Vêtus

Testamentum
BRILL Vêtus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 brill.nl/vt

Hortatory Discourse and Psalm 96

W. Dennis Tucker, Jr.

Baylor University
Waco, Texas USA

Abstract
Discourse analysis has been applied to numerous narrative texts in the Hebrew Bible, yet its use
with poetic texts remains infrequent. This study tests the thesis that hortatory discourse in poetic
texts resembles and reflects the structures of hortatory discourse present within narrative mate-
rial. Frequently the word order and construction of lines within Hebrew poetry have been attrib-
uted to poetic style, free variation, or rhetorical structure, among other suggestions, yet this
analysis of Psalm 96 suggests that word order may be explained based on the discourse employed
in the psalm.

Keywords
Psalm 96, Discourse Analysis, Hebrew Poetry, Robert Longacre, Yahweh Malak psalm

The primary thesis of this paper is that hortatory discourse in poetic texts
resembles and reflects the structures of hortatory discourse present within nar-
rative material. Frequently the word order and construction of lines within
Hebrew poetry have been attributed to poetic style, free variation, or rhetori-
cal structure, among other suggestions. The assumption is that the syntactic
constraints related to narrative texts have little to do with the syntax of Hebrew
poetry. Simply put: we are dealing with apples and oranges, narrative and
poetry. As Alviero Niccacci has observed, "Given the difficulty of understand-
ing the verb system in poetry, most scholars simply disregard the verb forms
appearing in the texts and translate according to their own taste".1 Although
no doubt overstated, Niccacci is not altogether incorrect in his assessment.
Perhaps one of the reasons scholars frequently "disregard the verb forms", as
suggested by Niccacci, is their failure to note the discourse-type at hand and

l)
A. Niccacci, "Poetic Syntax and Interpretation of Malachi", LA 51 (2001), p. 59.

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2011 DOI: 10.1163/156853311X548578

 120 WD. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132

its expected syntactic constructions. Such a typological-functional approach

to Hebrew poetry by no means displaces form critical approaches to the Psal-
ter, nor does it dismiss the importance frequently accorded to poetic and rhe-
torical devices. Rather such an approach may prove foundational to both.
Following a truncated overview of hortatory discourse as outlined by Rob-
ert Longacre and others, I would like to consider briefly an example of such
discourse in a narrative text before moving to its appearance in a poetic text,
namely Psalm 96.

Hortatory Discourse: An Overview

The intersection between discourse analysis, or textlinguistics, and biblical
studies can be attributed, in large part, to the pioneering work of Robert Lon-
gacre.2 His use of tagmemic theory is predicated primarily upon the earlier
work of Kenneth Pike.3 Longacre explains that tagmemics is "discourse about
linguistic patterns... [W]e want to posit in each language a system of labeled
patterns that will at least to some degree parallel the system of intuitively
felt patterns used by speaker and hearer".4 To be more precise, Longacre sug-
gests that all language has both" etic notional structures as well as ernie surface
structures.
As is frequently the case, linguistic terminology itself can actually prove
quite problematic if left without at least a cursory explanation. To be clear, etic
notional structures refer to the overall purpose of the discourse. As Longacre
has suggested, "It is obvious that not all... discourses are of the same sort".5 In
his work, Longacre has suggested that there are four primary notional struc-
tures evident in most languages. Narrative discourse attempts to tell a story.
Procedural discourse explains how something should be done. Expository dis-
course posits a theme or argument. Hortatory discourse attempts to alter the
actions or thought of another. Although some psalms may be understood as
narrative (Pss 78; 105; 106) and some psalms may provide embedded forms of
procedural discourse, the majority of the psalms have an etic notional struc-

