Psalm 44 Discourse
From Psalms: Layer by Layer
Psalm 44/Discourse
Choose a Psalm Navigate Psalm 44
Sheep to Be Slaughtered
Psalm 44
Please note: Resources for Psalm 44 are in the process of being reformatted for visual consistency and improved functionality.
About the Discourse Layer
Our Discourse Layer includes four additional layers of analysis:
- Participant analysis
- Macrosyntax
- Speech act analysis
- Emotional analysis
For more information on our method of analysis, click the expandable explanation button at the beginning of each layer.
Participant Analysis
Participant Analysis focuses on the characters in the psalm and asks, “Who are the main participants (or characters) in this psalm, and what are they saying or doing? It is often helpful for understanding literary structure, speaker identification, etc.
For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Participant Analysis Creator Guidelines.
Participant Relations Diagram
The relationships among the participants may be abstracted and summarized as follows:
.jpg)
Participant Analysis Summary Distribution
Macrosyntax
The macrosyntax layer rests on the belief that human communicators desire their addressees to receive a coherent picture of their message and will cooperatively provide clues to lead the addressee into a correct understanding. So, in the case of macrosyntax of the Psalms, the psalmist has explicitly left syntactic clues for the reader regarding the discourse structure of the entire psalm. Here we aim to account for the function of these elements, including the identification of conjunctions which either coordinate or subordinate entire clauses (as the analysis of coordinated individual phrases is carried out at the phrase-level semantics layer), vocatives, other discourse markers, direct speech, and clausal word order.
For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Macrosyntax Creator Guidelines.
Macrosyntax Diagram
| Macrosyntax legend | |
|---|---|
| Vocatives | Vocatives are indicated by purple text. |
| Discourse marker | Discourse markers (such as כִּי, הִנֵּה, לָכֵן) are indicated by orange text. |
 |
The scope governed by the discourse marker is indicated by a dashed orange bracket connecting the discourse marker to its scope. |
 |
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. |
 |
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. |
 |
Coordination is indicated by a solid blue line connecting the coordinating clauses. |
 |
Coordination without an explicit conjunction is indicated by a dashed blue line connecting the coordinated clauses. |
 |
Marked topic is indicated by a black dashed rounded rectangle around the marked words. |
 |
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. |
 |
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. |
 |
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)
This resource is in the process of reformatting. To view the notes on the Macrosyntax of Psalm 44, click here.
Speech Act Analysis
The Speech Act layer presents the text in terms of what it does, following the findings of Speech Act Theory. It builds on the recognition that there is more to communication than the exchange of propositions. Speech act analysis is particularly important when communicating cross-culturally, and lack of understanding can lead to serious misunderstandings, since the ways languages and cultures perform speech acts varies widely.
For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Speech Act Analysis Creator Guidelines.
Summary Visual
This resource is forthcoming.
Speech Act Chart
The following chart is scrollable (left/right; up/down).
| Verse | Hebrew | CBC | Sentence type | Illocution (general) | Illocution with context | Macro speech act | Intended perlocution (Think) | Intended perlocution (Feel) | Intended perlocution (Do) |
| Verse number and poetic line | Hebrew text | English translation | Declarative, Imperative, or Interrogative Indirect Speech Act: Mismatch between sentence type and illocution type |
Assertive, Directive, Expressive, Commissive, or Declaratory Indirect Speech Act: Mismatch between sentence type and illocution type |
More specific illocution type with paraphrased context | Illocutionary intent (i.e. communicative purpose) of larger sections of discourse These align with the "Speech Act Summary" headings |
What the speaker intends for the address to think | What the speaker intends for the address to feel | What the speaker intends for the address to do |
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. |
Emotional Analysis
This layer explores the emotional dimension of the biblical text and seeks to uncover the clues within the text itself that are part of the communicative intent of its author. The goal of this analysis is to chart the basic emotional tone and/or progression of the psalm.
For a detailed explanation of our method, see the Emotional Analysis Creator Guidelines.
Emotional Analysis Chart
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. |
Summary Visual
(Click visual to enlarge).
Bibliography
- Alonso Schökel, Luis, and Cecilia Carniti. 1992. Salmos I (Salmos 1–72): Traducción, Introducciones y Comentario. Navarra: Verbo Divino.
- Arnold, Bill T., and John H. Choi. 2018. A Guide to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Baethgen, Friedrich. 1904. Die Psalmen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.
- Barbiero, Gianni, and Marco Pavan. 2012. "Ps 44,15; 57,10; 108,4; 149,7: בלאמים or בל־אמים?" ZAW 124:598–605.
- Bosma, Carl J. 2008. “Discerning the Voices in the Psalms: A Discussion of Two Problems in Psalmic Interpretation.” Calvin Theological Journal 43, no. 2: 183–212.
- Craigie, Peter. 2004. Psalms 1–50. 2nd ed. WBC 19. Nashville: Nelson.
- Crow, Loren D. 1992. “The Rhetoric of Psalm 44.” ZAW 104, no. 3: 394–401.
- Dahood, Mitchell. 1966. Psalms I: 1–50. Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
- Davidson, A. B. 1902. Introductory Hebrew Grammar Hebrew Syntax. 3d ed. Edinburgh: T&T Clark.
- deClaissé-Walford, Nancy L. 2007. “Psalm 44: O God, Why Do You Hide Your Face?” Review & Expositor 104, no. 4: 745–59.
