Questions to ask a Biblical poem

As anyone who follows this blog will have noticed by now, I am working on an interpretation of Psalm 24, trying to take into account its textual, poetic, historical, literary, and theological dimensions (have I missed a dimension? For posts to date go here). One "means of entry" to the Psalm that I have been using is a list of questions that the Dutch Hebrew scholar Jan Fokkelman believes we ought to pose any example of Biblical poetry (I've got to question 11 so far; the most fruitful for Ps 24 was question 1). I thought I'd share them here and ask if anyone thinks an important question has been left out, or whether a question posed ought to be fine tuned:

1.Who is speaking, an “I” or a “we”? Can we picture this lyrical subject? Does it change in the course of the poem?

2.Whom is the lyrical subject addressing? Is the addressee visible in the text, or can we put a face to him/her? Does the addressee change? Do we encounter apostrophe?

3.How long are the sentences? Check every time whether the syntactic unit coincides with the colon, the verse, or even a strophe. In other words: does enjambment occur?

4.Which verb tenses are used? Are the various tenses (present, past, future) distributed over the strophes?

5.a.Which modes are used besides the indicative?1 Wishes, commands, exclamations?
b. Are there actions, or descriptions of qualities?

6.How do space and time function in the lyrical world?

7.Can a diagram be drawn of the relations between the lyrical characters—for instance, a triangle such as me-God-enemy?

8.How long are cola and verses, generally?

9.a. How much parallelism (both semantic and morphological) is there between half-verses? Ask yourself regularly if the “A, what's more, B” rule applies.
b. How much parallelism exists between the verses? And between the strophes?

10.Try to find the demarcation of strophes and stanzas. What devices does the poet use to create these units? Are there any boundary markers?

11.Is the cohesion of the strophe internal or external? Try to indicate the nature of the internal cohesion.

12.a. Does the poet use simile?
b. Metaphors?
c. Metonymy? Synechdoche? Symbols?

13.How are the verses related in regard to meaning?

14.And the strophes? Are they steps in a line of argument?

15.How does the theme develop? Is a specific line of thought followed?

16.What are the keywords?

17.Be sensitive to contrasts, oppositions, and transitions.

18.Try to make the most of various forms of repetition by listening for it and testing the function of variation-in-repetition.

A "canonical" translation of Isaiah 1:2?

How do you translate the qatal verbs in Isaiah 1:2?

שִׁמְעוּ שָׁמַיִם וְהַאֲזִינִי אֶרֶץ כִּי יהוה דִּבֵּר בָּנִים גִּדַּלְתִּי וְרוֹמַמְתִּי וְהֵם פָּשְׁעוּ בִ

I would follow all the standard translations and go for the past tense (has spoken). An offline interlocuter, however, has suggested that we translate them in the present (Yhwh speaks, I raise up, they sin against me). Here's his reasoning:

If you read just the opening verses of Isaiah your preference for a past tense makes sense. But I am working with a reading of the entire scroll of Isaiah that sees the pattern of divine good - rebellion - punishment, and each stage in it, as occurring at many times and not just at this one time. Two points are relevant. One, a translation of a given passage in any biblical book depends on one's understanding of that whole book and the place of that passage in it; it is not solely a matter of the forms and syntax of the passage itself. Two, the Hebrew text - verbs, nouns, etc. - can often support a range of meaning but a translator into English has to choose only one part of that range. Both "YHWH has spoken" and "speaks" and "I reared" and "I rear" are possible depending on one's focus on just these verses or on the larger scroll.

From what I can see, this would be an attempt at "canonical translation," a translation that attempts the communicate the substance of the entire scroll by means of its parts.

I do agree that there is an effort at typologizing in Isaiah's scroll. I recently read Brevard Childs' commentary on Isaiah, which made the same point. He also made another point, however, which would lead me to want to retain the past tense translation, even though I agree with the pattern my dialogue partner discerns. Here's my logic:

The pattern in Isaiah is of a certain kind, i.e. it is typological, which means that that one object (e.g. Assyria) is placed within a larger scheme and associated with another object (e.g. Babylon), so that the two distinct entities become types of a larger, single reality (e.g. human hubris). The literary technique of juxtaposition and intertextual linkaging operates on the principle that entities diverse in space and time (Assyria and Babylon) are really just pictures, types, of a single reality. They are juxtaposed on the basis of their ontological unity, they point beyond themselves to something more general. In this case, my friend's desire to translate Isaiah one in the present simple tense is correct, as this tense points to a general, repeated action. Perhaps we could say that his translation gets to the substance of the message of Isaiah as a whole.

