Psalm 78 Macrosyntax

From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Psalm 78/Macrosyntax
Jump to: navigation, search

Choose a PsalmNavigate Psalm 78


Macrosyntax

  What is Macrosyntax?

Macrosyntax Diagram

  Legend

Macrosyntax legend
Vocatives Vocatives are indicated by purple text.
Discourse marker Discourse markers (such as כִּי, הִנֵּה, לָכֵן) are indicated by orange text.
Macrosyntax legend - discourse scope.jpg The scope governed by the discourse marker is indicated by a dashed orange bracket connecting the discourse marker to its scope.
Macrosyntax legend - preceding discourse.jpg 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.
Macrosyntax legend - subordination.jpg 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.
Macrosyntax legend - coordination.jpg Coordination is indicated by a solid blue line connecting the coordinating clauses.
Macrosyntax legend - asyndetic coordination.jpg Coordination without an explicit conjunction is indicated by a dashed blue line connecting the coordinated clauses.
Macrosyntax legend - marked topic.jpg Marked topic is indicated by a black dashed rounded rectangle around the marked words.
Macrosyntax legend - topic scope.jpg 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.
Macrosyntax legend - frame setter.jpg 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.
Macrosyntax legend - direct speech.jpg 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)


Psalm 78 - Macrosyntax.jpg

  • v. 9 discourse discontinuity and constituent order: After lengthy grammatical subordination throughout vv. 5-8, the fronted "Ephraimites" (בְּֽנֵי־אֶפְרַ֗יִם) provides a topic shift beginning v. 9.
  • v. 21 discourse discontinuity: After lengthy grammatical subordination and direct speech throughout vv. 19-20, the discourse unit beginning v. 21 is indicated by the discourse marker, "therefore" (לָכֵ֤ן).
  • v. 32 discourse discontinuity: Following the semantic scope of the previous discourse marker, "therefore" (לָכֵ֤ן) in v. 21, and the symmetrical pattern of v. 31b-c, the discourse unit beginning v. 32 is indicated by another discourse marker "in spite of this" (בְּכָל־זֹ֭את), which finds its semantic denotation (i.e., the "this") in the entire previous discourse unit.
  • v. 40 discourse discontinuity: After the grammatical subordination throughout v. 39, the (double) exclamative initiated by "How often...!" (כַּ֭מָּה) indicates the beginning of a new discourse unit in v. 40.
  • v. 56 discourse discontinuity: The end of the semantic content following the relative clause of what was forgotten (from vv. 42-43 onwards) indicates a shift back to the discourse mainline.
  • v. 65 discourse discontinuity: After the unique instance (in this Psalm) of four sequential topic shifts throughout vv. 63-64, the new discourse unit in v. 65 resumes the pattern of wayyiqtol.
  • v. 2 post-verbal constituent order: The instrumental בְמָשָׁ֣ל "with a parable" precedes the object פִּ֑י "my mouth" to create repetition between the final constituents of this and the previous line.
  • v. 3c constituent order: The fronting in אֲבוֹתֵ֗ינוּ סִפְּרוּ־לָֽנוּ indicates the thetic information packaging of the clause as providing the grounds for the previous two, i.e., the means by which they heard and learned.
  • v. 5b constituent order: תוֹרָה֮ is fronted in תוֹרָה֮ שָׂ֤ם to provide a symmetrical structure with the previous line's וַיָּ֤קֶם עֵד֨וּת ׀, with repetition of the third constituent in each line: בְּֽיַעֲקֹ֗ב // בְּיִשְׂרָ֫אֵ֥ל (for which, see the thematic significance in vv. 21 and 71).
  • v. 7a post-verbal constituent order: The post-verbal position of בֵֽאלֹהִ֗ים in וְיָשִׂ֥ימוּ בֵֽאלֹהִ֗ים כִּ֫סְלָ֥ם may quite plausibly indicate the focal information structure of this constituent.
  • v. 7c constituent order: There does not seem to be a clear poetic function for the fronting of מִצְוֺתָ֥יו, so it should be read as a topic shift.
  • v. 8c post-verbal constituent order: The final position of the subject רוּחֽוֹ provides a pattern of repetition between this and the previous line's 3ms-suffixed לִבּ֑וֹ.