2)
See in particular, The Grammar of Discourse (New York, 1996). See also Longacre, Joseph: A
Story of Divine Providence (Winona Lake, 1989).
3)
See for example, K. Pike, Linguistic Concepts: An Introduction to Tagmemics (Lincoln, NE,
1982) and K. Pike and E. Pike, Grammatical Analysis (Dallas, TX, 1977).
4)
R. Longacre, "Tagmemics", Word 36 (1985), pp. 137-138.
5)
The Grammar of Discourse, p. 8.
 W D. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 121

ture that might best be described as hortatory, with many others being expos-
itory (Ps 8). As evidenced in the title of this piece, however, hortatory discourse
will remain the primary notional structure under consideration. These psalms
frequently implore Yahweh or the community to act in a particular manner,
while concomitantly, attempting to persuade either the Deity or the hearers to
adjust their ideology.
Hortatory discourse, in general, and these psalms in particular, contain
similar ernie surface structures. By ernie surface structures, Longacre refers
to the "constellation of verb forms that figure in each type".6 For example,
the main verb form in Hebrew narrative is the wayyiqtol, with other verbal
constructions signifying a progressive movement away from the main line of
the narrative.7 The presence of the other syntactic constructions not only
moves the story offline, but also frequently results in fronting or topicaliza-
tion.8 Likewise hortatory discourse has its own profile of clauses predicated
upon various verbal constructions. In hortatory discourse, the mainline verbal
forms are all some form of volitional speech, whether an imperative, jussive,
or cohortative. In addition, Bryan Rocine suggests that a weqatal may be used
to construct a form of mitigated hortatory discourse.9 In the Psalter, however,
the weqatal verb form occurs only 25 times, with relatively few instances of
this phenomenon.10

Hortatory Discourse in Narrative

Frequently hortatory discourse appears as an embedded discourse within nar-
rative texts. Jonah 1:12-16 provides a clear example of this phenomenon,

6)
Joseph, p. 59.
7)
Ibid.
8)
On the nature and function of fronting, see J. M. Heimerdinger. Topic, Focus, and Foreground
in Ancient Hebrew Narrative (JSOT 295; Sheffield, 1999). See also C. H. J. van der Merwe,
"Explaining Fronting in Biblical Hebrew", JNSL 25 (1999), pp. 173-199, and on the nature of
fronting in poetic texts, see S. J. Floor, "Poetic Fronting in a Wisdom Poetry Text: The Informa-
tion Structure of Proverbs 7", JNSL 31 (2005), pp. 23-58, esp. pp. 34-35.
9)
On mitigated hortatory discourse, B. Rocine, Learning Biblical Hebrew: A New Approach
Using Discourse Analysis (Macon, GA, 2000), pp. 110-111.
10)
On the function of the waw in poetic texts, see B. L. Bandstra, "Marking Turns in Poetic
Text. Waw in the Psalms", in E. Talstra (ed.), Narrative and Comment: Contributions to Discourse
Grammar and Biblical Hebrew, (Amsterdam, 1995), pp. 45-52.
122 WD. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132

demonstrating the structure of hortatory discourse when it appears as direct

speech embedded within Hebrew narrative.11
In this case, the hortatory speech appears in verses 12 and 14, with Jonah
speaking in the former and the sailors in the latter. The clauses present in each
verse and the discourse type of each appears below.

Discourse Type Hebrew Clause Clause Number

Narrative \&kto orrÒN -iDfcn 1

Mainline
Embedded ψχψ 2
Hortatory
Mainline
Embedded Djrrttf tfroro 3
Hortatory
Mainline
Embedded nybyn DVI priun 4
Hortatory
Offline
Embedded *)Λ xnv *a 5
Hortatory
Offline
Embedded Vmn "TVgn >*?ψη Ό 6
s
Hortatory uyby Tvtn
Offline

Following the opening verb, which operates as a discourse switch cue, the
embedded hortatory discourse begins on the mainline with two imperative
verb forms ΟΛ^ΟΠΙ ^ίΝψ), and then moves off the mainline in the subsequent
clauses as Jonah provides a rationale for the opening imperatives. Worth not­
ing, as well, is the clause-initial position of the imperative. Although the
imperative does not appear exclusively in this position, more often than not,
the verb is found at the beginning of the clause—a phenomenon that appears
in the Psalter and other poetic texts as well.
Following a brief narrative comment in verse 13, reasserting the tempestu­
ous nature of the storm, the sailors speak in verse 14.

u)
For an extended analysis of the book of Jonah, see W. Dennis Tucker, Jr., The Book of Jonah
(Baylor Handbook to the Hebrew Bible; Waco, TX, 2006).
 WD. Tucker, Jr. IVetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 123

Discourse Type Hebrew Clause Clause Number

Narrative nirr-^ji îinp?! 1

Mainline
Narrative nôfc»! 2
Mainline
Embedded topla rrtaiu xrbx ΠΙΓΡ π|Ν 3
Hortatory njn Uftjri
Mainline
Embedded «•»gj DjT ί Λ ρ ΙξΙΠ"^! 4
Hortatory
Mainline
Embedded nirp nn*r»3 5
Expository
Mainline
Embedded rrtep nsan -lutop 6
Expository
Offline

The hortatory nature of the speech is continued with a different construction,

that of a negative particle + cohortative, yet as suggested by Longacre and
Rocines profile, such a construction remains close to the mainline of horta­
tory discourse.12 Worth noting as well is the appearance of a vocative, func­
tioning as an adjunct, prior to the negative particle + cohortative construction.13
Such a construction (vocative as adjunct + negative particle + yiqtol) appears
similarly in psalms designated as hortatory discourse (cf. Pss 6:2; 25:2; 31:2,
18; 71:1). In addition to having hortatory discourse embedded within the
larger narrative discourse, there is expository discourse (both mainline and
offline) that appears embedded within the hortatory discourse. Longacre pos­
its only a tentative discourse profile scheme for expository discourse, noting
simply that clauses in expository discourse are meant to make a statement. The
preferred (mainline) construction is that of a verbless clause, as indicated in
clause 5 above.14 Off-line forms include clauses with a X + qatal construction,

12)
The presence of both the particle of negation b& as well as the particle R3 further marks the
clause as hortatory.
13)
On the vocative as an adjunct, see C. H. J. van der Merwe, J. A. Naudé, and J. H. Kroeze, A
Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar (Sheffield, 1999), p. 249.
14)
Longacre, Joseph, p. 111. See also the discussion on this clause in Tucker, Jonah, pp. 43-44.
124 WD. Tucker, Jr. IVetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132

clauses with a yiqtol indicating present time reference, and dependent clauses
with qatals or yiqtoIs.15
The text from Jonah provides an example of various discourse types embed-
ded within a larger discourse. I would like to turn to poetic speech, and Psalm
96 in particular, to consider whether a poetic text follows a similar structure.
And if so, then how might recognition of the discourse or discourses assist in
understanding the psalm in question.

Psalm 96
Of the discourse types suggested by Longacre, Psalm 96 is clearly a form of
hortatory discourse. The proclamation of the psalmist is directed at the people
of Israel, and even the nations of the world, exhorting them to participate in
this activity of praise and confession.16 In addition, and as suggested below,
shorter sections of expository discourse are embedded within the psalm. The
chart below provides a clause by clause analysis of the psalm, noting the dis-
course type of the clause, as well as whether it functions on the mainline or
whether it represents an offline form of the discourse. In addition, another slot
appears to note if the clause is an offline form of the embedded expository
discourse.
Longacre posits only a tentative discourse profile scheme for expository dis-
course, noting simply that clauses in expository discourse are meant to make
a statement. The preferred (mainline) construction is that of a verbless clause.17
Off-line forms include clauses with a X + qatal construction, clauses with a
yiqtol indicating present time reference, and dependent clauses with qatals or
yiqtols.18 As evident below, both mainline and offline forms of expository dis-
course appear in Psalm 96.

