Visual Learning of Semantic Organization: A Prosodic Parse of Jonah 1

The semantic organization of a text is clearer if it is expressed visually. The structure of a text is clearer if you can track it with your eye. Most everyone will nod their heads in agreement at these statements. It follows that a visual representation of the internal divisions of a text will illuminate its semantic organization.

An example of what I mean, in both Hebrew and English, is provided below. Things grab at you in a text, even a prose text, if it is organized according to its prosodic structure. Formatted to bring out its prosodic flow, worded in English to respect that flow, you will see and hear things in Jonah 1 that you missed before. I promise.

What is prosody, anyway?

Prosody is about the fact that the sonic flow of language comes in chunks or bit-sized pieces that are strung together and organized into hierarchies. Syllables, feet, words, phrases, and utterances in a given language come in certain shapes and sizes, phonologically speaking, and not others. They are combined in certain ways and not others. At each level – syllable, word, phrase, clause, sentence – length constraints come into play. Prose no less than poetry has prosodic properties. Linguists like Elizabeth Selkirk, Bruce Hayes, and Paul Kiparsky have studied language prosody with great success. Yale professor Benjamin Harshav, an expert in the prosody of Hebrew and many other literatures, likes to ask me a question. I like what you’re doing with the prosody of ancient Hebrew poetry (in published and unpublished work, he came to similar conclusions), he says, but what about the prosody of ancient Hebrew narrative? It’s a question I continue to work on.[1]

Prose and verse have measured-out qualities. This aspect of things is known as meter. An excellent definition of meter was given by John Lotz: “the numerical regulation of certain properties of the linguistic form.”[2]

Prose and verse possesses meter in this sense. At the highest level of abstraction, all one can say is that verse generally adheres to a more strictly defined set of regularities than do other forms of speech and literature in a given language.

It is usually not difficult to distinguish prose from verse in a given literature. Verse is characterized by specific and describable stylizations of more general metrical properties observable within a given language and time frame. The stylizations which qualify as “verse” are established by convention. We normally reserve the term “meter” for the metrical properties of verse.

Here is an attempt to visually express some of the mid-levels of the sonic flow of Jonah 1, a prose text. If Hebrew is not your thing, skip over the Hebrew. But Talmida, Bob MacDonald, Tim Bulkeley, and others who love Jonah, know Hebrew, and think visually will appreciate, I think, the exercise. Spacing, lineation, and vertical alignment are used to demarcate structure and parallelisms.

וַֽיְהִי֙ דְּבַר־יְהוָ֔ה אֶל־יוֹנָ֥ה בֶן־אֲמִתַּ֖י  לֵאמֹֽר׃

 

ק֠וּם לֵ֧ךְ    אֶל־נִֽינְוֵ֛ה הָעִ֥יר הַגְּדוֹלָ֖ה

וּקְרָ֣א עָלֶ֑יהָ   כִּֽי־עָלְתָ֥ה רָעָתָ֖ם לְפָנָֽי׃

 

וַיָּ֤קָם יוֹנָה֙  לִבְרֹ֣חַ תַּרְשִׁ֔ישָׁה    מִלִּפְנֵ֖י יְהוָ֑ה

וַיֵּ֨רֶד יָפ֜וֹ   וַיִּמְצָ֥א אָנִיָּ֣ה ׀ בָּאָ֣ה תַרְשִׁ֗ישׁ  וַיִּתֵּ֨ן שְׂכָרָ֜הּ

וַיֵּ֤רֶד בָּהּ֙  לָב֤וֹא עִמָּהֶם֙ תַּרְשִׁ֔ישָׁה  מִלִּפְנֵ֖י יְהוָֽה׃

 

וַֽיהוָ֗ה הֵטִ֤יל  רֽוּחַ־גְּדוֹלָה֙ אֶל־הַיָּ֔ם

וַיְהִ֥י סַֽעַר־גָּד֖וֹל בַּיָּ֑ם  וְהָ֣אֳנִיָּ֔ה חִשְּׁבָ֖ה לְהִשָּׁבֵֽר׃

 