  • v. 9 discourse discontinuity and constituent order: After lengthy grammatical subordination throughout vv. 5-8, the fronted "Ephraimites" (בְּֽנֵי־אֶפְרַ֗יִם) provides a topic shift beginning v. 9.
  • v. 10b constituent order: There does not seem to be a clear poetic function for the fronting of בְתוֹרָת֗וֹ, so it should be read as a topic shift (cf. v. 7c above).
  • v. 12 constituent order: The fronting of נֶ֣גֶד אֲ֭בוֹתָם provides a spatial frame setter for the following discourse (minimally, up to v. 16).
  • v. 14b constituent order: The order כָל־הַ֝לַּ֗יְלָה — בְּא֣וֹר אֵֽשׁ provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line's post-verbal בֶּעָנָ֣ן — יוֹמָ֑ם.
  • v. 20b-c constituent order: The fronted נְחָלִ֪ים provides a tail-head linkage to the previous line's final  מַיִם֮, creating syntactic closure before the interrogative beginning הֲגַם.
  • v. 20d constituent order: The fronted לֶ֭חֶם is best read as focal, both accompanied by the focus particle גַּם and adding an element to the set including מַיִם: "He gave water. Can he also give bread?"
  • v. 21c constituent order: The fronted clause אֵשׁ נִשְּׂקָ֣ה בְיַעֲקֹ֑ב seems best read as a thetic statement, reasonably out-of-the-blue, introducing 'fire' for the first time, as well as the unaccusative niphal נִשְּׂקָ֣ה, which is also symptomatic of thetic statements.[3] As a unitary state of affairs, it provides the initial details of the result of YHWH becoming furious (v. 21b).
  • v. 21d constituent order: The fronted אַ֝֗ף is best read as focal, both accompanied by the focus particle גַּם and adding an element to the set of "fire" and "anger" (cf. v. 20d).
  • v. 23b constituent order: Although Lunn considers the order here to be motivated by poetic defamiliarization,[4] the case for symmetry is not particularly strong, so the fronting of דַלְתֵ֖י שָׁמַ֣יִם most likely indicates scalar focus (cf. vv. 25a, 66b) as further specifying the extent of YHWH's provision, not only commanding clouds, but also opening even heavenly doors (a unique expression in the Bible).
  • v. 24b-25a constituent order: The fronted דְגַן־שָׁ֝מַ֗יִם provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line's מָ֣ן לֶאֱכֹ֑ל (V - PP + 3pl suffix - O // O - V - PP + 3pl suffix) creating syntactic closure before the asyndesis introducing the לֶ֣חֶם אַ֭בִּירִים in v. 25a, which is most likely fronted for scalar focus, as indicated by the expanded paraphrase.
  • v. 25b constituent order: The fronting of צֵידָ֬ה does not have an altogether obvious function. In agreement with Lunn, we do not perceive any poetic structure across the two lines of v. 25.[5] The information structure function of צֵידָ֬ה seems best read as additive focus. The discourse has only mentioned bread up to this point, and from v. 26 onwards, focuses on "meat" and "birds," so צֵידָ֬ה is an extension from "bread" to "provisions" in general (both bread and meat), as indicated by the CBC's expansion.
  • v. 27b constituent order: The order כְח֥וֹל יַ֝מִּ֗ים — ע֣וֹף כָּנָֽף provides a pattern of repetition in relation to the previous line's post-verbal כֶּעָפָ֣ר — שְׁאֵ֑ר (cf. the symmetry in v. 14b).
  • v. 29c constituent order: The fronting of תַֽאֲוָתָ֗ם indicates constituent focus, as it is revealed that YHWH brought them more than just "bread" and "meat," but rather nothing less than their craving.
  • v. 31a constituent order: The fronted clause אַ֤ף אֱלֹהִ֨ים ׀ עָ֘לָ֤ה בָהֶ֗ם is a thetic statement following the temporal clause in v. 30b: [While] their food was still in their mouth, X happened.
  • v. 31c constituent order: The fronting of בַחוּרֵ֖י יִשְׂרָאֵ֣ל provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line in preparation for the discourse discontinuity of v. 32:
וַֽ֭יַּהֲרֹג // בְּמִשְׁמַנֵּיהֶ֑ם 
וּבַחוּרֵ֖י יִשְׂרָאֵ֣ל // הִכְרִֽיעַ׃
  • v. 33b constituent order: The order שְׁנוֹתָ֗ם // בַּבֶּהָלָֽה provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line's post-verbal בַּהֶ֥בֶל // יְמֵיהֶ֑ם (cf. vv. 14b, 27b).