15)
See Rocine, Learning Biblical Hebrew, p. 319.
16)
M. E. Tate, Psalms 51-100 (WBC 20; Nashville, 1990), p. 512.
17)
Longacre, Joseph, p. 111.
18)
See Rocine, Learning Biblical Hebrew, p. 319.
 W D. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 125

Discourse Type Hebrew Clause Clause Ni

l
Hortatory uftn τ ψ mrrt ¡ιτψ la
Mainline
!
Hortatory rparrVa rrirrt' m > lb
» V IT τ τ τ - >·

Mainline i
Hortatory ,. ,\ mrñ rrtf 2a
Mainline
Hortatory ΪΏψ ΌΊΆ 2b
Mainline
Hbrtatory t -Anmw Di^"Di»n nfca 2c
Mainline
Hortatory ι trina trian n a p 3a
Mainline
Hortatory :rni«^£}j D'ôprrtea 3b
Mainline '
Embedded 7ψ] Vttì *j 4a
Expository
Mainline
Embedded TNQ %ΠΟί 4b
Expository
Mainline
Embedded iDVj^rta-1?*} wrí *qü 4c
Expository
Mainline
Embedded D ^ N trçipri "*φνή^ Ι Ό 5a
Expository
Mainline
Embedded rnfoç onju> πιπη 5b
Expository
Offline
Embedded η$Λ τ τ π ρ ί π 6a
Expository
Mainline
Embedded :t?nppa nnnsní ψ 6b
Expository
Mainline^ _ Ί

(Hortatory trav πιπάψρ ΠΙΪΤ6 n n 7a

]
Mainline
Hortatocy i :ψι Tina nirrV π π 7b
Mainline - 1
Hêrtatèiy *' j ίθψ TÍ13 Π1ΪΤΟ π π 8a
Mainline
Hortatory , nmp-^ψ 8b
Mainline.. J
126 WD. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132

(cont.)

Discourse Type Hebrew Clause Clause Number

Hortatory rrntrçrA ηκηη
IT
8c
Mairrliáfe
Hortatory unirrrnnn mrrt ηπΓίψη 9a
Mainline
Hortatory 1
V IT τ τ τ τ · i'
9b
Mainline
Hortatory ηΛη n o « 10a
<-
Mainline^
Embedded i?i? niñ; 10b
Expository
Offline
Embedded ^nn ri?P"1« 10c
Expository
Offline
Embedded trtarrtn lOd
Expository
Offline
Hortatory ronton cràîi ρ* 10e
Mainline I τ .

Hortatory trgtfn mnw lia

Mainline
Hortatory p g n b}n) 11b
Mainline
Hortatory :i*6m Djrí DÎTV lie
Mainline
Hortatory iantítortni ntg ήφ? 12a
Mainline
Hortatory πί/ρ \ϊφ riir-^ç-Vn ünf m 12b-13a
Mainline j
Embedded tárp 13b
Expository
Mainline
Embedded ρκπΌοιΛΊςρη 13c
Expository
Mainline
Hortatory ¡rran tarrea«^ 13d
Mainline
Hortatory :in}íD«n trôîrf 13e
Mainline
 W D. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 127

Of the thirty-five clauses identified in Psalm 96, twenty-three can be labeled

as some form of hortatory discourse. As indicated above, imperatives and
other volitional forms constitute the mainline in hortatory discourse. In Psalm
96, in all but one case, the clause begins with either an imperative or some
form of jussive. In the first three verses, the psalm opens with a series of six
imperatives, with a seventh clause (3b) appearing with an elided imperative.
The psalmist exhorts the people to sing (3x), bless, declare, and recount. Not
only does each clause contain an imperative, suggesting hortatory discourse,
but the imperative is clause-initial, indicating a mainline form of hortatory
discourse.
The poem shifts, however, in clause 4a with the use of the particle ^. Not
only does the particle signal a subordinate clause, but equally so, it operates as
a discourse switch cue. The presence of a verbless clause in verse 4a indicates
that the discourse has switched from hortatory to embedded expository dis­
course. Using slightly different nomenclature, Floor classifies the particle as a
"connective", and suggests that although rare in poetry, such connectives are
"markers signaling a thematic shift and are discourse devices indicating some
discontinuity. The discontinuity is a new development of the theme, or a rea­
son or result of some development".19 Whereas the opening three verses call
the people to a particular set of actions, the subsequent embedded expository
discourse offers a rationale for such action.