וַיִּֽירְא֣וּ הַמַּלָּחִ֗ים  וַֽיִּזְעֲקוּ֮ אִ֣ישׁ אֶל־אֱלֹהָיו֒

וַיָּטִ֨לוּ אֶת־הַכֵּלִ֜ים  אֲשֶׁ֤ר בָּֽאֳנִיָּה֙ אֶל־הַיָּ֔ם  לְהָקֵ֖ל מֵֽעֲלֵיהֶ֑ם

 

וְיוֹנָ֗ה יָרַד֙ אֶל־יַרְכְּתֵ֣י הַסְּפִינָ֔ה  וַיִּשְׁכַּ֖ב וַיֵּרָדַֽם׃

 

וַיִּקְרַ֤ב אֵלָיו֙  רַ֣ב הַחֹבֵ֔ל  וַיֹּ֥אמֶר ל֖וֹ

מַה־לְּךָ֣ נִרְדָּ֑ם  ק֚וּם קְרָ֣א אֶל־אֱלֹהֶ֔יךָ

אוּלַ֞י יִתְעַשֵּׁ֧ת הָאֱלֹהִ֛ים לָ֖נוּ  וְלֹ֥א נֹאבֵֽד׃

 

וַיֹּאמְר֞וּ אִ֣ישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵ֗הוּ לְכוּ֙ וְנַפִּ֣ילָה גֽוֹרָל֔וֹת

וְנֵ֣דְעָ֔ה בְּשֶׁלְּמִ֛י הָרָעָ֥ה הַזֹּ֖את לָ֑נוּ

וַיַּפִּ֙לוּ֙ גּֽוֹרָל֔וֹת  וַיִּפֹּ֥ל הַגּוֹרָ֖ל עַל־יוֹנָֽה׃ וַיֹּאמְר֣וּ אֵלָ֔יו

 

הַגִּידָה־נָּ֣א לָ֔נוּ  בַּאֲשֶׁ֛ר לְמִי הָרָעָ֥ה הַזֹּ֖את לָ֑נוּ

מַה־מְּלַאכְתְּךָ֙  וּמֵאַ֣יִן תָּב֔וֹא

מָ֣ה אַרְצֶ֔ךָ  וְאֵֽי־מִזֶּ֥ה עַ֖ם אָֽתָּה׃

 

וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֲלֵיהֶ֖ם  עִבְרִ֣י אָנֹ֑כִי

וְאֶת־יְהוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֤י הַשָּׁמַ֙יִם֙ אֲנִ֣י יָרֵ֔א

אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה אֶת־הַיָּ֖ם  וְאֶת־הַיַּבָּשָֽׁה׃

 

וַיִּֽירְא֤וּ הָֽאֲנָשִׁים֙  יִרְאָ֣ה גְדוֹלָ֔ה

וַיֹּאמְר֥וּ אֵלָ֖יו מַה־זֹּ֣את עָשִׂ֑יתָ

כִּֽי־יָדְע֣וּ הָאֲנָשִׁ֗ים כִּֽי־מִלִּפְנֵ֤י יְהוָה֙  ה֣וּא בֹרֵ֔חַ

כִּ֥י הִגִּ֖יד לָהֶֽם׃

 

וַיֹּאמְר֤וּ אֵלָיו֙

מַה־נַּ֣עֲשֶׂה לָּ֔ךְ וְיִשְׁתֹּ֥ק הַיָּ֖ם מֵֽעָלֵ֑ינוּ

כִּ֥י הַיָּ֖ם הוֹלֵ֥ךְ וְסֹעֵֽר׃

 

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם

שָׂא֙וּנִי֙ וַהֲטִילֻ֣נִי אֶל־הַיָּ֔ם  וְיִשְׁתֹּ֥ק הַיָּ֖ם מֵֽעֲלֵיכֶ֑ם

כִּ֚י יוֹדֵ֣עַ אָ֔נִי  כִּ֣י בְשֶׁלִּ֔י הַסַּ֧עַר הַגָּד֛וֹל הַזֶּ֖ה עֲלֵיכֶֽם׃

 

