Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Loren Crow" <lorencrow AT earthling.net>]

Hi Joseph.

I've addressed several of your questions in my book, _The Songs of Ascents
(Psalms 120-134): Their Place in Israelite History and Religion_ (JBLDS 148;
Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986).  I've tried to answer your questions briefly
here, but of course there's no substitute for a more extended discussion.

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Brian Tucker [mailto:music AT riverviewcog.org]
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 11:13 PM
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: Psalm 134 grammatical questions

 > 1. Does 134 contain a valid inclusio or is it a minor inclusio since it
 > does not go the length on the poem?

I think the two halves of v. 3 were characteristic formulas of the redactor
of the Songs of Ascents, and were not part of the original psalms included
in it.  Although I thought that Psalm 134 was not part of the "nucleus
group," I do notice that v. 2 ends with the same phrase with which v. 1
began.  The best inclusio, then, would be vv. 1-2, which I would argue were
the original poem to which v. 3 was added by a redactor.

 > 2. Is HINNEH an interjection or an adverb here? "Behold or come"

It looks to me like an interjection, having the force of "Ahem!" or
"Attention, please!"

 > 3. How does the third BRK relate to the inclusio?

The important question, as I see it, is whether v. 3 is the ending verse of
Psalm 134 or the ending verse of the Songs of Ascents.  If it's the latter,
then your question is misplaced.  If it's the former, though, then I would
regard it as playing on the idea of who does the blessing--do we bless God
or does God bless us?

 > 4. Some see a stair-like parallelism here, what type of parallelism do
you
 > see?

The "step parallelism" is not usually thought to be a primary characteristic
of Psalm 134; it's illustrated much better by Psalms 120-125.  Having said
that, I'm not sure what you're asking here.  Can you clarify your question?

 > 5. Is there anything significant about the use of the imperatives here?

Absolutely.  In fact, this is a good piece of evidence that v. 3 did not
originally belong with vv. 1-2.  The "you" of v. 3 is singular; the "you" of
the imperatives in vv. 1-2 is plural.

 > 6. Is the third BRK (Pi Prefix 3ms 2ms obj suf) a jussive?

Yes.

 > 7. I don't have access to Habel, JBL 91, (1971) 321-37 article which
 > discusses the connection between "the maker of heaven and earth" with
 > "Zion." Does anyone have insight concerning the connection?

If you have software that allows you to search phrases, I heartily recommend
a search on "maker of heaven and earth" (in Hebrew, of course).  The phrase
is almost certainly a standardized Jerusalemite formula.

 > 8. Is it best to construe "he who made" (Q act ptc in Cstr) as an
 > adjectival use of the participle used as an equivalent of a relative
 > clause?

I think so, yes.

Hope this helps,
Loren Crow

  _____

  _____

         

        Loren D. Crow, Ph.D.
        Department of Religion
        Wiley College
        711 Wiley Avenue
        Marshall, Texas 75670

        VOX: (903) 927-3219
        FAX: (903) 927-3336
        lorencrow AT earthling.net <mailto:lorencrow AT earthling.net>
        http://www.texramp.net/~lorencrow
<http://www.texramp.net/~lorencrow>

        The unexamined life is not worth living.

                                - Socrates