For great is the LORD,

And greatly to be praised
He is feared above all gods.

Verse 5 contains the same construction—the particle ^ plus a verbless clause.

Again, using Floor s terminology, the particle serves as a connective providing
additional development of the previous theme. 20 Hence, the particle does
more than simply suggest the presence of a subordinate clause. Rather, the
presence of the particle signals a discourse shift—a shift that figures promi­
nently in the overall rhetorical strategy of the psalm itself.
In clause 5b, the psalmist deviates from the word order of the previous three
clauses. The clause reads TWO WON) m m . Prior to this clause, the discourse
τ τ · - τ τ '

19)
Floor, "Poetic Fronting", p. 53.
20)
The parallel construction bears out Niccacci s observation that Hebrew poetry is best under­
stood as "segmented communication", as opposed to the more linear nature of Hebrew narrative
("Poetic Syntax and Interpretation of Malachi", p. 59).
128 WD. Tucker, Jr. I Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132

has remained in the mainline form, i.e., verbless clauses. But with clause 5b,
the embedded expository discourse moves to an offline form. In the X + qatal
construction, not only is the subject fronted, but so too is the direct object.
The question that remains is whether such a move is an example of "free varia­
tion" and "poetic license", or is there another possible explanation? In his
analysis of fronting in poetic texts, Floor suggests, among other possibilities,
that fronting may signal a sentence focus structure. The function of such a
sentence can be to report an event that is background information to the cur­
rent "theme-line", but nevertheless, critical information in terms of providing
"explanatory information necessary for the development of the theme". 21 In
Psalm 96:4-5a, the psalmist provides a series of statements, appearing as verb­
less clauses, meant to buttress the opening hortatory discourse. The psalmist
shifts verbal construction in clause 5 b, momentarily digressing, to support the
current argument being expounded in the embedded expository discourse. Or
put more succinctly, the arguments made in clauses 4a-5a as well as 6a-6b, are
founded in part on the thematic development provided in the offline con­
struction in 5b.
The presence of the imperative in 7a suggests that the psalm has returned to
hortatory discourse. The string of 8 clauses, all with clause-initial imperatives,
solidifies not only the discourse identity of this section of the psalm, but more­
over, contributes to the overall hortatory thrust of the entire psalm. Similar to
the thrice-fold repetition of Τ ψ followed by an array of additional imperatives
in the first hortatory section, there is a thrice-fold repetition of another verb,
inj, in the second section, followed by additional imperatives, thus providing
a syntactic mirror between the two sections.
The final imperative, ΓΙΟΝ, actually serves as another discourse switch cue,
signaling a switch to a form of direct speech discourse.22 Once again, the
psalmist turns to embedded expository discourse in an effort to provide a
rationale for the exhortations above. Chief among the difficulties in approach­
ing verse 10 is the need to identify the parameters of the quotation. Both the
NRSV and the NAS understand the entire verse to be a quote, while both the
NJPS and the NIV limit the quote to the first clause, ^7D Π)Γ\\ The latter
option appears preferable for two reasons. First, the phrase appears repeatedly
as a well-defined formula in its own right throughout the Psalter (see Ps 47:1 ;

21)
Floor, "Poetic Fronting", p. 30.
22)
For an extended discussion on related matters, see Cynthia Miller, The Representation of Speech
in Biblical Hebrew Narrative: A Linguistic Analysis (HSM 55; Winona Lake, IN, 2003).
 W D. Tucker, Jr. / Vetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 129

93:1; 97:1; 99:1).23 And second, the Chroniclers use of Psalm 96 appears to
suggest such a reading. In 1 Chronicles 16, the author incorporates Psalm
96:10 into his work, but rearranges the material considerably. The Chronicler
writes in verse 30b-31 :

The world isfirmlyestablished;

It cannot be tottered.
Let the heavens rejoice and the earth be glad
And let them say among the nations,
"Yahweh reigns".

