Ps 47:10(9) magen

Classical Hebrew morphology and syntax, aspect, linguistics, discourse analysis, and related topics
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
Post Reply
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by SteveMiller »

Psalm 47:10 נְדִ֨יבֵ֤י עַמִּ֙ים׀ נֶאֱסָ֗פוּ עַם֘ אֱלֹהֵ֪י אַבְרָ֫הָ֥ם כִּ֣י לֵֽ֭אלֹהִים מָֽגִנֵּי־אֶ֗רֶץ מְאֹ֣ד נַעֲלָֽה׃

The willing of the peoples have been gathered together, the people of the God of Abraham,
For unto God are the shields of the earth. He is greatly lifted up.

Is it possible to translate מָֽגִנֵּי־אֶ֗רֶץ as "the surrendered of the earth" as in Hos 11:8 or "those given [to Him] of the earth" as in Prov 4:9?

Another question:
Could מְאֹ֣ד נַעֲלָֽה be translated as "they are taken up on high" referring to the people (singular)?
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
ducky
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by ducky »

H Steve,

Doesn't seem so.

Seeing מגני as rulers brings the same idea with the right form.

As for נעלה - it seems that this root comes as a motive in this psalm (one time for each part) referring to God
3 - כי ה עליון נורא
6 - עלה אלהים בתרועה
10 - מאד נעלה
David Hunter
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by SteveMiller »

ducky wrote:H Steve,

Doesn't seem so.

Seeing מגני as rulers brings the same idea with the right form.
Thanks David! What would the right form of magen be to have my meaning of "surrendered ones"?

I don't see a meaning of "ruler" for magen in HALOT.
ducky wrote:As for נעלה - it seems that this root comes as a motive in this psalm (one time for each part) referring to God
3 - כי ה עליון נורא
6 - עלה אלהים בתרועה
10 - מאד נעלה
That's a good point. Can I take it that there is no grammatical problem with "they are taken up on high"?
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
ducky
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by ducky »

Hi Steve,

The root מגן comes only in Pi'el form, and so, first, we had to see a Dagesh in the letter G.
the passive form should be with the prefix M (the M that in the word is the root letter).

the מגן as ruler (or a king, or the Great of the people) comes for example, in Ho. 4:18.
or in Psalms 84:10 (comes as parallel to משיחך).
or in Psalms 89:19 (comes as parallel to מלכנו).

Halot probably brings this meaning (as a figurative), can you check again?.

grammatically, you can link the נעלה for the people, but I think that according to the context and order of things in this psalms, it should be linked to God.
In the same way of 97:9 מאד נעלית על כל אלהים.

***********************
Another think
I saw a suggestion that says that the combination of מגני ארץ is some sort of misspelling.
and he says that the letter ץ (of ארץ) was actually two letters נ=N) that wrongfully it was seen as the letter ץ.

And so, he read it as:
לאלהים מגני ארנן מאד נעלה
(מגני as Maginni)

Saying: I will sing to God my protector (leader): "מאד נעלה"
David Hunter
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by SteveMiller »

ducky wrote:Hi Steve,

The root מגן comes only in Pi'el form, and so, first, we had to see a Dagesh in the letter G.
the passive form should be with the prefix M (the M that in the word is the root letter).
Thanks very much, David. That is very helpful.
I see my translating it as passive is wrong.
It seems like active would work: for to God are the offerers of the earth
I don't care about the missing dagesh, as the vowels are commentary.
ducky wrote:the מגן as ruler (or a king, or the Great of the people) comes for example, in Ho. 4:18.
or in Psalms 84:10 (comes as parallel to משיחך).
or in Psalms 89:19 (comes as parallel to מלכנו).

