The Grammar of Ps. 29:6

Back to Psalm 29

Introduction

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. 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; cf. KJV, RV, JPS, DELUT, ELB, LUTHEUTE, NBS, Reina Valera).

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, PV, NFC, NVI).

Who is being made to skip like a calf? Is it Lebanon and Sirion, or is it Lebanon and Sirion along with "them"? Why do some translations have "them" while others do not? And, if "them" is the correct interpretation, to what or whom is it referring?

Summary of the Issue

The issue involves both grammar and line-division.

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)

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

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 :C:, Hengstenberg 1869 :C:, Delitzsch 1883 :C:, Emerton 1996 :A:, Barbiero 2016 :A:). #dispreferred
   - [Cedars broken]: "It is difficult to imagine trees that were split and shattered now skipping like calves" (Futato 2009 :C:; cf. Duhm 1899 :C:; Loewenstamm 1982 :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 1982 :A:).
  + [Lebanon & Sirion]: The 3mp suffix refers to "Lebanon and Sirion" in the following line (v. 6b) (Olhausen 1853 :C:, Ewald 1880 :C:, Ehrlich 1905 :C:, Fokkelman 2003 :M:, Goldingay 2006 :C:, Ross 2011 :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 :A:).
   + [Ps. 114:4, 6]: Ps. 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 :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 :A:; Hossfeld 1993 :C:).
  + [Meter]: "The metrical verse arrangement (3/3) is disturbed if we follow MT" (Kraus 1988 :C:; cf. Gunkel 1927 :C:; Ginsberg 1935).
   - [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

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

Enclitic-mem in Ps. 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 :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" (Chaim 2004 :A:).

Enclitic-mem in Biblical Hebrew

Any argument for an enclitic-mem in Ps. 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 :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:" Gen. 14:6; Ex. 26:26; 28:17; 1 Kgs. 7:12; Deut. 33:11; Isa. 1:18; Prov. 31:21; Isa. 5:11; 10:1; Ezek. 22:18; Hos. 14:3; Ps. 18:16; Ps. 29:6; Job 15:18; 31:11 (Cohen 2004 :A:).
  + [E.g., Ps. 18:16]: 2 Sam. 22:16 reads אפיקי ים while the parallel text in Ps. 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

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: και λεπτυνει αυταϲ ωϲ τον μοϲχον τον λιβανον | καὶ ὁ ἠγαπημένος ὡς υἱὸς μονοκερώτων
• Aquila: και σκιρτωσει αυτας ομοι(ως) μοσχω . λιβανον (και) σεριων ομοι(ως) υιω ρινοκερωτων
• Symmachus: και ορχεισθαι εποιησ(εν) αυτ(ας) ως μοσχον . τον λιβανον και τον σαριων ωσπερ υιον μονοκερωτων
• Quinta: και σκιρτοποιησει αυτας ως μοσχον τον λιβανον . και σεριων ως υιοι ρημα μονον μονοκερωτων
• Syr. ܪܩܕ ܐܢܘܢ ܐܝܟ ܥ̈ܓܠܐ܂ ܠܠܒܢܢ ܘܠܣܢܝܪ ܐܝܟ ܒܢ̈ܝ ܪܝܡܐ܂
• Hier. et disperget eas quasi vitulus Libani | et Sarion quasi filins rinocerotis
• Gal. et comminuet eas tamquam vitulum Libani | et dilectus quemadmodum filius unicornium
• Tg: ושוורינון היך עגלא לבנן וטור מסרי פרוי היך בר רמיא׃ (Stec: “He makes them leap like a calf, Lebanon and the mountain (that) produces rotten fruits, like a young wild ox”)

Modern

English

• Option 1. "He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn" (KJV; cf. RV, JPS).
• Option 2. "He makes Lebanon leap like a calf, Sirion like a young wild ox" (NIV; cf. ESV, RSV, CSB, CEV, NET, NEB, CJB; cf. NLT ["He makes Lebanon’s mountains skip like a calf; he makes Mount Hermon leap like a young wild ox."])

German

• Option 1. Und macht sie hüpfen wie ein Kalb, den Libanon und Sirjon wie ein junges Einhorn (DELUT, cf. Eberfelder [und er macht sie hüpfen wie ein Kalb, den Libanon und Sirjon wie einen jungen Wildochsen], LUTHEUTE [Er lässt sie hüpfen wie ein Kalb, den Libanon und Sirjon wie einen jungen Büffel]).
• Option 2. Er lässt den Libanon hüpfen wie ein Kalb, wie einen Wildstier den Sirjob (EÜ; cf. NGÜ [Er lässt den Libanon erbeben und hüpfen wie ein Kalb, auch den Hermon lässt er auf und nieder springen wie einen jungen Stier], HFA [Das Libanongebirge lässt er wie ein Kalb hüpfen, der Berg Hermon springt wie ein junger Stier])

French

• Option 1. Il les fait bondir comme un taurillon, il fait bondir le Liban et le Siriôn comme un aurochs (NBS)
• Option 2. Il fait bondir ╵tout le Liban ╵comme des veaux et le Siriôn ╵comme des buffles. (cf. S21 [Il fait bondir le Liban comme un veau, et le Sirion comme un jeune buffle], PV [Il fait bondir les montagnes du Liban comme un jeune taureau, et la montagne de l’Hermon comme un jeune buffle.], NFC [Il fait bondir les montagnes du Liban comme de jeunes taureaux, le mont Hermon comme un jeune buffle.]).

Spanish

• Option 1. E hízolos saltar como becerros; Al Líbano y al Sirión como hijos de unicornios (RV).
• Option 2. 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

Grammars

IBHS

1.6.2. The archaic grammatical formant called the enclitic mem, of uncertain function (see 9.8), was generally reinterpreted by later scribes as a plural marker; the orthography was revised to match, so ם -became (among other things) ים ,-and the oral tradition was reshaped.

9.8. a. A variety of external evidence has led scholars to recognize in the biblical text a particle m, often associated with the genitive [fn: There is evidence from ENWS (Ugaritic, El-Amarna), as well as other areas of Semitic...]. Whatever shape the particle took (perhaps -m after a vowel; or -mi or -ma in all cases), it seems to have been used at the end of a word, and so it is assumed to have been enclitic on (i.e., to have leaned on) that word. Only the consonantal mem is preserved; since its meaning was lost in the course of the text’s long transmission, the mem became confounded with other common morphemes formed with mem such as the masculine plural suffix -im, the pronominal suffix -am, the inseparable preposition min, etc. As a result it must be detected behind the Masoretic Text by irregularities and anomalies associated with final or initial mem.

9.8. b. Enclitic mem is used in sufficiently varied ways in cognate languages to make it certain that the earliest forms of Semitic must have known more than one form of this construction. In Hebrew it sometimes has an emphatic force, while at other times it serves as a morpheme for indetermination. It is seen in connection with almost every part of speech, including verbs, nouns, pronominal suffixes, adverbs, etc. Most common are its uses in the middle of the construct chain. The enclitic mem is common in poetry.

9.8. c. The examples most easily seen are those involving external evidence.

E.g. Ps. 18:16 // 2 Sam. 22:16; Gen. 14:6 MT // SP; Deut. 33:11 MT // SP

Articles

Ginsberg 1935

Meter and sense require that verse 6 of our psalm be divided, as in Biblia Hebraica³, as follows:

And he maketh Lebanon to dance like a calf, even Sirion like a young buffalo.

But instead of, like Buhl, deleting the ם of וירקידם, which has always been a stumbling-block to exegetes but is attested by all the versions, I prefer to take it as the emphatic enclitic -ma: the latter is a very characteristic feature of Ugaritic, as I have shown elsewhere.

Ginsberg 1943

To correct the reading of a corrupt word or group of words in a biblical text according to a similar Ugaritic phrase, preferably one occurring in a parallel literary context, is one thing. But to assume that a refractory Hebrew text conceals linguistic elements otherwise attested only in Ugaritic without the support of phrase identity in a non-parallel context is another. The latter method is also legitimate, but far less reliable. Examples of its application are: (a) the writer’s hypothesis that Ps 29 6 contains the emphatic enclitic particle ־ma (read wayyarqed-ma) [fn.: See Ginsberg, The Ugarit Texts, pp. 129-31, for the probably North Canaanite origin of the whole psalm.] (p. 115).

Hummel 1957

"The MT pointing of וירקידם is almost impossible in the context, but if we view the final mem as enclitic, almost all difficulties disappear. This was one of Ginsberg's first discoveries of enclitic mem in the Bible [fn: Kitve Ugarit, pp. 129-31. Also "The Ugaritic Texts and Textual Criticism," JBL, LXII (1943), 115.]." (p. 93).

