earlier, there is no mention of the רשע in the following description that runs until v. 11.
10:5c כל צרריו. Lunn categorises as marked, although the function is not clear. The clause is extraposed, which may suggest that it is marking minor break in the discourse.
10:7a אלה פיהו מלא. Lunn reads as 'aperture' (182). Groß (2001, 96) also associates with stylistic intentions. The motivation for fronting אלה פיהו is chiasmus with the rest of the line: a b VERB b' b.
10:8 Lunn categorises as defamiliarised.
10:14b אתה. Signals theticity for the closing of a section, as reflected by the following change in verbal semantics and overall affective tone.
10:14b עמל וכעש. Constituent focus, supplying the expected object of ראתה as indicated by the following תבית.
Psa 10:14 עליך...יתום. Each clause reads like a thetic sentence, glossing תבית לתת.
Psa 10:17a Fronting signals another change back in topic. This is confirmed by continuation of the topic reflected in the pronoun on לבם. The phrase תאות ענוים instead of just ענוים because because of the acrostic. The change in topic also contrasts the actions of God towards the wicked vs. the afflicted. He destroys the afflicted, but listens.

Text Division[ ]

Between vv. 5/6. Shift in predicative participant.
Between vv. 13/4. Thetic a-line in v. 13, shift from jussive to imperatives.
Between vv. 15/6. Shift to qatal verbs.
Between vv. 19/20. Sentence focus, shift from qatals to imperative.
Between vv. 21/22 (10:1). Shift in mood (imperative to interogative), selah, shift in verbal semantics.
Between vv. 24 (10:3)/25 (10:4). Sentence focus marking closure, topical fronting marking aperture. Beginning of the section describing the wicked.
Between vv. 32 (10:11)/33 (10:12). Shift to imperatives, shift in addressee, closed by explicitly arked direct speech.
Between vv. 35 (10:14)/36 (10:15). Sentence focus to close a section, opening imperative.