Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Eep Talstra
In my opinion there is a more general theme behind these questions: how does
one analyse texts, poetic texts in particular? We seem to have two options: one
may describe a text in terms of design, as pattern, and one may describe a text
in terms of the interaction of text and reader, as a process. Much modern
stylistic research of the Hebrew Bible tends to present poetic texts in the first
place as pattern. It concentrates on the study of a text as a well designed form,
nicely balanced by lexical repetitions and phonological features. Grammatical
research or discourse analysis, however, concentrates on a text as a
communicative process, guided primarily by the texts grammatical features
and their relations.
The presence
of stylistic phenomena, such as the repetition of the exclamation
in verse 2 and 10, and the presence of grammatical phenomena, such
as the rather unexpected wayyiqtol in verse 6 and the asyndetic yiqtol in verse 7,
make clear that it is not our task to make choices here. Rather it is to find a proper
order in the registration of the phenomena of language both at the level of
grammar and at the level of stylistics and to consider their particular contribution
to poetic structure. Based on the assumption that a linguistic analysis referring to
language as a system comes prior to stylistic analysis referring to the phenomena
that mark the structure of a specific textual composition, it is my view that
observations on the level of grammar and lexicon should have priority over
observations in terms of semantics or stylistics2. However, especially with
poetry, the challenge remains: how much do we know about the classical Hebrew
as a langue, as a linguistic system?
In agreement with the order of analysis proposed here, I first want to address a
number of syntactic details of Psalm 8 and second to consider the interaction of
syntax and rhetorical or strophical structure.
See my article, Dialogue in Job 21. "Virtual Quotations" or text grammatical markers? in:
The Book of Job (BETL) 94 (1994) 329 - 348. The Appendix to that article also explains
more details of the computer programme Quest that has been used also for this article to
search for lexical and grammatical Hebrew data.
2.
Verse 2b-3.
After the 1th person plural and the vocative in verse 2a, section 2b-3 does not
continue the 1th person plural, but it introduces 3rd person plurals: children,
adversaries. In verse 4a another actor, a 1th person singular is introduced: I
see. These observations suggest that verse 2b and 3 can be taken together.
Observations of the internal structure of this segment of text can corroborate this.
The construction of verse 2b-3: an clause, i.e. a subject clause in frontposition, continued by an asyndetic verbal clause, may not be very commonly
3
used, but it is a grammatical option also used
in other prayers . For an
explanation of the unexpected verbal form
in verse 2, I refer to the
commentary of
Van
Uchelen.
Verse 3a.
..
. In my view it is possible
to assign meaning to the
Massoretic text as it stands, if one does not take
as a verbal complement to
(you have founded "by the mouth" (RSV) "aus der Kinder Mund"
(Buber), but as a more losely connected adjunct. In that role the phrase
can
indicate the authority or the origin of a statement rather than the physical mouth
speaking or the
words spoken: Jer. 23:16; 2Chr. 35:22; 36:12; Esr. 1:1 (cf. Sach.
8:9 where
is on the first position of a halfverse). So the translation could be:
"for reason of the childrens voice you have established a stronghold", indicating
the reason why, rather than the material from which God founded it. In this way
the texts interpretation is that God forces his ennemies, the powers of chaos, into
silence in order to let the childrens voice be heard.
Verse 4-7.
Verse 4 is a temporal clause, introducing a new actor, by a 1st person singular
verb. In my view it is correct to combine verse 4 and 5, for if verse 4 is kept
separate4, the introduction of the new actor ("I") remains isolated. It is more
likely that this "I" continues in being the speaker of the wordsof verse 5.
clause of
Moreover, if one would like to isolate verse 4 in order to have the
H.J. Kraus, Psalmen (BKAT XV/1), Neukirchen-Vluyn, 19663, p. 65, refers to a number of
clause is the continuation of a hymnic expression. In my view it fits
texts where the
the text of Ps.8: 2f. better to refer to cases of an
clause that is the subject a following
main clause. See the translation by Buber and the text of Ps.71:20; Cf. 1Ki.8:24; Jer.32:20.
"!
!
Cf. Nic.H. Ridderbos, De Psalmen (KV), Kampen, 1962, p. 114, 121 and P. van der Lugt
Strofische Structuren in de Bijbels-Hebreeuwse Pozie (diss. TU Kampen), Kampen, 1980,
p. 473.
Eep Talstra
B. Waltke - M. OConnor, Biblical Hebrew Syntax, Winona Lake, 1991, 18.3, p. 322ff,
cf. p. 322 N15; p. 326.
Walter Gross, Verbform und Funktion. Wayyiqtol fr die Gegenwart. Ein Beitrag zur Syntax
poetischer althebrischer Texte (ATSAT 1), St. Ottilien, 1976, p. 55: "Verschiedene
syntaktische Formen lassen jedoch verschiedene Funktionen vermuten".
op.cit., p. 66f.
