Psalm 139:13

The main place for discussion the Hebrew Bible, its language and message.
Forum rules
Members will observe the rules for respectful discourse at all times!
Please sign all posts with your first and last (family) name.
User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Psalm 139:13

Postby SteveMiller » Thu Sep 06, 2018 10:07 pm

Thank you all for the help with vv 3-4.
Now v13:
Psalm 139 כִּֽי־אַ֭תָּה קָנִ֣יתָ כִלְיֹתָ֑י תְּ֜סֻכֵּ֗נִי בְּבֶ֣טֶן אִמִּֽי׃
KJV Psalm 139:13 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
NKJ Psalm 139:13 For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother's womb.
NAS Psalm 139:13 For Thou didst form my inward parts; Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb.
LXXE Psalm 139:13 For thou, O Lord, hast possessed my reins; thou hast helped me from my mother's womb.


1 question is on the verb תְּ֜סֻכֵּ֗נִי.
Most English translations take it as 2ms qal imperfect of ‎ סכך meaning "cover".
NAS & others translate it as "weave", which I don't see a case for.

It could also be taken as the 2ms qal imperfect of סכן meaning "to be useful", which would go back to v3b "And [in] all my ways You work Your purpose".
This seems to be how the LXX saw it.
I am surprised no English versions see it that way, since that connects this verse to v3.
Is there a problem because of the pronoun suffix "me", which is the direct object?
The qal form of sachan does not seem to take a direct object, but it might in:
Job 34:9 כִּֽי־אָ֭מַר לֹ֣א יִסְכָּן־גָּ֑בֶר בִּ֜רְצֹת֗וֹ עִם־אֱלֹהִֽים׃
Dby Job 34:9 For he hath said, It profiteth not a man if he delight himself in God.

What do you think? sachan or sachach? cover, weave or profit?

2nd question: the verb תְּ֜סֻכֵּ֗נִי is imperfect.
Yet the action takes place "in my mother's womb" which was in the past.
To understand imperfect verb as not completed action, I would add the preposition "since" in front of "in my mother's womb", which is what LXX did.
So I would get something like, You work Your purpose in me [since I was] in my mother's womb.
But that is taking the hiphil meaning, 'cause to be useful', but the verb here is qal, so maybe, You profit me [since I was] in my mother's womb.

Thoughts?
thanks.
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)

Schubert
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 2:05 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby Schubert » Sat Sep 08, 2018 2:44 pm

For the record, in the thread on verse 4 of this psalm, I've posted a comment about the use of כִּֽי at the beginning of both verse 13 and 4: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1039&e=1&view=unread#unread .
John McKinnon

kwrandolph
Posts: 911
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby kwrandolph » Sun Sep 09, 2018 2:04 pm

In answer to your two questions:

1) The verb תסכני cannot come from סכן because it lacks a double nun that it would need if from סכן. I checked DSS and found a spelling indicating that the word comes from סוך.

The idea here is that God has possession of the inward parts (exemplified by kidneys), and has overspread them while yet in the mother’s womb. Unspoken is that the overspreading is skin. This is typical of Biblical Hebrew, that an idea is expressed with the reader needing to fill in the blanks to get the full idea.

2) the second question, NO, it is not imperfect. It’s indicative, but an indicative that indicates a continuation of the main thought. I call that a “secondary indicative”.

As we have discussed earlier, Biblical Hebrew conjugates for neither tense nor aspect. As such, Biblical Hebrew has neither perfect nor imperfect, nor perfective nor imperfective. Rather the conjugations of Qatal and Yiqtol refer to model ideas. The Qatal is used for indicative, what is sure to follow should certain standards be met, and the reason for an idea. The Yiqtol is used for subjunctive mood, as well as intention, expectation, secondary indicative (possibly the most common use in Tanakh) and a few other moods. Notice, I didn’t mention optative mood—apparently it wasn’t indicated by a conjugation, unlike English.

So the idea of the verse is that God possesses my inward parts, he covered them with skin in my mother’s womb.

Karl W. Randolph.

User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby SteveMiller » Sun Sep 23, 2018 8:30 pm

kwrandolph wrote:In answer to your two questions:

1) The verb תסכני cannot come from סכן because it lacks a double nun that it would need if from סכן. I checked DSS and found a spelling indicating that the word comes from סוך.

Thanks very much, Karl. You are right.
Thanks also for looking it up in the DSS. I think the extra waw in DSS, תסוכני, is instead of the u vowel under the samech.

kwrandolph wrote:The idea here is that God has possession of the inward parts (exemplified by kidneys), and has overspread them while yet in the mother’s womb. Unspoken is that the overspreading is skin. This is typical of Biblical Hebrew, that an idea is expressed with the reader needing to fill in the blanks to get the full idea.

That makes the most sense.

kwrandolph wrote:2) the second question, NO, it is not imperfect. It’s indicative, but an indicative that indicates a continuation of the main thought. I call that a “secondary indicative”.