Examples of enclitic mem with verbs noted by previous scholars: Ex. 15:9; Num. 24:19; Deut. 33:3; Ps. 42:5; 83:12; 125:1; Isa. 9:18; 10:2; 11:15; Joel 1:17

Other examples of enclitic mem with verbs: Job 28:9; Pss. 12:8; 46:9; 58:12; 78:3; 85:4; 89:10; 107:39; 147:20; Isa. 17:13; 25:2, 10; 62:10; 65:20; Jer. 10:4; 18:15; 46:5; 50:26; Lam. 3:17.

Conditions for detecting enclitic mem:

1. When the suffix ם or מו does not seem to fit, especially if the ancient versions omit it. Often important in making the final decision are (a) G. R. Driver's recent demonstration that one suffix may do double duty for both halves of a Hebrew bicolon and (b) Held's observation that in Ugaritic poetry the suffixes in different cola of the same verse often may disagree in number.
2. The plural suffix -im, when it appears as the regens of a construct chain, or when a plural is followed by a singular verb in the kethib.
3. A masculine plural noun used adverbially where, instead of the "intensive plural," there may originally have been an accusative singular followed by enclitic m(i) (like Amarna reqa-mi, etc.). When such plurals occur only once or very infrequently, we may tentatively include them in our list.
4. The preposition מן, if its use seems clumsy or unlikely (although our relative ignorance of its exact use imposes great caution).
5. The word מה when used adverbially, but where its use is awkward or improper.
6. Prefixed mem to form participles or nouns, whenever these forms are poorly attested in extant Hebrew literature.

Loewenstamm 1982:296

...the recognition that the words ושריון כמו בן ראמים are in parallelism with כמו עגל לבנון, an assumption which obviously makes good sense and is further corroborated by the line: ההרים רקדו כאלים / גבעות כבני צאן (Ps. 114:4).

It seems to us that of the views which recognize this parallelism Ginsberg's is the most acceptable. It provides a normal two-colon structure, retains the consonants of the text just as they are written and explains the mem of wayyarqidem as an archaic enclitic mem which was misunderstood when such a use of mem became obsolete in the Hebrew language. This misunderstanding resulted in the suffix em being explained as an object-suffix referring back to the cedars of Lebanon, which were mentioned in verse 5. This led to the caesura being transferred from לבנון to עגל."

Basevi 1990

v. 6. Es un versículo que constituye una verdadera crux interpretum.

Vamos a considerar en primer lugar el TM: [v. 6]

La Masora señala que wesiryon es un hapax. De todos modos, la mención del Líbano en el v. 6a ayuda a esclarecer el nombre: trata del Siryon, el nombre sidonio del monte Hermón, en la sierra del Antilibano. Se trata de un arcaísmo, o de un ugarítismo. Más complicada es la traducción de wayyarquidem debido a su sufijo de 3a plural, «ellos». Es posible que se refiera a los cedros del v. anterior, pero, en este caso, rompería las reglas del paralelísimo, ya que el v. 6b quedaría sin paralelo. O bien hay que colocar el acento atnach por debajo de levanon y no de egel, como hacen las ediciones críticas en contra del TM. En este segundo caso la división sería mucho más natural, aunque altere el paralelismo interno del verso, ya que el verbo se referiría a dos sujetos distintos, uno en cada hemistiquio: wayyarqîdem kemô-'egel levanôn (tres acentos tónicos); wesiryon kemô ben-re'emím (tres acentos tónicos).

Quedaría, sin embargo, la dificultad del sufijo «ellos» que ya no puede referirse a los cedros, sino que tiene que referirse al Líbano y al Hermón. La solución que se propone es que se trata de un mem enclítico con función intensiva, vestigio de una construcción ugarítica.

En cuanto a la semántica no hay particulares dificultades, si se exceptúa re'emîm que no tiene un sentido del todo seguro. De todos modos, es evidente que el versículo se refiere al efecto del torbellino: Dios hace saltar a los montes y a los bosques así como salta un novillo. Muy distinto es el texto griego de la Septuaginta: [LXX v. 6] que tiene como traducción: «y las (los cedros, femenino) triturará (o descortezará) como el ternero el Líbano y el amado como hijo de los unicornios.» Es francamente difícil dar un sentido a estas frases y conectarlas con el texto hebreo. El primer hemistiquio es todavía comprensible, si se tiene en cuenta que leptyneô quiere decir «triturar» (p. ej. un alimento que se digiere) o también «descortezar»; y si se one una coma entre moskhon y ton Libanon: «y las sacudirá como (hace saltar) un ternero, es decir, el Líbano».