וַיַּחְתְּר֣וּ הָאֲנָשִׁ֗ים  לְהָשִׁ֛יב אֶל־הַיַּבָּשָׁ֖ה

וְלֹ֣א יָכֹ֑לוּ  כִּ֣י הַיָּ֔ם הוֹלֵ֥ךְ וְסֹעֵ֖ר עֲלֵיהֶֽם׃

וַיִּקְרְא֨וּ אֶל־יְהוָ֜ה  וַיֹּאמְר֗וּ

 

אָנָּ֤ה יְהוָה֙ אַל־נָ֣א נֹאבְדָ֗ה בְּנֶ֙פֶשׁ֙ הָאִ֣ישׁ הַזֶּ֔ה

וְאַל־תִּתֵּ֥ן עָלֵ֖ינוּ  דָּ֣ם נָקִ֑יא

כִּֽי־אַתָּ֣ה יְהוָ֔ה כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר חָפַ֖צְתָּ עָשִֽׂיתָ׃

 

וַיִּשְׂאוּ֙ אֶת־יוֹנָ֔ה  וַיְטִלֻ֖הוּ אֶל־הַיָּ֑ם

וַיַּעֲמֹ֥ד הַיָּ֖ם מִזַּעְפּֽוֹ׃

 

וַיִּֽירְא֧וּ הָאֲנָשִׁ֛ים  יִרְאָ֥ה גְדוֹלָ֖ה אֶת־יְהוָ֑ה

וַיִּֽזְבְּחוּ־זֶ֙בַח֙ לַֽיהוָ֔ה  וַֽיִּדְּר֖וּ נְדָרִֽים׃ 

 

On more than one occasion, I’ve babbled on about literary translation, rhetorical equivalence, and the possibility of mimicking word plays and such in translation. Here’s an attempt to do what some suggest should not even be tried. I used NLT as a base and patiently rewrote it in an attempt to DE the underlying Hebrew at the rhetorical and prosodic levels. I highlight some things that come through well in translation. Other examples apparent in Hebrew but not in English are of course left unmarked.

 

The Lord gave this message  to Jonah son of Amittai:

 

“Get up and go  to the great city of Nineveh.

Tell it off! Its wickedness stinks to high heaven.”

 

Jonah got up to go  in the opposite direction  to get away from the Lord.

He went down to Port Jaffa, found a ship heading for Tarshish,  and bought a ticket.

He got on board, heading with them to Tarshish away from the Lord.

 

The Lord, on his part, hurled a powerful wind over the sea.

A powerful storm came up, and threatened to break the ship apart.

The sailors were afraid and cried out to their gods.

They threw the cargo overboard  to lighten the ship.

 

As for Jonah, he went down into the depths of the hold, and fell fast asleep.

 

The crew captain  approached him, and told him:

“How can you possibly sleep? Get up and call out to your god!

Maybe he will pay attention,  and we not die.”

 

The crew talked it over. “Let’s cast lots

to see which of us  brought on this great evil.”

They cast lots, and the lot fell on Jonah. They told him:

 

“Tell us right now: for whatever reason has this great evil come upon us?

What is your mission? Where do you come from?

What land do you call home?  What’s your nationality?”

 

Jonah told them,  “I am a Hebrew;

the Lord God of heaven is the one I worship,

who made the sea  and the dry land.”

 

The sailors were afraid, very afraid.

They told him,  “Why did you do this?”

The men knew that he was running from the Lord,

because he told them.

 

They told him,

“What should we do to you, to stop this storm?

The sea was getting rougher all the time.

 

“Throw me into the sea,”  Jonah said,

“and the storm will stop threatening you.

I know  that this awful storm is my bad.”

 

The sailors rowed  to regain dry land,

but they were not able. The sea was too rough for them.

They called out to the Lord, Jonah’s God.

 

“How much longer, Lord? Don’t make us die  because of this man!

And don’t hold us responsible for innocent blood shed.

You, O Lord, do exactly what you please.”

 

The sailors picked Jonah up  and threw him into the sea.

The storm stopped at once!

 

The sailors were afraid, very afraid, because of the Lord.

They offered him a sacrifice and vowed to serve him.

---

[1] I provide bibliographies of these authors here.