Hence, the phrase ^bù Π1ΪΤ is understood by the Chronicler as the only quota­
tion from Psalm 96; clauses 10c and lOd in Psalm 96, however, are quoted
earlier as part of an expository discourse.
As the chart above indicates, clauses 10b-10d in Psalm 96 are noted as
expository discourse. The first clause, an X + qatal construction, is an off-line
construction, with a fronted subject.24 And whether the verb ^bü is under-
stood as an active verb (i.e., "the LORD reigns"), or it is read as a stative verb
("the LORD has become king") both carry an ingressive durative sense.25 Fol-
lowing the proclamation in clause 10a, the psalmist continues the expository
discourse in clause 10c. The particle *}& is frequently translated emphatically
as "indeed", or "surely",26 but ^N also possesses a consequential nuance, sug-
gesting that the "content of one clause must be added to another, as an addi-
tional confirmation of the preceding statement".27 Perhaps the psalmist begins
the subsequent clause with *)Ν in an effort to link his own statement with the
communal confession in the previous clause. Hence, the purpose of the par­
ticle is not emphatic, but consequential. The two yiqtols employed in 10c and
lOd are best termed as "progressive non-perfectives", in the nomenclature of

23)
See the brief discussion of Psalm 96 by Rolf A. Jacobson, 'Many are Saying:' The Function of
Direct Discourse in the Psalter (JSOT Suppl. 397; Sheffield, 2004), pp. 139-140.
24)
On the use of the X + qatal form in direct discourse, see especially Niccacci, The Syntax of the
Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, pp. 44-45.
25)
See Frank-Lothar Hossfeld and Erich Zenger, Psalms 2 (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, 2005),
p. 448.
26)
Dahood cites the emphatic usage of *"!** in Ugaritic poetry, subsequently rendering the parti­
cle "surely" (Mitchell Dahood, Psalms 51-100 [Anchor Bible 17; New York, 1968], p. 340).
27)
Van der Merwe, Naudé, and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, p. 313. See also,
D. J. A. Clines, ed., The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, vol. 1 Κ (Sheffield, 1993), pp. 352-353.
130 WD. Tucker, Jr. IVetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132

Waltke and O'Connor, and as such they represent a situation that is on-going.28
The construction of all three clauses, an X + qatal followed by two yiqtols,
signals that the embedded expository discourse is off-line. The implications of
this will be considered below.
The final clause in verse 10 merits special attention. Almost without excep-
tion, the yiqtolhas been taken as an indicative: "He will judge the peoples with
equity" (NRSV). The fact that the yiqtol is clause-initial suggests otherwise. As
both Joosten and Niccacci, among others, have noted, a clause initial yiqtol
typically operates modally.29 Among the varied uses of a clause initial yiqtol is
that of a request. Having heard the claims made in the brief expository dis-
course (clauses 10b-10d), the psalmist begins the third hortatory section with
a request: "May he judge the peoples with equity". The subsequent clauses,
11 a-12a, contain clause initial yiqtoh, with one weyiqtol form, as well. These
clauses, however, function as an invitation, and appear better rendered as such:
"Let the heavens be glad" (v 1 la).
Clause 12b-13a continues the modal use of the yiqtol. Although the adverb
TN is clause initial, its presence in the preverbal field does not alter the meaning
of the yiqtol. To the contrary, the adverb introduces a clause that refers to a
logical implication of what was suggested in the prior clause or clauses.30 In
clause 10b, the community asserts Yahwehs reign, and subsequent to that, all
of creation, psalmist included, enjoins in rejoicing. As Tate has observed, the
rejoicing of the trees in a theophanic context is a traditional, if not central,
feature of such texts (Ezek 17:22-24; 31:2-18; Is 10:33-34; 2 Sam 5:22-24;
Is 55:12).31 Thus the announcement of the reign of Yahweh, followed by
the acclamations of creation, culminates in a not so subtle theophanic allu-
sion. Such an allusion is made explicit by the two subsequent clauses that
appear in 13b-c.
In clauses 13b-c, the particle *? appears, serving as a discourse switch cue,
alerting the reader to a shift in the psalm. The psalmist has shifted briefly from
hortatory discourse to embedded expository discourse. The two causal clauses
in fact offer additional information to support the claim made in 12b-13a.