However, what is equally as important as the substance of Isaiah's message is the means by which the book communicates it. It doesn't do this by flattening out the concrete entities, by swallowing them up into a schematized drama. Rather, Assyria and Babylon are retained in the historical, geographical particularity. It is only through the literary technique of juxtaposition that the reader is invited to discover the unity that undergirds them. In other words, the unity of the message must be sought through the particularity of the parts and not despite them. On this view, the historical particularity of Isaiah 1:2 ought to be maintained by means of past tense translation, even if the translator wishes his reader to grasp the singular message of the whole. There is a path the attentive, theologically minded reader has to tread, and it is through finite particularity to the universal. This would seem to be the way the book of Isaiah itself wishes to communicate its message.

I invite all and sundry to critique me!

Powerful readings of R. Alter's Psalms translation on BCC Radio 4.

Ros of Conversational Theology has just posted a link to a most beautiful edition of BBC Radio 4's Poetry Please. The evening is entirely dedicated to the Psalms, read out of both the King James Version Bible and the recent translation by renowned Hebrew scholar Robert Alter. The readings are by experts and, for me at least, open up the Psalms in a new way. Henry Goodman's reading of Psalm 22 was just breathtaking. I highly recommend investing about 30 minutes of your time just to enjoy these recordings and discover the Psalms anew. You better hurry though, you only have another six days to listen to them.

A brief response to Niccacci on verbs in Hebrew poetry, with an illustration from Isaiah.

I briefly introduced Niccacci's theory on the translation of Hebrew verbs in Hebrew poetry in my post Translating a qatal/yiqtol sequence in Psalm 24:2 (drawing on Niccacci). I was recently contacted by someone offline who kindly shared the following brief response to Niccacci's article[*], along with his own illustration from Isaiah. With his permission, I share it here in the hopes that others will add their views.

I finally read Niccacci's article. I think his basic motive for the study is solid: we need to take the different verbal forms in Hebrew seriously and not just translate as we want, usually putting them in the same English tense. This was a clear reminder to me to pay such attention and not gloss over issues in translation.

I think he gets himself in some trouble when he says that initial yiqtol is always volitive and then has to invoke ellipses and double-duty modifiers to explain the instances where it clearly isn't volitive. This usage need further investigation. His comments on the use of qatal are solid as far as they go. I think he limits himself by maintaining that qatal is past in the sense that it should always be translated with an English past tense. As he notes (p. 266) qatal is for the narrative-punctual. This can be rendered with an English past tense (preterite or perfect) but also with an English present tense understanding that the focus is on the aspect and not the time of the action.

Isaiah is my field of focus for Hebrew poetry and I offer one example for the latter point. (I haven't and I don't know of anyone who's investigated the possibility of significant differences in Hebrew poetry between Psalms and prophets.)

Isaiah opens with the call for heavens and earth to hear ky YHWH dibber. The closing verb can be translated "has said" or "says;" I think that the Hebrew supports both and the issue is with a translation since we have to choose one in English; against Niccacci I don't think that it always has to be an English past. My squabble with him is more about possible translations than with his comments on the Hebrew itself. I often translate Isa 1:2 with "says," not in the sense that YHWH is now saying this but that this is what YHWH says as a matter or course, as a type of characteristic: YHWH says or speaks past, present and future. What he says in the 2nd half of v 2 uses 3 qatal forms and can be translated with past or present forms: "reared, brought up and rebelled" or "rear, bring up and rebel." The latter again not in the sense that YHWH is now doing this but this is what he does - past, present and future - with the inevitable result that the sons rebel. V 3 also uses 3 qatal forms and most, if not every, translation employs English present: "knows, doesn't know, doesn't understand."

[*] A. Niccacci. "The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry" in Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting: Typological and Historical Perspectives (Eisenbrauns, 2006).

Poetic yiqtol as a "deictic centre shift"?