Halot probably brings this meaning (as a figurative), can you check again?.
Thanks again. I see most translate ‎ מָגִנֶּֽיהָ in Hos 4:18 as "rulers".
HALOT references Hos 4:18 as meaning "shameless", which seems to be how LXX translated it.
or as meaning "gift", which is how Goldingay and JPS 1985 translate it there.
You are right, HALOT does give a possible metaphorical meaning (indicated by a ?) of "those in power" in Ps 47:10, referencing LXX and Peshita.
BHS footnote says that LXX probably saw סגני(rulers) as in Isa 41:25. Apparently BHS does not think magan can mean "ruler".
ducky wrote:grammatically, you can link the נעלה for the people, but I think that according to the context and order of things in this psalms, it should be linked to God.
In the same way of 97:9 מאד נעלית על כל אלהים.
That is a very good point referencing ps 97:9 using the passive form.
I see the psalm prophesying about the willing gentiles becoming a part of Israel. (v1,4 and especially v9).
v9 tells us that the willing among the peoples (both Israel and the gentiles) have been gathered together as the people of the God of Abraham. The word ‎ נֶאֱסָ֗פוּ is a verb that I think refers to the rapture in Isa 11:12 & Ps 50:5. It refers to one's spirit being taken away in death Gen 25:8,17.
עלה also refers to burnt offerings, which these willing peoples are to God.
ducky wrote:Another think
I saw a suggestion that says that the combination of מגני ארץ is some sort of misspelling.
and he says that the letter ץ(of ארץ) was actually two letters נ=N) that wrongfully it was seen as the letter ץ.

And so, he read it as:
לאלהים מגני ארנן מאד נעלה
(מגני as Maginni)

Saying: I will sing to God my protector (leader): "מאד נעלה"
That is pretty neat. Thanks for bringing it up. I think it shows the unsatisfaction with the last sentence common rendering.
This emendation would refer back to ‎ רִנָּֽה in v1.
I don't believe the emendation is correct or necessary. There are no 1st person singular pronouns in this psalm. It is entirely corporate. It would not fit to end it with"I will sing".
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
ducky
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by ducky »

Hi Steve,

If you want to see it as active participle from root MGN, as I see in your translation, then you need a prefix for the root (prefix M - like any Pi'el participle gets).

***
As for the LXX in Hosea, they probably didn't translate the word מגניה as we see it, and so, there is no need to try to understand the definition through their translation.
I saw in an LXX English translation: "they have loved dishonour through her insolence".
Maybe they read the מגניה as מגאוניה - it is closer to what I see in the translation.

***
The word "gift" as a suggestion probably refers to the word הבו which can be understood as (getting/giving) gifts (but I need to see the whole translated verse to understand if that what they meant).

****
just a note for נעלית/נעלה -
Niphal is not passive (basically)
In this case, it is reflexive - it represents a state

***
As for the other part that you wrote, (your interpretation) - I think you play too much with the words - but each one has his way...
David Hunter
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by SteveMiller »

ducky wrote:Hi Steve,

If you want to see it as active participle from root MGN, as I see in your translation, then you need a prefix for the root (prefix M - like any Pi'el participle gets).
Thanks David. I was thinking that MGN is an infinitive noun with the yod at the end making it a construct owned by earth.
ducky wrote:The word "gift" as a suggestion probably refers to the word הבו which can be understood as (getting/giving) gifts (but I need to see the whole translated verse to understand if that what they meant)
Here is John Goldingay's translation:
Hos 4:18 Their drink has gone as they've whored and whored;
as they've loved and loved, slighting is its 'gift'.

JPS 1985: They drink to excess - Their liquor turns against them. They "love" beyond measure - Disgrace is the gift.
ducky wrote:just a note for נעלית/נעלה -
Niphal is not passive (basically)
In this case, it is reflexive - it represents a state
There are 18 niphal instances of the verb. Most are basically passive - 8 are on the cloud being taken up from the tabernacle. 2 on the glory of God being taken up from the temple. Ezr 1:11 to be led up. Ezek 36:3 to be spoken about.
Num 16:24,27 is reflexive for the congregation getting away from Datan and Abiram.
ducky wrote:As for the other part that you wrote, (your interpretation) - I think you play too much with the words - but each one has his way...
I understand. thanks. I am debating with myself whether to go with the straightforward "shields of earth" rather than "offerers of earth".
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)
ducky
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:01 pm

Re: Ps 47:10(9) magen

Post by ducky »

Hi Steve,

1. I didn't understand so much about your way of Pi'el infinitive as a construct state in this verse.
Can you give an example t what you mean?

2. They translated the word as "gift" according to the same root מגן that you refer too - (that the meaning is to give something) - and with that - as giving a gift - as it is said and understood in Proverbs 4:9 - as giving as a gift.

3. the word נעלה that you quoted is not passive. the cloud going up is not passive - but it represents its state. It was not taken high. it became high. so is the glory of God and so on.
And I wrote "became" - but notice that sometimes the perfect doesn't represent the past in these cases, but it can be a long time state - such in this verse of נעלית - it is written as perfect - but it is not about the past - but it is about the general regular state.
David Hunter
Post Reply