Mucho más complicado es el segundo hemistiquio. Por esto Aquila y Símaco se separan de la Septuaginta y no traducen, sino que transliteran el término. Van Uchelen propone una explicación apoyada en dos conjeturas:

a) que, en lugar de wayyarqidem, los LXX hayan leído wayyadem, es decir, «y trituró», hizo polvo», que mejor corresponde a leptynô;

b) que ho êgapêmenos sea un sinónimo de Israel: yeshurun = el elevado, de una raiz yshr.

Con lo cual el versículo debería leerse, empezando por el v. 5b: «y despedazará el Señor los cedros del Líbano y los sacudirá como el ternero del Líbano, (o bien: los hará saltar como (hace saltar) el Líbano, como un ternero) mientras que el amado (e.d. Israel) como un hijo de unicornios». Aunque esta última parte quede un poco oscura, el sentido general está claro: Israel mantendrá toda su fuerza y se salvará del castigo de Dios.

Cohen 2004

Criteria for identifying 'classic cases' of enclitic mem:

1. The MT cannot be properly understood according to the Masoretic vocalization, or at the very least there is a difficult philological problem (or difficult philological problems) that emanates from parallelism, grammar or syntax, unprecedented usage, or the like. There is no valid internal biblical philological evidence or external evidence from the ancient Semitic languages that can justify the Masoretic vocalization.
2. Only the assumption that one of the words in the context originally included the enclitic-mem allows us viably to reconstruct the vocalization of the entire problematic context without the need for emending the consonantal text (not including matres lectiones).
3. It is necessary to provide positive philological evidence from the Hebrew Bible itself, from the ancient Semitic languages, from other ancient versions of the Hebrew Bible (the Samaritan Torah or the Dead Sea Scrolls) or, under certain circumstances, from the ancient translations (as additional corroborating evidence) that unequivocally supports the assumption that the enclitic-mem was originally present in the biblical context being discussed.

#13. Ps. 29:6 (cf. Ps. 114:4, 6).

This parade example, first suggested by H. L. Ginsberg in 1936, was already discussed in §II above. Here may be added the additional evidence of בן ראמים in the second clause (instead of just ראמים). 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 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. enclitic-mem. Emerton’s assumption here of “an anticipatory suffix” or “that v. 6 does not speak of the mountains dancing (despite Ps 114:4, 6) but the ‘cedars of Lebanon’ mentioned in v. 5, which would be the antecedent of the suffix at the end of וירקידם seems to be an attempt at all costs to avoid reading the enclitic-mem.

Cf. Isa. 5:11; Job 15:8.

Barbiero 2016

and made them leap like a calf

Lebanon and Sirion like a son of buffalo

Against the majority of scholars, who understand the hnal ״ ،,»،of the verb וירקידם as enclitic (cf., for example, Dahood, p. 178), we follow the MT, considering it as a pronominal suffix and so connecting it to “cedars”.

Commentaries

Rashi

Text and translation from sefaria.org

וירקידם כמו עגל. את הארזים ואת ההרים שבאו לשמוע מתן תורה:

He causes them to dance like a calf The cedars and the mountains that came to hear the giving of the Torah.

לבנון ושריון. שמות ההרים:

Lebanon and Sirion The names of mountains.

Hitzig 1835

Er macht sie springen, wie ein Kalb, // Den Libanon und Sirion, wie den jungen Büffel

Olhausen 1853

View on archive.org.

V. 6. [וירקידם‎ und macht sie hüpfen; man darf das Suff. nicht auf die Cedern beziehen, sondern das 2. Gl. giebt erst die Erkl. dazu; ein Fall, der ganz andrer Art ist, wie bei der masorethischen Lesart למו‎ 28, 8.

Alexander 1864

The pronoun in the first clause may refer to cedars, or by anticipation to Lebanon and Sirion (pg. 135).

Plumer 1867

Some refer them to the cedars of Lebanon just mentioned; but others regard them as used by anticipation for Lebanon and Sirion. This seems to accord with Scripture usage, Ps. 114:4, 6. Some of the best commentators give this sense. Calvin: He maketh Lebanon to skip like a calf, and Sirion like a young unicorn; Green: He maketh Lebanon to skip like a calf, and Sirion like a young unicorn; Edwards: He made Lebanon to skip like a calf, and Sirion like a young oryx. Others favor the same reading. Perhaps it is better than the common version. Still better is that of Amesius: The voice of the Lord causes that Lebanon and Sirion leap as a calf, as a young unicorn.

Hupfeld 1868

View on Google books.

Das Suff. sie (ם) geht nicht zum voraus auf die Berge des Libanon, die im 2. Gl. genannt werden, wie viele Ausll. (auch Ew. Olsh.) wegen 114, 4. 6 annehmen, sondern auf die im vorherg. V. genannten Cedern (GEI. de W. Maur. Hengstb. Hitz. Del.); allerdings nur zufolge des Hüpfens der Berge worauf sie stehn, u. daher werden diese im 2. Gl. selbst genannt.

Hengstenberg 1869

And He maketh them to skip like a calf; Lebanon

and Sirion like a young buffalo.

The "them" must be referred to the cedars. As the skipping of the trees, however, is only the consequence of the skipping of the hills, these also are mentioned in the second clause. (p. 477).

Ewald 1880

View on archive.org.

Ver. 6 must refer to an apparent or actual earthquake (the like are often mentioned in conjunction with violent storms, comp. Matthias of Eclessa, Armenian Hist.," p. 288, Dul.) The rigid mountains Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon (Shirjon) skip like young animals leaping up in alarm. The sufiix in וירקידם must hence refer to the mountains already present to the imagination of the poet, and presently more plainly named. (p. 96)

Delitzsch 1883

View on archive.org.

And maketh them skip like a calf,

Lebanon and Sirion like a young antelope.

"The suffix in v. 6a does not proleptically refer to the mountains afterwards named, but naturally to the cedars (Hengst., Hupf., Hitz.), which bend down in the storm, and start up again; the skipping of Lebanon and Sirion, however, is not to be regarded as meaning that their wooded tops bend down and rise again, but, after 114:4, refers to their being shaken by the crash of the thunder, a feature in the picture which sets forth figuratively the apparent shaking of the ground during a severe thunderstorm. (p. 449).

Duhm 1899

Lässt tanzen wie ein Kalb den Libanon Und den Sirjon wie einen Wildochsen,

In v. 6 l. mit BiCKELL u. a. וירקד, denn die Cedern werden zerbrochen und tanzen nicht, wenigstens nicht wie ein Kalb. (p. 86)

Baethgen 1904

Und lässt sie tanzen wie ein Kalb // Libanon und Sirjon wie ein Wisentkalb

Die gewaltigen Bäume, die einen Umfang von 36 Fuss erreichen, stürzen vom Blitz getroffen nieder; beim Aufschlagen brechen die Äste und schnellen noch einmal zurück um wieder zur Erde zu fallen. Dies Auf- und Niederschlagen der gestürzten Bäume vergleicht der Dichter mit den ungeschlachten Sprüngen eines Kalbes oder eines jungen Wisent (s. zu 22:22). Im zweiten Gliede nennt der Dichter statt der einzelnen Bäume den ganzen Wald; denn diesen, nicht aber die Berge selbst, nämlich die Fels- und Erdmassen, meint er mit Libanon und Sirjon; vgl. Jes. 10:34; 40:16.

Ehrlich 1905

View on archive.org

Er macht sie hüpfen,

wie ein Kalb den Libanon

und den Sirjon wie einen jungen Wildoschen

Es ist durchaus nicht nötig, das Suffix im Verbum zu streichen. Es kann sehr gut die folgenden Namen der Berge anticipieren. Von diesen muss aus rhytmischen, wie auch aus grammatischen Gründen לבנון zum vorherg. und שריון zum folg. gezogen werden, weil sonst der Parallelismus nicht vollkommen ist, und auch die Singulare von עגל und בן nicht passen. Die Konstr. ist dann ähnlich wie 83, 12.

Kittel 1922

View on archive.org.

läßt den Libanon 'hüpfen' wie ein Kalb // den Sirjon wie ein Büffeljunges.

MT „läßt sie hüpfen“. Aber nicht die Zedern tanzen, sondern die Berge; streiche das Suffix; der Atnach gehört zu לבנון.

Gunkel 1927

aber der Rhythmus ist gestört; auch tanzen nach dem Zusammenhange nicht die Zedern, sondern die Berge; mit Recht lesen Bickell, Wellhausen und die meisten Neueren וירקד oder וירקיד und versetzen die Akzente.

Dahood 1965

He makes Lebanon skip like a calf,

and Sirion like a young wild ox.

skip like a calf. Reading wayyarqēd-mi for MT wayyarqīdēm, as first proposed by Ginsberg (he read -ma for -mi) in 1935 (see general NOTE, p. 175); this was the first of several hundred instances of enclitic mem found in the Bible. After twenty-four years, several articles on the subject, and scores of examples, La Bible de la Pléiade, II, p. 948, buoyantly unaware of the existence of the enclitic mem, recommends the deletion of the mem of yrqdm.

Cf. H. L. Ginsberg, “A Phoenician Hymn in the Psalter,” in Atti del XIX Congresso Internazionale degli Orientalisti (Roma, 1935), pp. 472–76.

Anderson 1972

lit.: 'he makes them to skip' (similarly AV, RV) but the Hebrew verbal suffix (m), here translated by 'them' may well be an enclitic letter, as assumed by RSV (cf. Dahood, PAB, I, p. 178). See 114:4. (p. 237).

Kraus 1988

The metrical verse arrangement is disturbed if we follow MT ('he makes them skip like a calf, Lebanon and Sirion like a young wild ox'). It is probably best to read וַיַּרְקֵד or וְיַרְקִיד (Bickel, Wellhausen). (p. 345)... The parallelism Lebanon-Sirion can also be documented in Ugaritic texts (C. H. Gordon, Ugaritic Handbook II, 142:51; VI, 18-19, 20-21). (p. 349).

Alonso-Schokel 1992

wyrqydm: Refieren el sufijo —m al precedente 'arze = cedros Jerón Vg Geier Del; lo refieren por prolepsis a los dos montes que siguen Ros Tournay Cast; supone que el verbo rige a cedros y montes por zeugma Marinus; considera -m enclítico Dah, cf. Wei Rav Cunchillos. Suprimen el sufijo Briggs Duhm Gun Pod But Kraus Jaequet.

Hossfeld & Zenger 1993

EÜ folgt zu Recht nicht dem MT; der deutet das alte enklitische -m am Verb als Personalsuffix und versetzt deswegen den Atnach ein Wort nach vorne, was den ursprünglichen Parallelismus mit chiastischer Wortstellung von 'Libanon' und 'Sirjon' zerstört. (P. 183).

Fokkelman 2003

This is the central line v. 6, whose A-colon is the middle colon of the total of 23 cola. The image offered in v. 6 is not only one of the most spectacular in the entire song, but is also illustrated by two similes:

He makes them skip like a calf,

Lebanon and Sirion like a young bull.

This rendering reveals that I follow the small minority of scholars who read 3 + 5 words here rather than 4 + 4, guided by the atnah. The B-cola of vv. 5 and 6, which contain the name 'Lebanon' back to back, both score a striking 12 as their syllable totals. This is also the number of v. 6a, as the middle colon of the 23 cola.

fn.: In my interpretation, v. 6a contains a proleptic object suffix 'them.' (There is an alternative theory that this is the enclitic particle -ma, which we know from Ugaritic.) The configuration in which the sentence core (here a 3rd pers. mas. sing. verbal predicate), just one word, is placed in one colon and the object in the other, can still be translated perfectly well, and is more exciting than the more widely followed option; for a similarly and equally daring division of the chiastic syntax in the (restored) v. 2 of Ps. 44, see the section on that Psalm (pp. 47-48).

Craigie 2004

The translation of the first line of v 6 involves reading the final mem of וירקדם, not as a suffix, but as enclitic mem, analogous to Ugaritic usage (cf. Gibson, CML2 150); the athnaḥ, is placed under לבנון.

Goldingay 2006

The suffix is explained by “Lebanon and Sirion” later in the line. See CP 32–33 on the possibility that this is enclitic m (cf. DG 27). MT reads the line as 2-4; CP 32–33 takes it as 3-3.

Futato 2009

The Mem on the end of the verb is probably an example of enclitic Mem (Hummel 1957). The enclitic Mem is an archaic grammatical particle of uncertain function but usually associated with the genitive function of nouns. For a full discussion see Waltke and O’Connor 1990:§9.8. Emerton (1996:325–326) denies the existence of enclitic Mem here, arguing for a pl. suffix -m [3963.1, 4392] with the trees of 29:5 as the antecedent, but this explanation is dubious, since it is difficult to imagine trees that were split and shattered now skipping like calves. The verb “skip” does not refer to joyful frolicking in this context but to awe and dread, as in 114:4–7.

Ross 2011

The suffix 'them' on the verb is anticipatory, referring to Lebanon and Sirion in the next colon.

Jacobson et. al. 2014

The 3mp suffix is read not as a suffix, but as an enclitic mem (with Craigie, Psalms 1–50, p. 243).

References

29:6 Approved