In response to my question on the Biblical Hebrew List on how to translate the yiqtol in Ps 24:2, a certain Vadim Cherny has kindly e-mailed me the following thoughts:

Yiqtols are a bit hard to understand in the English linguistic mentality. As I argue elsewhere ( http://vadimcherny.org/hebrew/grammatical_function_hebrew_yiqtol.htm), yiqtol represents a deictic center shift. A close approximation in English is, "and upon rivers he would establish it," using nominal future tense for past events as the author is immersed in the recited (past) events. The deictic center shift is extremely common in, for example, Old Russian.

Any thoughts?

Second-line information in a poetic yiqtol clause?

Two Psalms experts have kindly weighed in on my attempt to use Niccacci's theory of the verbal system in Hebrew poetry to translate Ps 24:2: John Hobbins and Pete Bekins (read their helpful comments in the comments section). John and I are agreed that the shift from qatal to yiqtol represents a shift in temporal perspective - somehow (Pete begs to differ, on diachronic grounds). However, neither John nor Pete like my translation using the "-ing form" :

for he has founded it upon the seas,
establishing it upon the currents.

Though John can appreciate my attempt to get at the "dynamism" of the yiqtol behind the verb "establishing," he worries that it creates the impression that this colon is subservient to the former, creating the impression that it is portraying a shift "from main-line to secondary-line information."

But I don't get why this is wrong. According to Niccacci, secondary-line information (x-yiqtol/weqatal) can function in various ways to specify what is happening in the main line (qatal/wayyiqtol). How it specifies what happens is open to context, but if John is right that the second colon somehow intensifies the meaning of the first colon (as is typical in parallelism, cf. R. Alter), then does that make it in some sense parasitic on the first colon? Doesn't that mean that the second colon is somehow subservient to the former? I've tried to improve on my translation by adding the word "indeed," thus:

for he has founded it upon the seas,
indeed, establishing it upon currents.

The solution isn't perfect because the -ing form still sounds like a relative participle, qualifying the manner in which the first action happened. But I fined the present simple (establishes) just sounds unnatural and doesn't achieve what it's supposed to do! Niccacci offered a similar solution to mine for two similar cases: Ps 78:20 and 25:

הֵן הִכָּה־צוּר וַיָּזוּבוּ מַיִם

וּנְחָלִים יִשְׁטֹפוּ

(v. 20) Behold, he smote the rock and water gushed out,

indeed, streams were overflowing.

וַיַּכְעִיסוּהוּ בְּבָמוֹתָם

וּבִפְסִילֵיהֶם יַקְנִיאוּהוּ

(v. 58) And they provoked him to anger with their high places,

indeed, <they> were constantly moving him to jealousy with their idols.

Here we have the same event described twice, the second being "more intense." However we understand the exact temporal dimension of the verb (I chose the "-ing form" instead of the past continuous because "was establishing" means either that God was either establishing the earth again and again or that the action has been reduced to an unnaturally slow place, as if in "slow motion"), the second yiqtol colon is subservient to the first clause by making it come more alive -- somehow.

Or am I just missing the point of what "secondary-line information" is all about? I'd agree that what I'm describing is not "background" information, if that is synonymous with "secondary-line information" ... I'm new to all of this so please point out where I'm mistaken!

p.s. For some really awesome photos of rocks and sea, go here. I posted this one so large because it, well, rocked!

Translating a qatal/yiqtol sequence in Ps 24:2 (drawing on Niccacci)

Ps 24:2 reads as follows:

כִּי־הוּא עַל־יַמִּים יְסָדָהּ

וְעַל־נְהָרוֹת יְכוֹנְנֶהָ

We have here a typical example of a qatal // yiqtol sequence, often found in Hebrew poetry, much to the frustration of translators. That qatal refers to the past is clear, but how do we translate the yiqtol (underlined)?

A translation found in some of the older commentators (Briggs, Kittel, Bäthgen) translates it in the present tense:

for he has founded it upon the seas
and upon the rivers he establishes it.

(Bäthgen even saw cosmological significance in the distinction:"Das Perf. יסדה geht auf die Schöpfung, das Imperf. יכוננה auf die Erhaltung.”).

