The Grammar of Psalm 29:6

Exegetical Issues for Psalm 29:

• The Syntactic Function of קוֹל יְהוָה in Psalm 29
• The Grammar of Psalm 29:6
• The Grammar and Meaning of Psalm 29:7
• The Text and Meaning of Psalm 29:9

Introduction

The Masoretic Text of Psalm 29:6 reads as follows:

וַיַּרְקִידֵ֥ם כְּמוֹ־עֵ֑גֶל לְבָנ֥וֹן וְ֝שִׂרְיֹ֗ן כְּמ֣וֹ בֶן־רְאֵמִֽים׃

Psalm 29:6 is a "true crux interpretum." Translations differ on how they understand the grammar and line division of this verse. Consider the interpretations of the following modern translations:

• The Revised Version (1885), for example, is typical of older translations; it has a pronoun in the first line ("them"), and it groups "Lebanon" with the second line:

He maketh them also to skip like a calf;

Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild-ox

(RV 1885; cf. KJV, JPS 1985, DELUT, ELB, LUTHEUTE, NBS, RVES).

• The ESV (2016), by contrast, is representative of most modern translations; it does not have a pronoun ("them") in the first line, and it groups "Lebanon" with the first line instead of the second.

He makes Lebanon to skip like a calf,

and Sirion like a young wild ox

(ESV; cf. NIV, NLT, RSV, CSB, CEV, NET, NEB, CJB, EÜ, NGÜ, HFA, BDS, S21, PDV, NFC, NVI).

The interpretation of this verse depends primarily on two issues:

1. Grammar. The suffix on וַיַּרְקִידֵ֥ם (Ps 29:6a) has been interpreted in the following ways:

• as an enclitic-mem (i.e., "an additional mem which may potentially occur at the end of any grammatical form")
• as a 3mp pronominal suffix
• referring anaphorically to the cedars (v. 5b)
• referring cataphorically to the mountains of Lebanon and Sirion (v. 6b)

2. Line division. The grammatical issue is closely related to the issue of line division. If לְבָנוֹן begins the b-line (v. 6b) (as in MT), then the mem on the transitive verb וַיַּרְקִידֵ֥ם is more likely to be read as a suffix. If, however, לְבָנוֹן belongs with the previous line (v. 6a), then the mem is more likely to be read as an enclitic-mem.

Argument Map

The Interpretation of The Suffix on וַיַּרְקִידֵ֥ם

The first issue to be addressed is the interpretation of the suffix on וירקידם (Ps 29:6a). Is the final mem on וירקידם best explained as a pronominal suffix or as an enclitic-mem? This grammatical issue is closely related to the second issue; i.e., the issue of line division. For this reason, the argument maps below incorporate arguments for both issues.

Pronominal suffix

Before the mid-twentieth century, the vast majority of extant interpreters (including the MT and all the ancient versions) read the -m ending of וירקידם as a 3mp pronominal suffix. Still today, some interpreters continue to hold this view. The arguments for and against this traditional interpretation are as follows:

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 

[Pronominal Suffix]: The *-m* ending on וירקידם is a 3mp pronominal suffix. #dispreferred
 + <MT>: The MT points the *-m* ending on וירקידם as a 3mp pronominal suffix: וַיַּרְקִידֵם, and it is possible to interpret it as such. #dispreferred
  + [Cedars]: The 3mp suffix refers to the "cedars" in the previous verse (v. 5) (Hupfeld 1868, 174 :C:, Hengstenberg 1869, 477 :C:, Delitzsch 1883, 449 :C:, Emerton 1996 :A:, Barbiero 2016, 380 :A:). #dispreferred
   - [Cedars broken]: "It is difficult to imagine trees that were split and shattered now skipping like calves" (Futato 2009, 119 :C:; cf. Duhm 1899, 86 :C:; Loewenstamm 1992, 296 :A:).
    - [Poetic]: "There would be no difficulty supposing that a poetic text such as v. 5 does not imply that every cedar was shattered, and in understanding v. 6 to refer to other cedars (quite apart from the possibility that even broken cedars might be said to dance)" (Emerton 1996 :A:). #dispreferred 
   - [Imbalance]: "The cedars of Lebanon are mentioned in three hemistichs while the mountains of Lebanon and Sirion appear only in one single hemistich... One therefore gets the impression that the description is lacking in balance" (Loewenstamm 1992, 296 :A:).
  + [Lebanon & Sirion]: The 3mp suffix refers to "Lebanon and Sirion" in the following line (v. 6b) (Olshausen 1853, 142 :C:, Ewald 1880, 96 :C:, Ehrlich 1905, 62 :C:, Fokkelman 2003, 47-8 :M:, Goldingay 2006, 411 :C:, Ross 2011, 659 :C:). #dispreferred
   + [Cataphoric pronouns]: "The cataphoric pronoun is attested in most periods of Biblical Hebrew yet with increasing frequency over time. It is not restricted to a particular genre of discourse. It is well attested in prose (e.g. Exod 2:6; Num 32:33; 2 Sam 14:6) yet occurs in poetry as well (e.g. Ps 87:5; Job 29:3; see also Prov 5:22)" (Garr 2022 :A:). #dispreferred
    <_ [Not cataphoric]: The example in Psalm 29 does "not conform to the linguistic profile of the cataphoric construction" and "seems unlikely" (Garr 2022, 383 :A:).
   + [Psalm 114:4, 6]: Psalm 114: 4, 6 speaks of mountains "skipping": הֶֽ֭הָרִים רָקְד֣וּ כְאֵילִ֑ים גְּ֝בָע֗וֹת כִּבְנֵי־צֹֽאן׃ #dispreferred
 - <MT difficult>: "The MT pointing of וירקידם is almost impossible in the context" (Hummel 1957, 93 :A:).
  + [Parallelism]: The placement of "Lebanon" in v. 6b would ruin the parallelism and the chiastic pattern (like a calf - Lebanon / Sirion - like a r'em) (Basevi 1990, 29-32 :A:; Hossfeld 1993, 183 :C:).
  + [Meter]: "The metrical verse arrangement (3/3) is disturbed if we follow MT" (Kraus 1988, 349 :C:; cf. Gunkel 1927, 125 :C:; Ginsberg 1935, 472-6).
   - [Not metrically uniform]: "The psalm is not metrically uniform, and some other verses have a second part that is longer than the first (for example vv. 5, 10, 11) (Emerton 1996 :A:). #dispreferred

Enclitic-mem (preferred)

Ginsberg was the first to argue, in 1936, that the final -m in Psalm 29:6 was an enclitic-mem. This was the first of many purported examples of enclitic-mem to be discovered in Biblical Hebrew.

Any argument for an enclitic-mem in Psalm 29:6 is, to a large extent, dependent on arguments for the existence of enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew in general. Therefore, we will present argument maps for an enclitic-mem in both Psalm 29:6 and in Biblical Hebrew.

Enclitic-mem in Psalm 29:6

The vast majority of interpreters and translators today take the final -m on וירקידם as an instance of the so-called "enclitic-mem." The arguments for and against this are as follows.

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 

[Enclitic-mem]:The *-m* ending on וירקידם is an enclitic-*mem*.
 + <Explanatory power>: "If we view the final *mem* as enclitic, almost all difficulties disappear" (Hummel 1957, 93 :A:)
 + <Line Division>: The word "Lebanon" belongs with v. 6a, not v. 6b. When the text is divided in this way, "Lebanon" is most likely the direct object and the *mem* is most likely an enclitic-*mem*.
  + [External evidence for Lebanon in a-line]: Septuagint MSS (followed by Vulgate MSS) and subsequent Greek versions (e.g., Symmachus) along with Jerome (see Codex Amiatinus) and one Targum manuscript group "Lebanon" with v. 6a.
  - [External evidence for Lebanon in b-line]: The MT (*athnach*), the Aleppo Codex, the Berlin Codex, the Peshitta manuscript Codex Ambrosianus, and most Targum MSS group "Lebanon" with v. 6b. #dispreferred
   - <Facilitative reading>: The grouping of "Lebanon" with the b-line may be explained as an attempt to make sense of the *mem* as a pronominal suffix. By contrast, it is difficult to explain why so many manuscripts would group "Lebanon" with the a-line unless this were the earlier division of the text.
  + <בן ראמים>: "The additional evidence of בן ראמים in the second clause. For just as כבני צאן (rather than just צאן) is used in Ps 114:4, 6 in the second stich to help compensate rhythmically for the verb תרקדו/רקדו that occurs in the first stich but stands for both stichs, so בן ראמים (instead of just ראמים) is used in Ps 29:6. But this would only occur if the second stich would otherwise be shorter than the first, a situation that exists only if וירקד-מ is read with enclitic-mem" (Cohen 2004, 256-7 :A:).

Enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew

Any argument for an enclitic-mem in Psalm 29:6 is, to a large extent, dependent on arguments for the existence of enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew in general. Scholars are divided on this issue. The arguments for and against the existence of enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew are as follows:

===
model:
    removeTagsFromText: true
    shortcodes:
      ":C:": {unicode: "🄲"}
      ":G:": {unicode: "🄶"}
      ":A:": {unicode: "🄰"}
      ":I:": {unicode: "🄸"}    
      ":L:": {unicode: "🄻"}
      ":D:": {unicode: "🄳"}    
      ":M:": {unicode: "🄼"}   
selection:
    excludeDisconnected: false
dot:
    graphVizSettings:
        concentrate: true
        ranksep: 0.2
        nodesep: 0.2
=== 

[Enclitic-mem]:The enclitic-*mem* is a feature of Biblical Hebrew (IBHS §9.8. :G:, Hummel 1957 :A:, Cohen 2004 :A:).
 + <Enclitic-mem in Semitic languages>: "This additional *mem* was in widespread use throughout Akkadian literature (according to the suffix -ma) beginning in the third millennium B.C.E. and is also common in certain Northwest Semitic languages beginning in the second millennium B.C.E., as follows: Ugaritic (-m suffix); Amarna letters (the two suffixes -ma/-mi ); Amorite personal names (the two suffixes -ma/-mi ); and in BH, as we will see (-m suffix)... Therefore, in the light of all these precedents, there is no reason to question the possibility that the enclitic-mem could have existed in BH as well..." (Cohen 2004, 232-3 :A:).
  + [Ugaritic]: Enclitic-*mem* is a feature of Ugaritic (Watson 1992 :A:, 1994 :A:, 1996 :A:).
 + <Biblical examples>: The following verses contain "classic cases of the enclitic-*mem* in BH:" Genesis 14:6; Exodus 26:26; 28:17; 1 Kings 7:12; Deuteronomy 33:11; Isaiah 1:18; Proverbs 31:21; Isaiah 5:11; 10:1; Ezekiel 22:18; Hosea 14:3; Ps 18:16; Psalm 29:6; Job 15:18; 31:11 (Cohen 2004, 241-59 :A:).
  + [E.g., Ps 18:16]: 2 Samuel 22:16 reads אפיקי ים while the parallel text in Psalm 18:6 reads אפיקי מים. "The first text has lost the enclitic *mem*, while the second has attached it to ים yielding a different (and not implausible) reading" (IBHS §9.8. :G:).
  - <Other explanations defensible>: In many of these examples, the MT understanding of the *m* (as something other than an enclitic) may be reasonably defended (Emerton 1996 :A:). #dispreferred

Conclusion (C)

The final mem on וירקידם is best explained as an enclitic-mem and not as a pronominal suffix. While the latter view is possible syntactically, it is not likely poetically. The strongest argument for reading an enclitic-mem is the argument from line division. In all likelihood, the earliest division of the lines was (according to the oldest manuscripts) וירקידם כמו עגל לבנון // ושריון כמו בן ראמים. If this line division is adopted, then it is virtually impossible to read the mem as a pronominal suffix. The best alternative explanation is that it is an enclitic.

The following explanation seems most probable:

1. The verse was originally divided as follows and the suffix interpreted as an enclitic-mem: וירקידם כמו עגל לבנון // ושריון כמו בן ראמים
2. The verse continued to be divided in the same way, but the enclitic-mem was reanalyzed as a 3mp pronominal suffix. The preservation of the original line division together with the reanalysis of the morphology of the -m as a pronominal suffix made for a syntactically difficult verse which the versions struggled to understand.
3. With the m now interpreted as a pronominal object suffix referring either to (1) to the cedars in the previous verse (anaphoric) or (2) to Lebanon and Sirion in what follows (cataphoric), "Lebanon" could no longer be analyzed as the direct object of וירקידם. It now belonged syntactically with the following line. The new syntax resulted in a new prosody, whereby the pause shifted from לבנון to עגל.

Research

Translations

Ancient

• LXX: καὶ λεπτυνεῖ αὐτὰς ὡς τὸν μόσχον τὸν Λίβανον, καὶ ὁ ἠγαπημένος ὡς υἱὸς μονοκερώτων.
  • "And he will pulverize them, as the bull calf, the Lebanon, and he that is beloved is like a son of unicorns."
• Aquila: καὶ σκιρτώσει αὐτὰς ὁμοί(ως) μόσχῴ λίβανον (καὶ) σερίων ὁμοί(ως) υἱῷ ῥινοκερώτων
  • "And he will make them jump like a bull calf, Lebanon (and) Sirion like the son of a bull"
• Symmachus: καὶ ὀρχεῖσθαι ἐποίησ(εν) αὐτ(ὰς) ὡς μόσχον τὸν λίβανον καὶ τὸν σαρίων ὥσπερ υἱὸν μονοκερ‹ώ›των
  • "And he will make them dance like a bull calf, Lebanon and Sirion just as the son of a bull"
• Quinta: καὶ σκιρτοποιήσει αὐτὰς ὡς μόσχον τὸν λίβανον καὶ σερίων ὡς υἱοὶ μονοκερώτων̣

"And he will make them jump like a bull calf, Lebanon and Sirion like the sons of bulls"

• Peshitta: ܪܩܕ ܐܢܘܢ ܐܝܟ ܥ̈ܓܠܐ܂ ܠܠܒܢܢ ܘܠܣܢܝܪ ܐܝܟ ܒܢ̈ܝ ܪܝܡܐ܂
  • "He makes them skip like calves; Lebanon and Sanir like young bulls."
• Jerome (Hebr.): et disperget eas quasi vitulus Libani | et Sarion quasi filins rinocerotis
  • "and he will scatter them like a calf of Lebanon | and Sarion like a young rhinoceros."
• Jerome (Gall.): et comminuet eas tamquam vitulum Libani | et dilectus quemadmodum filius unicornium
  • "and he will crush them like a calf of Lebanon | and his beloved like a son of an unicorn"
• Targum: ושוורינון היך עגלא לבנן וטור מסרי פרוי היך בר רמיא׃
  • “He makes them leap like a calf, Lebanon and the mountain (that) produces rotten fruits, like a young wild ox.”

Modern

Pronoun in the 1st line / "Lebanon" is grouped with the 2nd line

• "He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild-ox" (RV 1885)
• "He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn" (KJV)
• "making Lebanon skip like a calf, Sirion, like a young wild ox" (JPS 1985)
• "Und macht sie hüpfen wie ein Kalb, den Libanon und Sirjon wie ein junges Einhorn" (DELUT)
• Er lässt sie hüpfen wie ein Kalb, den Libanon und Sirjon wie einen jungen Büffel (ELB)
• Er lässt sie hüpfen wie ein Kalb, den Libanon und Sirjon wie einen jungen Büffel" (LUTHEUTE)
• "Il les fait bondir comme un taurillon, il fait bondir le Liban et le Siriôn comme un aurochs" (NBS)
• "E hízolos saltar como becerros; Al Líbano y al Sirión como hijos de unicornios" (RVES).

No Pronoun in the 1st line / "Lebanon" is grouped with the 1st line

• "He makes Lebanon to skip like a calf, and Sirion like a young wild ox" (ESV)
• "He makes Lebanon leap like a calf, Sirion like a young wild ox" (NIV)
• "He makes Lebanon’s mountains skip like a calf; he makes Mount Hermon leap like a young wild ox" (NLT)
• "He makes Lebanon to skip like a calf, and Sir′ion like a young wild ox" (RSV)
• "He makes Lebanon skip like a calf, and Sirion, like a young wild ox" (CSB)
• "God makes Mount Lebanon skip like a calf and Mount Hermon jump like a wild ox" (CEV)
• "He makes Lebanon skip like a calf and Sirion like a young ox" (NET)
• "He makes Lebanon skip like a calf, Sirion like a young wild ox" (NEB)
• "and makes the L’vanon skip like a calf, Siryon like a young wild ox" (CJB)
• "Er ließ den Libanon hüpfen wie einen Jungstier, wie einen Wildstier den Sirjon" (EÜ)
• "Er lässt den Libanon erbeben und hüpfen wie ein Kalb, auch den Hermon lässt er auf und nieder springen wie einen jungen Stier" (NGÜ)
• Das Libanongebirge lässt er wie ein Kalb hüpfen, der Berg Hermon springt wie ein junger Stier (HFA)
• "Il fait bondir ╵tout le Liban ╵comme des veaux et le Siriôn ╵comme des buffles" (BDS)
• "Il fait bondir le Liban comme un veau, et le Sirion comme un jeune buffle" (S21)
• "Il fait bondir les montagnes du Liban comme un jeune taureau, et la montagne de l’Hermon comme un jeune buffle" (PDV)
• "Il fait bondir les montagnes du Liban comme de jeunes taureaux, le mont Hermon comme un jeune buffle" (NFC)
• "Hace que el Líbano salte como becerro, y que el Hermón salte cual toro salvaje" (NIV)
• "Hace temblar los montes Líbano y Sirión; ¡los hace saltar como toros y becerros!" (DHH)

Secondary Literature

Barbiero, Gianni. 2016. "The Two Structures of Psalm 29". In Vetus Testamentum 66, 3: 378-392.

Basevi, Claudio. 1990. "El Salmo 29. Algunas Observaciones Filológicas Sobre El Texto Hebreo y Griego." In Scripta Theologica 22(1):13-47.

Cohen, Chaim. 2004. "The Enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew: Its Existence and Initial Discovery." Pages 231-260 in Sefer Moshe: The Moshe Weinfeld Jubilee Volume: Studies in the Bible and the Ancient Near East, Qumran, and Post-Biblical Judaism. Edited by Chaim Cohen, Avi M. Hurvitz and Shalom M. Paul. University Park, USA: Penn State University Press.

Delitzsch, Franz. 1883. Biblical Commentary on the Psalms: Vol. 1. Translated by Eaton David. Vol. 1. New York: Funk and Wagnalls.

Duhm, Bernhard. 1899. Die Psalmen. Mohr Siebeck.

Ehrlich, Arnold B. 1905. Die Psalmen; neu übersetzt und erklärt. Berlin: Poppelauer.

Emerton, John A. 1996. “Are There Examples of Enclitic mem in the Hebrew Bible?” Pages 321-338 in Texts, Temples, and Traditions: A Tribute to Menahem Haran. Edited by Michael V. Fox, Victor Avigdor Hurowitz, Avi M. Hurvitz, Michael L. Klein, Baruch J. Schwartz, and Nili Shupak. Winona Lake, Eisenbrauns.

Ewald, Heinrich. 1880. Commentary on the Psalms. Vol. 1. London: Williams and Norgate.

Fokkelman, J.P. 2003. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis (Vol 3: The Remaining 65 Psalms). Vol. 3. Studia Semitica Neerlandica. Van Gorcum.

Futato, Mark D. 2009. "The Book of Psalms." In Cornerstone Biblical Commentary: The Book of Psalms, The Book of Proverbs. Vol 7. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers.

Garr, W. Randall. 2022. "The Cataphoric Pronoun in Biblical Hebrew," JSS 67, no. 2: 353–393.

Ginsberg, H. L. 1935. “A Phoenician Hymn in the Psalter.” In Atti del XIX Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti, Roma, 23-29 Settembre 1935 (Rome: G. Bardi, 1938), 472–6.

Goldingay, John. 2006. Psalms: Psalms 1-41. Vol. 1. BCOT. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Gunkel, Hermann. 1926. Die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

Hengstenberg, Ernst W. 1869. Commentary on Psalms. Vol. 1. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

Hossfeld, Frank-Lothar, and Erich Zenger. 1993. Die Psalmen I: Psalm 1–50. Neue Echter Bibel. Würzburg: Echter.

Hummel, Horace D. 1957. "Enclitic Mem in Early Northwest Semitic, Especially Hebrew." In Journal of Biblical Literature; 76 (2): 85–107.

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

Kraus, Hans-Joachim. 1988. Psalms 1-59: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Augsburg.

Loewenstamm, Samuel E. 1992. From Babylon to Canaan Studies in the Bible and Its Oriental Background. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University.

Olshausen, Justus. 1853. Die Psalmen. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.

Ross, Allen P. 2011. A Commentary on the Psalms 1-41. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Kregel.

Watson, W. G. E. 1992. “Final -m in Ugaritic,” Aula Orientalis 10: 223-52.

________. 1994. “Final -m in Ugaritic Again,” Aula Orientalis 12: 95-103.

________. 1996. “Final -m in Ugaritic Yet Again,” Aula Orientalis 14: 259-68.

References

Choose a PsalmNavigate Psalm 29

Psalm 29 Home

Bible Text

Hebrew & English

Structural Overlay

Expanded Paraphrase

Participant Tracking

Translation (forthcoming)

Academic

Overview

Layer by Layer ▸

View All Layers

Grammar & Semantics

Story Behind

Discourse

Poetry

Verse by Verse

Exegetical Issues

Book 1

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

Book 2

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

Book 3

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

Book 4

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

Book 5

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

29:6 Approved