10
&('
The following Query was used to search for verses, with in it at least four words specified:
% filename: MAKI.TOP
% START QUERY
definitions
topograph
domain bible
[verse
[word
lexeme { "MH" "MJ" }
]
[word
part_of_speech ~verb
]
[word <- 2
]
[word
]
[word
]
commands
;
]
mark( 2, word 1)
mark( 3, word 4)
)+*
&,*
lexeme "KJ"
(max 2 words in
between)
( )
part_of_speech verb
(a verb)
&('
Eep Talstra
11
12
Psalm 8:5f.:
what is man that thou art mindful of him,
and the son of man that thou dost care for him?
Yet thou hast made him little less than God,
and dost crown him with glory and honour.
Job 7:17f.:
What is man, that thou dost make so much of him,
and that thou dost set thy mind upon him,
dost visit him every morning,
and test him every moment?
NZ, KJ+yiqtol
W(..)KJ+yiqtol
wayyiqtol
W-X-yiqtol
NZ, KJ+yiqtol
W-KJ+yiqtol
wayyiqtol
..-X-yiqtol
I assume it is the text of Heb. 2,6. that dominates the usual translation of the
Hebrew text of Psalm 8, 5f:
What is man that thou art mindful of him, or the son of man, that thou carest
for him?
Thou didst make him for a little while lower than the angels, thou hast
crowned him with glory and honour, ...
the questionmark already is placed after the verb
- In
.0/21%the
3546- 78/6text
92:<; . ofTheHebrews,
next sentence is not a question but a statement, referring to
Jesus, son of man, and uses a tense form with complete action in Greek
:=.?>A@87B9C92D3"@E ), speaking of a specific and already past period in the existence of
(
the son of man. From this specific application of the Greek text of Psalm 8 it is
understandable that in translations of the Hebrew text a similar pattern has been
used: the same position of the questionmark, i.e. after verse 5 and the translation
of the wayyiqtol als complete tense. The comparison with the text of Job 7, 17f.,
however, demonstrates that from the perspective of Hebrew syntax this
translation pattern is less convincing.
Van Uchelen in his translation of the wayyiqtol in verse 6 uses the explanatory
"immers" ("for") and he states that by the transition of verse 5 to verse 6 it more
and more becomes clear what exactly is mans position granted to him by
God13. In a footnote14 Van Uchelen refers to Gesenius-Kautzsch 154.a,
where it is explained that clauses with can have various functions, such as
causal or final. This approach is helpful to avoid the usual translation in terms of
a constrast: "yet you made him .." Now in view of the text of Job 7, 17f. I would
prefer a consecutive function of the wayyiqtol more than an explanatory one.
13
14
op.cit. p. 61 N16.
Eep Talstra
This syntactic analysis and the translation imply that verses 4 - 9 constitute one
segment of text, that is divided into two sections. The first section is opened by
15
op.cit., p. 114. More complicated is the position of Walter Gross, op.cit. p. 155 n.76. He also
emphasizes that the two texts have an identical syntax (mah... ki yiqt. ol...ki yiqt. ol
wayyiqt. ol...w=x-yiqt. ol). However, Gross wants to keep the wayyiqtol in Psalm 8,5, but he
proposes to change the wayyiqtol of Job 7,18 into a weyiqtol. The reason is, that in his view
wayyiqtol expresses individual situations, which would apply in the text of Psalm 8, 5 (the
action is executed just once), whereas it would not apply in Job 7,18. I would suggest that
the distinction of wayyiqtol and yiqtol by individual and general situation may not be
decisive. Gross himself speaks of "Progress" being expressed by wayyiqtol in a context of
general experience. (p. 165). This is close to the statements in Gesenius-Kautzsch 111.l.m.
about consecution.
the
clause in 4a and mentions F
GHIJKI . The second section is
opened by the asyndetic yiqtol-clause in verse 7a and mentions FLMKI . In
my view the syntactic construction and the lexical material cooperate: in
comparison with heaven and earth, the work of Gods fingers, man does not seem
to be qualified at all to have Gods attention. Yet man is a ruler of the work of
Gods hands. The experience of mans real task is phrased in verse 7, not in verse
5 and 6.
2 /2a N
Ridderbos:
Buber:
RSV:
NBG:
/4
/3a N
/3
2 /2b
2 /2b
2
/8 /10 (4 strophes)
/6
/5
/7
/4 /5
/7
/4
/4
/4
/6
/6
Van der Lugt does not give a full argumentation, only a short formula for his
division of Psalm 816. The translators, of course, have no occasion to present
their arguments for the division of the text. Divisions they usually indicate by
starting a sentence with a capital letter in combinaton with a preceding blank line.
Buber indicates the textual structure of Psalm 8 by main clauses starting with a
capital letter.
16
10
Eep Talstra
17
Cf. Johannes C. de Moor, Micah 1. A structural Approach, in: W. van der Meer & J.C. de
Moor (ed.), The Structural Analysis of Biblical and Canaanite Poetry (JSOT Supplement
Series 74, Sheffield, 1988, p. 172 - 185.