But this isn't the view of most modern scholars. Gesenius opted for an even more unlikely translation: he lists יכוננה as an example of the frequentive use of yiqtol in the past rather than the present (§107.1a; giving the odd translation: "was continually being established").

All English translations, including most modern commentators, translate it in the past ("established").

I'm trying to grasp this from the perspective of Alviero Niccacci's fascinating essay (Eisenbrauns, 2006) which, as far as I can see, is the first attempt to consistently translate the verbs in poetry along the same lines as in prose. It would appear that for Niccacci, yiqtol never refers to the present. The present tense is always referenced by either a verbless or a participle clause. This leaves us with yiqtol for either the future or the past. The future translation is well known (e.g. Ps 6:10: “The Lord has heard my supplication; the Lord will accept my prayer). When the qatal/yiqtol sequence refers to the past,

they signal a shift from main-line, punctual information (qatal) to secondary-line, repeated/habitual/explicatory/descriptive information” (yiqtol), p. 253.

So, in sum, on Niccacci's reading, יְכוֹנְנֶהָ

1. cannot be present (because yiqtol never refers to the present);
   
2. could theoretically be future, except that it is excluded due to the context (i.e. it doesn't make sense; are there formal indicators as well?)
   
3. is probably past, and given the semantics in the Psalm probably either communicates either secondary-line descriptive or explicatory information. If explicatory, it wishes to clarify the process by which God founded the earth on the seas; if descriptive, it wishes to represent the event more “graphically,” even to “celebrate” it, giving the event “depth of field” (to uses Niccacci's terms). Here, the yiqtol would have a “relief function.”

The best translation for this that I can think of is the gerundive, which expresses the "dynamicity” of an action, i.e.:

for he has founded it upon the seas
establishing it upon the rivers.

My questions:

1. Does Niccacci's theory hold water?
2. Does the gerund do justice to the form?
3. What's your favourite translation?

By the way: in a footnote, Niccacci notes that a first attempt was made in this direction in his article "Syntactic Analysis of Jonah," which, thankfully, is available online.

Bibliography for the verbal system in Biblical Hebrew poetry

I recently posted a request for tips on resources for this topic to two Internet discussion groups dedicated to Biblical studies: Jim West's Biblical Studies List and The Biblicalist. I've decided to collect their suggestions here, along with what I've discovered for myself. I'd appreciate any updates.

Adele Berlin, “Grammatical Aspects of Biblical Parallelism,” in Hebrew Union College Annual 50 (1979), 17-43.

Peter C. Craigie, "Excursus II: The Translation of Tenses in Hebrew Poetry," in vol. 19, Word Biblical Commentary (2nd ed.; Word Biblical Commentary Nashville, Tenn.: Nelson Reference & Electronic, 2004), 110-113.

Fensham, FC. "The Use of the Suffix Conjugation and the Prefix Conjugation in a Few Old Hebrew Poems," in Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 6 (1978), 9-18.

J. C. L. Gibson, “The Anatomy of Hebrew Narrative Poetry,” in Understanding Poets and Prophets: Essays in Honor of George Wishart Anderson, edited by A. G. Auld (JSOTSup 152, Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 146-47

M. Held, “The YQTL-QTL (QTL-YQTL) Sequence of Identical Verbs in Biblical Hebrew and Ugaritic,” in Studies and Essays in Honor of Abraham A. Neuman, edited by M. Ben-Horin et al. (Leiden: Brill, 1962) 285-86.

See P. D. Miller, “The Theological Significance of Biblical Poetry,” in Language, Theology, and the Bible: Essays in Honor of James Barr, edited by S. E. Balentine and J. Barton (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1994), 221-22.

Alviero Niccacci. "Syntactic Analysis of Jonah." Liber Annuus 46 (1996), 26-31.

_____. “Poetic Syntax and Interpretation of Malachi.” Liber Annuus 51 (2001): 55-107.

_____."The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry" in Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting: Typological and Historical Perspectives (Eisenbrauns, 2006).

Diethelm Michel, Tempora und Satzstellung in den Psalmen, Bonn 1960, § 36 (p. 249).

Cristian Gheorghe Rata, The Verbal System in the Book of Job (Unpublished doctoral dissertation; University of Toronto, 2003).