[2] John Lotz, “Elements of Versification,” in Versification: Major Language Types (ed. William K. Wimsatt; New York: Modern Language Association / New York Univ. Press, 1972) 1-21; 2.

Comments

[Bob MacDonald]

It is like a kid's story - how could anyone have read it as if it were history?

[JohnFH]

It's a true story.

It packs into a single narrative the life experience and God-wrestlings of an entire people, the Jewish people, past, present, probably future, too.

[tim bulkeley]

As a nice example of the richness of this just look at v.2-3a (in English because I'm having difficulty pasting Hebrew:

get up and go - and he went
to Nineveh that great city - to Tarshish
to my face - from the face of YHWH

Such structured repetition is typical of storytelling.

But Bob, why call it a children's story? Perhaps because in our cultures oral "stories" are only told to children? That was surely not the case in Ancient Israel... NB. I am not arguing that we take the details of the story literally and inquire of the size of the fish's throat, merely suggesting that the qualifier "children's" is unhelpful!
֠

[Robert Holmstedt]

A "true story" -- ahh, thank you. This encapsulates in one simple phrase what I try to teach my 3rd year Hebrew students in my course "Myth and Folklore."

So often the very different issues of genre (e.g., history-writing, fiction-writing) and correspondence to reality (truth, falsehood) are confused. There are true stories and false histories.

And as one who is often engaged in reading "kid's stories" in the evening to my children, I would assert that they present more truth more often than most of the so-called "factual" writing in the daily and weekly news-rags.

The old Grimm Brothers' fairy tales (i.e., the versions not cleaned up by some editor without any background in folklore and myth) are perhaps second only to the Bible for conveying deep (and often odd) truths about life to "children" aged 3 to 83 (or even 103).

Here's to us taking stories like Jonah more seriously and ignoring much of what now passes for historiography (what I call the often incoherent sequencing of barely related facts without any connection to Truth with a capital T).

[Wayne Leman]

Yes, yes, yes!

[JohnFH]

Thanks, Rob, for chiming in. Couldn't agree more.

My four-year old goes all hush hush to the Velveteen rabbit, but also likes the rhymes best with a violent twist to them. A carver's knife that cuts off tails, and a nose that gets pecked off. Then again, her favorite song is 'color the world with Jesus' or some such, with bright and glowing tones.

The human psyche at 4 years of age: already a microcosm of what is to come.

[Bob MacDonald]

kids? well - I felt like a kid again as I read your translation - that's why I used kid as adjective - although I usually eschew adjectives (and words ending in -ly).

[Randall Buth]

Nice discussion mixing linguistics and 'art'.
Not surprisingly some would de-lineate slightly differently. Which is why a text can produce multiple READINGS, (which are oral, though can be presented visually). We do something very similar with our summer ulpan students in presenting texts (quasi-)claused. Greatly helps learners.

And YES, one picks up something differently, even above after the multihundredth+ time, e.g. your presentation with the te`amim allowed me to notice a mis-accentuation by the MT:
וְנַפִּ֣ילָה גֽוֹרָל֔וֹת

וְנֵ֣דְעָ֔ה בְּשֶׁלְּמִ֛י הָרָעָ֥ה הַזֹּ֖את לָ֑נוּ

The first zaqef is on a mini-break that is semantically more of a break than the following, while in MT rankings the second zaqef should cover the more dominant break. Cf. Is 40.3 for the classic example with 'במדבר'. (Incidentally, the zaqef gadol in 40.3 simply means a zaqef division of one word, it does not necessarily rank over the multi-word zaqef, though in this context by coming second, it does.)

[JohnFH]

Thanks, Randall, for pointing out the neumes - even Google might not give you anything on that precious term. It's really helpful to know their values relative to one another.

I briefly define neumes in my glossary and discuss their relationship to prosodic domain theory in my Lamentations paper - links in the left sidebar. It's a complex topic.

[Talmida]

I enjoyed this, John. Now I'll be looking for more examples of this as I continue my study of Jonah.

[JohnFH]

Nice of you to drop by, Talmida. I'll keep at it, then, for the book of Jonah.

I'm still thinking through how best to chunk prose and vertically align so as to lay bare prosodic structure.