11
verse
syntactic:
actors
syntactic:
clauses
lexical
rhetorical
2a
--1pl
2sg
vocat.
-
O
M
refrain
10
---
1sg
2sg
3sg
1pl
2sg
2sg
3pl
2sg
3sg
asyn
yqtl yqtl
yqtl
-qtl
-qtl
yqtl
wyqtl
#
#
K
K
vocat.
-
O
M
refrain
Not all data fit into these columns. In addition to this schema more rhetorical
arguments have to be mentioned, such as: the use of words from the same
semantic field (the animals mentioned in verse 8 and 9) or the semantic
parallellism of clauses (verse 7a and 7b).
Of course, the reader may have serious doubts, whether a grammatician would
ever be capable of understanding the poet. These doubts may be justified. The
grammatical approach did not yield strophes of equal length in the psalm.
Nevertheless I have thought it worthwile to execute syntactic analysis in dialogue
with the approach advocated by Van Uchelen in his Commentary. The stimulance
coming from his work is his concentration on the cooperation of syntactical,
semantical and rhetorical observations in the readers reconstruction of the world
of the text. I consider this crucial for a further development of linguistic and
literary methods of reading biblical poetry.
12
Eep Talstra
LITTERATURE
F.I. Andersen,
The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew,
(Janua Linguarum, Series Practica, vol. 231), The Hague, 1974
F.I. Andersen,
The poetic properties of Prophetic Discourse in the Book of Michah, in: Robert D.
Bergen (ed.), Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns,
1994, p. 520-528
B.L. Bandstra,
Word Order and Emphasis in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: Syntactic Observations
on Genesis 22 from a Discourse Perspective, in: Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, W.
Bodine (ed.), Winona Lake, 1992, p. 109 - 124
W. Gesenius, E. Kautzsch,
Hebrische Grammatik, Leipzig, 1909-28
Walter Gross,
Verbform und Funktion. Wayyiqtol fr die Gegenwart. Ein Beitrag zur Syntax poetischer
althebrischer Texte (ATSAT 1), EOS Verlag: St. Ottilien, 1976
P. Joon, T. Muraoka,
A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew (Subsidia Biblica 14/1-2), Rome, 1991
H.J. Kraus,
Psalmen (BKAT XV/1), Neukirchen-Vluyn, 19663
R.E. Longacre,
Discourse Perspective on the Hebrew Verb
in: W.R. Bodine (ed), Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew, Eisenbrauns: Winona Lake,
Indiana, 1992, p. 177-189
P. van der Lugt
Strofische Structuren in de Bijbels-Hebreeuwse Pozie (diss. TU Kampen), Kampen, 1980
W. van der Meer & J.C. de Moor (ed.),
The Structural Analysis of Biblical and Canaanite Poetry (JSOT Supplement Series 74,
Sheffield, 1988
Diethelm Michel,
Tempora und Satzstellung in den Psalmen, Bonn, 1960;
Grundlegung einer hebrischen Syntax. Teil 1. Sprachwissenschaftliche Methodik. Genus
und Numerus des Nomens, Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1977.Michel,
Christo H. J. van der Merwe,
Discourse Linguistics and Biblical Hebrew Grammar, in: Bergen, Robert D.(ed.),
Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1994, p. 13 - 49
J.C. de Moor,
Micah 1. A structural Approach, in: W. van der Meer & J.C. de Moor (ed.), The
Structural Analysis of Biblical and Canaanite Poetry (JSOT Supplement Series 74,
Sheffield, 1988, p. 172 - 185
T. Muraoka,
Emphatic Words and Structures in Biblical Hebrew, Jerusalem/Leiden, 1985
Nic.H. Ridderbos,
De Psalmen (KV), Kampen, 1962
13
W. Schneider,
Grammatik des Biblischen Hebrisch, Mnchen, 1982 -5
E. Talstra
"Text Grammar and Computer. The Balance of Interpretation and Calculation", in:
Actes du Troisime Colloque International Bible et Informatique: "Interprtation,
Hermneutique, Expertise", Tbingen 28-31 aout 1991 (Paris / Genve: Slatkine, 1992)
p.135-149
E. Talstra,
Dialogue in Job 21. "Virtual Quotations" or text grammatical markers? in: The Book
of Job (BETL (Bibliotheca Ephemerides Theologicarum Lovaniensium)) 94 (1994) 329
- 348
N.A. van Uchelen,
Psalmen deel I (POT), Nijkerk, 1971
B. Waltke - M. OConnor
Biblical Hebrew Syntax, Winona Lake, 1991.
Nicolai Winther-Nielsen,
A Functional Discourse Grammar of Joshua. A Computer-assisted Rhetorical Structure
Analysis (Coniectanea Biblica, Old Testament Series 40)
Nicolai Winther-Nielsen, Eep Talstra,
A Computational Display of Joshua. A Computer-assisted Analysis and Textual
Interpretation (Applicatio 13), Amsterdam, 1995
Beat Zuber,