28)
B. Waltke and M. O'Connor, Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax (Winona Lake, IL,
1990), pp. 504-505.
29)
J. Joosten, "The Indicative System of the Biblical Hebrew Verb", in E. van Wolde (ed.), Nar-
rative Syntax of the Hebrew Bible (Leiden, 2002), pp. 57-58, and Niccacci, The Syntax of the Verb
in Classical Hebrew Prose, p. 79.
30)
van der Merwe, Naudé, and Kroeze, A Biblical Hebrew Reference Grammar, p. 295.
31)
Tate, Psalms 51-100, p. 511, n. 12a.
 WD. Tucker, Jr. IVetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-132 131

Clause 13d returns to a clause-initial yiqtol. Nearly all translations, however,

take the yiqtol as indicative: "He will judge the world with righteousness". As
noted above, clause-initial yiqtols can be used modally, and hence express the
wish or desire of the speaker. Rendered accordingly, the clause would read,
"May he judge the world with righteousness". Thus, following the eschato-
logical allusion made in clauses 12b-13c, the psalmist concludes the psalm
with a final exclamation of desire: "May he judge the world with righteousness
and the peoples with equity".

Conclusion
At the beginning of the paper, I questioned whether hortatory discourse in
poetry parallels the expected constructions found when embedded within
larger narratives. The brief analysis above suggests that Psalm 96 does indeed
exhibit characteristics of hortatory speech found in the direct discourse sec-
tions of narrative texts. The point is not to suggest that all psalms maintain
such well-defined syntactic constraints, rather only to suggest that perhaps we
have too readily dismissed expected syntactic constraints due to the complex-
ity of Hebrew poetry.32
Such an approach to Hebrew poetry also has semantic, as well as linguistic
implications. As Longacre has suggested, "a well-formed discourse is going
somewhere".33 An analysis of the clauses and the discourses to which they
belong, as provided above, may suggest something about where this "well
formed discourse is going". This psalm has routinely been classified as a Yah-
weh malak psalm, based primarily on the fact that such an assertion is made in
clause 10b, coupled with the fact that surrounding psalms reflect a similar
theme. Such a classification is based primarily on semantic grounds. The anal-
ysis above supports the same claim, but suggests that such a claim is verified
linguistically. Longacre observes that the peak of a discourse may be termed a
"zone of turbulence".34 The clauses that comprise the peak of a discourse are
often those most removed from the mainline of the discourse. Or to be more
concrete, the poet speaks in one form of discourse (hortatory), but at the point
of emphasis, he shifts to a different form of discourse. To make the statement

32)
M. O'Connor (Hebrew Verse Syntax [Winona Lake, 1997]) has most forcefully argued for
proper attention to the syntactical constraints of poetry.
33)
The Grammar of Discourse, p. 37.
34)
The Grammar of Discourse, p. 3.
132 WD. Tucker, Jr. IVetus Testamentum 61 (2011) 119-1È2

even more emphatic, the poet moves the language to an off-line form of the
embedded discourse. In essence, the narrative flow comes to a halt, focusing
on these three off-line clauses. Somewhat counter intuitively, the off-line forms
are not less important as a result of their form, but are in fact the peak of the
entire psalm. Thus the psalm is not a Yahweh mahk psalm merely because it
includes such a phrase, rather it is a Yahweh malak psalm because it has been
constructed linguistically to make such an announcement the focal point of
the entire psalm.
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.