v. 35b constituent order: The order of the verbless clause אֱלֹהִ֣ים צוּרָ֑ם is potentially ambiguous between a simple topic-initial predicational, (i.e., "[as for] God, [he] was their rock") or a comment-initial specificational (i.e., "[it was] God [who] was their rock"). The former is most likely, though see SG21 of the second line for the specificational interpretation: "Ils se souvenaient que Dieu était leur rocher, que le Dieu très-haut était celui qui les rachetait" ("[they remembered] that God Most High was he who redeemed them").

  • v. 36b constituent order: The fronting of בִלְשׁוֹנָ֗ם provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line:
וַיְפַתּ֥וּהוּ // בְּפִיהֶ֑ם 
וּ֝בִלְשׁוֹנָ֗ם // יְכַזְּבוּ־לֽוֹ׃
  • v. 37a constituent order: The fronting of לִבָּם is a topic shift from the body parts previously mentioned in v. 36 ("their mouth" and "their tongue").
  • v. 39 constituent order: The verbless clause בָשָׂ֣ר הֵ֑מָּה is a comment-initial predicational clause, as transparent in the SG21: "Il s’est souvenu qu’ils n’étaient que des créatures" (cf. NBS, NFC, TOB)—see also "just," "only," "but" etc., in the English versions.
  • v. 41c constituent order: The fronting of קְד֖וֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֣ל provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line:
וַיָּשׁ֣וּבוּ וַיְנַסּ֣וּ — אֵ֑ל  
וּקְד֖וֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֣ל — הִתְווּ׃ 
  • v. 43a constituent order: The post-verbal position of בְּ֭מִצְרַיִם preceding the object אֹֽתוֹתָ֑יו produces a line-balanced sound play with מִנִּי־צָֽר in the previous line:
אֲֽשֶׁר־פָּדָ֥ם מִנִּי־צָֽר׃  
אֲשֶׁר־שָׂ֣ם בְּ֭מִצְרַיִם אֹֽתוֹתָ֑יו 
  • v. 44b constituent order: The fronting of נֹזְלֵיהֶ֗ם produces a tail-head linkage with יְאֹרֵיהֶ֑ם in the previous line.
  • v. 46b constituent order: The order וִֽ֝יגִיעָ֗ם // לָאַרְבֶּֽה׃ provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line's post-verbal לֶחָסִ֣יל // יְבוּלָ֑ם (cf. vv. 14b, 27b, 33b). The same phenomenon occurs in vv. 47b and 48b.
  • v. 50c constituent order: The fronting of חַיָּתָ֗ם provides a tail-head linkage with נַפְשָׁ֑ם in the previous line.
  • v. 53c constituent order: The fronting of אֶת־א֝וֹיְבֵיהֶ֗ם indicates a brief topic activation, before the text proceeds to recount more of YHWH's deeds. Its line-initial position also brings into relief the phonological correspondence between א֝וֹיְבֵיהֶ֗ם (oyevehem) and וַ֭יְבִיאֵם (vayvi’em) at the beginning of the following line.
  • v. 56c constituent order: The fronting of עֵדוֹתָ֗יו indicates a brief topic activation (cf. v. 7c), before the text proceeds to recount more of YHWH's deeds.
  • v. 58b constituent order: The fronting of בִפְסִילֵיהֶ֗ם provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line:
וַיַּכְעִיס֥וּהוּ — בְּבָמוֹתָ֑ם  
וּ֝בִפְסִילֵיהֶ֗ם — יַקְנִיאֽוּהוּ׃
  • v. 61 constituent order: The order תִפְאַרְתּ֥וֹ — בְיַד־צָֽר provides a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line's post-verbal לַשְּׁבִ֣י — עֻזּ֑וֹ (cf. vv. 14b, 27b, 33b, 46b, 47b, 48b).
  • v. 62 constituent order: The fronting of בְנַחֲלָת֗וֹ creates a tail-head linkage with the final עַמּ֑וֹ in the previous line.
  • vv. 63–64 constituent order: The fronting of each of the 3ms-suffixed people groups throughout these verses provides a rapid series of topic shifts before the wayyiqtol sequence is resumed again in v. 65.
  • v. 66b constituent order: חֶרְפַּ֥ת ע֝וֹלָ֗ם is fronted for scalar focus, i.e., this was not just any military defeat (v. 66a), but eternal shame (that is, a definitive defeat).
  • v. 67b constituent order: The fronting of בְשֵׁ֥בֶט אֶ֝פְרַ֗יִם creates a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line:
וַ֭יִּמְאַס — בְּאֹ֣הֶל יוֹסֵ֑ף  
וּֽבְשֵׁ֥בֶט אֶ֝פְרַ֗יִם — לֹ֣א בָחָֽר׃
  • v. 71a constituent order: It seems best to read the fronting of מֵאַחַ֥ר עָל֗וֹת as a pattern of symmetry with the preceding line, v . 70b, in light of the 3ms suffixes on the verbs and מִן prepositions (though this would be a unique case in the psalm crossing a verse boundary):
וַ֝יִּקָּחֵ֗הוּ — מִֽמִּכְלְאֹ֥ת צֹֽאן׃
מֵאַחַ֥ר — עָל֗וֹת הֱ֫בִיא֥וֹ
Alternatively, the fronting of מֵאַחַ֥ר עָל֗וֹת could be understood to provide a spatial frame setter (cf. v. 12a) in order to understand the origin of where YHWH had brought David—specifically from nursing animals—in order to shepherd his people.
  • v. 72b constituent order: The fronting of בִתְבוּנ֖וֹת כַּפָּ֣יו creates a pattern of symmetry in relation to the previous line:
וַ֭יִּרְעֵם — *בְּ*תֹ֣ם לְבָב֑וֹ  
וּבִתְבוּנ֖וֹת כַּפָּ֣יו — יַנְחֵֽם׃
  • v. 1 vocative position: The vocative is post-verbal, drawing attention to the following sentence constituent.[6]

(There are no notes on discourse markers for this psalm.)

(There are no notes on conjunctions for this psalm.)


  1. ↑ 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.
  2. ↑ 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.
  3. ↑ Unaccusatives are constructions which are not only inherently intransitive, but which also require the grammatical subject to be the affected patient of the event—such as "arrive," "come," "die," and "disappear," among others (Goldberg 2004, 533)—though not due to passive transformation of an active construction. "Flaring up" also lacks the volition and initiative required of a prototypical agent, such that it fits the unaccusative profile, which is a central diagnostic of thetic sentences (Goldberg 2004, 533; Bailey 2009, 53; Atkinson 2021).
  4. ↑ Lunn 2006, 316.
  5. ↑ Lunn 2006, 316.
  6. ↑ Kim 2022, 233-235; cf. 2 Kgs 19:16; Ps 24:7, 9, etc.