- deClaissé-Walford, Nancy, Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. 2014. The Book of Psalms. NICOT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
- de Regt, Lénart. 2020. Linguistic Coherence in Biblical Hebrew Texts. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press.
- ________. 2013. "Participant Reference in Discourse: Biblical Hebrew." In Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics Online. Edited by Geoffrey Khan. Brill.
- Ehrlich, Arnold B. 1905. Die Psalmen. Berlin: Verlag Von M. Poppelauer.
- Fokkelman, J.P. 2003. Major Poems of the Hebrew Bible: At the Interface of Prosody and Structural Analysis. Vol. 3. Assen: Van Gorcum.
- Freedman, David Noel, Gary A. Herion, David F. Graf, John David Pleins, and Astrid B. Beck, eds. 1992 The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. New York: Doubleday
- Goldingay, John. 2007. Psalms. Vol. 2. Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.
- Hengstenberg, Ernst Wilhelm. 1863. Commentary on the Psalms. Vol. 1, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.
- Holmstedt, Robert D., and Andrew R. Jones. 2014. “The Pronoun in Tripartite Verbless Clauses in Biblical Hebrew: Resumption for Left-Dislocation or Pronominal Copula?” Journal of Semitic Studies 59 (1):53–89.
- Keel, Othmar, and Timothy J. Hallett, trans. 1997. The Symbolism of the Biblical World: Ancient Near Eastern Iconography and the Book of Psalms. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
- Khan, Geoffrey, and Christo H.J. Van Der Merwe. 2020. “Towards A Comprehensive Model For Interpreting Word Order In Classical Biblical Hebrew.” Journal of Semitic Studies 65 (2):347–90.
- Kim, Young Bok. 2023. Hebrew Forms of Address: A Sociolinguistic Analysis. Atlanta: SBL Press.
- King, Philip J., and Lawrence E. Stager. 2001. Life in Biblical Israel. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
- Kittel, Rudolf. 1922. Die Psalmen. Leipzig: A. Deichertsche Verlagsbuchhandlung Dr. Werner Scholl.
- Kraus, Hans-Joachim. 1988. Psalms 1–59. Translated by Hilton C. Oswald. Minneapolis: Ausburg.
- Locatell, Christian S. 2017. “Grammatical Polysemy in the Hebrew Bible: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach to כי.” PhD Dissertation, University of Stellenbosch.
- Lunn, Nicholas P. 2006. Word-Order Variation in Biblical Hebrew Poetry: Differentiating Pragmatics and Poetics. Paternoster Biblical Monographs. Milton Keynes: Paternoster.
- Miller, Cynthia L. 2010. "Vocative Syntax in Biblical Hebrew Prose and Poetry: A Preliminary Analysis." Journal of Semitic Studies 55 (2):347–364.
- Niccacci, Alviero. 2006. “The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry.” Pages 247–68 in Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting: Typological and Historical Perspectives. Edited by Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz. Jerusalem: Hebrew University Magnes Press.
- Olyan, Saul M. 1996. “Honor, Shame, and Covenant Relations in Ancient Israel and Its Environment.” Journal of Biblical Literature 115 (2):201–18.
- Price, James D. 1990. The Syntax of Masoretic Accents in the Bible. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.
- Putnam, Frederic Clarke. 2002. Hebrew Bible Insert: A Student’s Guide to the Syntax of Biblical Hebrew. Quakertown, PA: Stylus Publishing.
- Ryken, Leland, Jim Wilhoit, Tremper Longman, Colin Duriez, Douglas Penney, and Daniel G. Reid, eds. 2000. Dictionary of Biblical Imagery. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
- Schaefer, Konrad. 2001. Psalms. Berit Olam Studies in Hebrew Narrative and Poetry. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press.
- Silva, Moisés, and Merrill Chapin Tenney, eds. 2009. The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Q-Z. Volume 5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
- Terrien, Samuel. 2003. The Psalms: Strophic Structure and Theological Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
- Thomas, David Winton. 1956. "Use of Netsach as a Superlative in Hebrew." Journal of Semitic Studies 1 (2): 106–9.
- Tsumura, David Toshio. 2017. "Verticality in Biblical Hebrew Parallelism." Pages 189–206 in Advances in Biblical Hebrew Linguistics. Edited by Adina Moshavi and Tania Notarius. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns.
- van der Lugt, Pieter. 2010. Cantos and Strophes in Biblical Hebrew Poetry II: Psalms 42-89. Leiden: Brill.
- van der Merwe, Christo H. J. 2009. "The Biblical Hebrew Particle אַף." VT 59: 266–283.
- van der Merwe, Christo H. J., and Ernst R. Wendland. 2010. "Marked Word Order in the Book of Joel. Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 36 (2): 109–130.
- VanGemeren, Willem A. 2008. “Psalms.” REBC 5. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
- Watson, Wilfred G. E. 1986. Classical Hebrew Poetry: A Guide to Its Techniques. JSOT 26. Sheffield: JSOT Press.
- Wendland, Ernst R. 2002. Analyzing the Psalms: With Exercises for Bible Students and Translators. 2nd ed. Dallas: SIL International.
- Young, Ian. 2013. “Collectives: Biblical Hebrew.” Pages 1:477–79 in Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics. Edited by Geoffrey Khan. Leiden: Brill.
Footnotes
- ↑ 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.
- ↑ 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.