Silviu Tatu. "The rhetorical interpretation of the yiqtol//qatal (qatal//yiqtol) verbal sequence in classical Hebrew poetry and its research history," in Transformation 23/1 (2006), 17-23.

_____. The Qatal//Yiqtol (Yiqtol//Qatal) Verbal Sequence in Semitic Couplets: A Case Study in Systemic Functional Grammar with Applications on the Hebrew Psalter and Ugaritic Poetry (Eisenbrauns, 2008).

A Christmas poem

The following poem by New Testament scholar Ben Witherington III, posted on his blog here (along with thoughts on the virgin conception), neatly expresses how I have experienced Advent and Christmas this year. Germany seems to celebrate these festivals far more ostentatiously then England (though with far more taste!), and the experience has once again left a bitter-sweet taste in my mouth. Enjoy the poem:

THE BONDING

A cold and listless season,
And full of cheerless cheer,
When hopes are raised and dashed again
And joy dissolves in tears.

The search for endless family
The search for one true Friend
Leaves questers tired, disconsolate
With questions without end.

Best find some potent pleasure quick
Some superficial thrill
Than search for everlasting love
When none can fill that bill.

So hide yourselves in shopping
And eating ‘til you burst,
Use endless entertainment
As shelter from the worst.

And hope at least for truce on earth,
Though warlords rattle swords
As if to kill could solve our ills
We seize our ‘just’ rewards.

Mistake some rest for lasting peace
And calm for ‘all is well’
And absence of activity
As year end’s victory bell.

But what if Advent is no quest
Despite the wise men’s star
What if Advent isn’t reached
By driving from afar?

What if Good News comes to us
From well beyond our reach?
What if love and peace on earth
Are more than things we preach?
What if a restless peace
Is what He did intend
Until we open up our lives
And let the stranger in?

What if a peaceless rest
Is not the Christmas hope
What if nothing we could do
Helps us truly cope?

What if there is a bonding
With one who rules above
Who came to us in beggar’s rags
And brought the gift of love?

The God shaped hole in every heart
Is healed by just one source
When Jesus comes to claim his own
Who are without recourse.

So give up endless seeking
Surrender is required
The one who is the Lord of all
Cannot be bought or hired,

He’s not conjured into life
By pomp and circumstance
By Yuletide carols boldly sung
By fun or drunken trance.

He comes unbidden, unawares
Fills crevices of souls
He comes on his own timely terms
And makes the sinner whole.

‘We shall be restless’ said the saint
‘Until we rest in thee’
And find that we have been reborn,
Our own nativity.

How silently, how silently
The precious truth is given
And God imparts to human hearts
The blessings of his heaven.

BW3

The Passing of a Palestinian Poet: Mahmoud Darwish

Laila of Raising Yousuf and Noor informs us that the celebrated Palestinian poet passed away yesterday. I have often heard of this poet, but still haven't got round to reading his work - something I'd love to rectifiy. Lailia posts a poem, from which I recognised a line. It has been used by Edward Said as the title for an eloquent elegy (or is it a paen? I'm no good at poetry) for his beloved people, After the Last Sky. I should add that the blog Improvisations has posted an interesting review of his book Memory for Forgetfulness. And finally, related in theme, is this music video In my Heart.

The Earth is closing on us

pushing us through the last passage

and we tear off our limbs to pass through.

The Earth is squeezing us.

I wish we were its wheat

so we could die and live again.

I wish the Earth was our mother

so she'd be kind to us.

I wish we were pictures on the rocks

for our dreams to carry as mirrors.

We saw the faces of those who will throw

our children out of the window of this last space.

Our star will hang up mirrors.

Where should we go after the last frontiers?

Where should the birds fly after the last sky?

Where should the plants sleep after the last breath of air?

We will write our names with scarlet steam.

We will cut off the hand of the song to be finished by our flesh.

We will die here, here in the last passage.

Here and here our blood will plant its olive tree.

- Mahmoud Darwish

Quote of the Day: Theopoetics

Before the message there must be the vision,
before the sermon the hymn, before the prose the poem.

The structures of faith and confession have always rested on hierophanies and images.

From Wilder's Theopoetics.

Reminds me of this quote on our contemporary poetry wilderness.

Poetry Wilderness

“The poetic imagination is marginal within our dominant scientific culture. This tends towards a deadening literalism. In most traditional societies, poetry, myth, song and music were central to the culture. In our society these have often been reduced to entertainment. The hunger for the transcendent is still there in the human heart. As St. Augustine said, it is restless until it rests in God. But in our postmodern society it is harder for the preacher to evoke that ultimate human destiny which transcends our words. Few preachers are poets. I am not. But if the preaching of the word is to flourish, then we need poets and artists, singers and musicians who keep alive the intuition of our ultimate destiny. The Church needs these singers of the transcendent to nurture her life and her preaching.”

(Timothy Radcliffe OP, ”The Sacramentality of the Word,” in LITURGY IN A POSTMODERN WORLD, pp.133-147, here p.145)

An Awesome Cyber-Psalm

I don't know about you, but watching those interviews with Fred Phelps and his cronies yesterday made me feel dirty. As a remedy to that, I recommend this beautiful Cyber-Psalm, which I've copied from its author's website, Lingamish. I hope David Ker doesn't mind me simply reproducing a post that he himself wrote, but if he's anything like the prophets of the Old Testament, he'll understand that its the truth of the poem that matters and needs to be propagated and not adherence to rules of copyright and ownership.

For your delectation:

Cyber-Psalm 15

What would heaven be like

if books of theology

were written by children not men?

And what if sermons were delivered by the poor.

And devotional books were written by the hungry.

And hymns were composed by the sick and the old.

The Sermon on the Mount requires no interpretation,

unless you are fat and happy.

If our hope of heaven were colored

with children’s crayons and felt tip markers.

And our theology of hell were tempered

by the dying breath of those who suffer.

The hair-splitting and hand-wringing

of over-educated men in ivory towers

goes largely unnoticed by grandmothers in their kitchens

and office workers in their cubicles.

They go on putting silly magnets on their fridge

And trading forwarded e-mails about heaven.

Two thousand years of systematic theology

Disturbs them not a bit!

God is honored and praised

Hoped for and prayed to

By myriads who never learned Greek.

Their revelation is not a scroll

But a hope vaguely imprinted

On a soul made by God.

The sick and the blind and the poor

Receive Jesus with gladness.

The Gospels require no spiritualized application.

Feed us, friend Jesus.

Our stomachs are empty.

You are the one our hearts hope for.

Heal us who are sick.

We ache and we suffer.

Save us in death.

We are dying in darkness.

Savior Jesus, our hope at life’s end.

Adventsgedanken von Jochen Klepper

The following is a poem by the German Lutheran novelist and poet Jochen Klepper (1903-1942). It's about Advent and hits the nail on the head. We need such poetry today, as Advent is reduced to a matter of acquiring more physical comfort and spoiling oneself. I won't give a translation, but if anyone wants to give it a shot thengo ahead and I'll give my comments (not that I'm totally fluent myself!):

Mein Gott, dein hohes Fest des Lichtes
hat stets die Leidenden gemeint.
Und wer die Schrecken des Gerichtes
nicht als der Schuldigste beweint,
dem blieb dein Stern noch tiefverhüllt
und deine Weihnacht unerfüllt.

Die ersten Zeugen, die du suchtest,
erschienen aller Hoffnung bar.
Voll Angst, als ob du ihnen fluchtest,
und elend war die Hirtenschar.
Den Ärmsten auf verlassenem Feld
gabst du die Botschaft an die Welt.

Die Feier ward zu bunt und heiter,
mit der die Welt dein Fest begeht.
Mach uns doch für die Nacht bereiter,
in der dein Stern am Himmel steht.
Und über deiner Krippe schon
zeig uns dein Kreuz, du Menschensohn.

Herr, daß wir dich so nennen können,
präg unseren Herzen heißer ein.
Wenn unsere Feste jäh zerrönen,
muß jeder Tag noch Christtag sein.
Wir preisen dich in Schmerz, Schuld, Not
und loben dich bei Wein und Brot.

My favourite strophe is the third:

"The festivities have become too colourful and jolly,
with which the world celebrates your festival.
Please make us more ready for the night
in which your star hangs in the heavens.
And already, over your crib,
show us your cross, you Son of Man."

For an excellent post on the theological catastrophe of consumerism check out inhabitatio dei's Eugene McCarraher on Personhood and “the Secular”.