As we have discussed earlier, Biblical Hebrew conjugates for neither tense nor aspect. As such, Biblical Hebrew has neither perfect nor imperfect, nor perfective nor imperfective. Rather the conjugations of Qatal and Yiqtol refer to model ideas. The Qatal is used for indicative, what is sure to follow should certain standards be met, and the reason for an idea. The Yiqtol is used for subjunctive mood, as well as intention, expectation, secondary indicative (possibly the most common use in Tanakh) and a few other moods. Notice, I didn’t mention optative mood—apparently it wasn’t indicated by a conjugation, unlike English.

So the idea of the verse is that God possesses my inward parts, he covered them with skin in my mother’s womb.

Isn't the verb here Yiqtol, not Qatal?
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)

kwrandolph
Posts: 911
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby kwrandolph » Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:20 pm

SteveMiller wrote:
kwrandolph wrote:2) the second question, NO, it is not imperfect. It’s indicative, but an indicative that indicates a continuation of the main thought. I call that a “secondary indicative”.

As we have discussed earlier, Biblical Hebrew conjugates for neither tense nor aspect. As such, Biblical Hebrew has neither perfect nor imperfect, nor perfective nor imperfective. Rather the conjugations of Qatal and Yiqtol refer to model ideas. The Qatal is used for indicative, what is sure to follow should certain standards be met, and the reason for an idea. The Yiqtol is used for subjunctive mood, as well as intention, expectation, secondary indicative (possibly the most common use in Tanakh) and a few other moods. Notice, I didn’t mention optative mood—apparently it wasn’t indicated by a conjugation, unlike English.

So the idea of the verse is that God possesses my inward parts, he covered them with skin in my mother’s womb.

Isn't the verb here Yiqtol, not Qatal?


Yes it is a Yiqtol. One of the uses of Yiqtol is secondary indicative which is a continuation or addition to the initial clause. In this context, the covering is a continuation, adding to the main idea, that God possesses us even in the inward parts.

Because neither Qatal nor Yiqtol have time stamps on them, they don’t refer to tense, a Yiqtol that grammatically comes after a Qatal, can refer to an event that happened before the action indicated by the Qatal. The Yiqtol in this case is determined by grammar, not event time.

Karl W. Randolph.

User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby SteveMiller » Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:49 pm

Thanks Karl. Is that understanding of the yiqtol widely accepted?
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)

Isaac Fried
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 8:32 pm

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby Isaac Fried » Tue Oct 02, 2018 10:17 pm

תְּסֻכֵּנִי = את-ס-הוּא-כ-אני, 'you-cover-me (with flesh)'.

Isaac Fried, Boston University

kwrandolph
Posts: 911
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 12:51 am

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby kwrandolph » Sun Oct 07, 2018 8:43 pm

SteveMiller wrote:Thanks Karl. Is that understanding of the yiqtol widely accepted?


Nope. But neither is it widely accepted that in order to know Biblical Hebrew language, one must read Tanakh cover-to-cover, over and over again.

It’s my understanding that the late Dr. Diethelm Michael understood the grammar similar to what I describe. However, most people I’ve read still consider the medieval Hebrew of the Masoretes as representative of Biblical Hebrew, when it clearly isn’t. The famous grammar by Gesenius is an example of medieval Hebrew.

Personally, I read Tanakh cover-to-cover, over and over again, not to become a Biblical Hebrew language scholar, but merely to read God’s Word. It was while I read Tanakh, that I realized that there were very serious problems with the grammar I had been taught that teaches that the conjugations represent tenses, Also very serious problems with the then emerging grammar that teaches that the conjugations represent aspect. (Aspect, as I was taught in linguistic classes, agrees with the definition given in the SIL description.)

Karl W. Randolph.

User avatar
SteveMiller
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:53 pm
Location: Detroit, MI, USA
Contact:

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby SteveMiller » Tue Nov 06, 2018 4:29 pm

Thanks Karl
Sincerely yours,
Steve Miller
Detroit
http://www.voiceInWilderness.info
Honesty is the best policy. - George Washington (1732-99)

Saboi
Posts: 328
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2018 4:06 pm

Re: Psalm 139:13

Postby Saboi » Tue Nov 06, 2018 6:20 pm

סכן is a straightforward cognate of the verb, σκιάν "overshadow, shade, darken", the prefix
letter, ת can often abbreviate κἆτα and the last letter, י is μοι.

This cognate is confirmed in Job 40:22, יסכהו/σκιάζονται , Psalm 91:4 יסך / ἐπισκιάσει
and Psalm 140:7 סכתה / ἐπεσκίασας .

The Hebrew word for weave is ארג (ARG), same word in Greek, ἔργα.

Homer's Odysseus 22.422, ἔργα ἐργάζεσθα
Women that we have taught to do their work to weave the wool

2 Kings 23:7 ארגות/ἐργάζεσθαι
The women wove hangings for the grove.
Lee Mcgee


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest