Psalm 19:2: Text, Translation, and Notes

The format of this post is as follows. First the Hebrew text is given. Then a modern English translation, not my own, is quoted, chosen for its utility as a whipping boy, that is, as a negative object lesson. Then the translation I prefer is offered, followed by comment that touches on all three. 

הַשָּׁמַיִם מְסַפְּרִים

כְּבוֹד אֵל

וּמַעֲשֵׂה יָדָיו

מַגִּיד הָרָקִיעַ

The heavens are telling the glory of God;
      and the firmament proclaims his handiwork. (NRSV)

The heavens declare
     the glory of God.

The firmament shows
     his handiwork.

The verbs in Hebrew are participles. They give a timeless quality to the description. NRSV, by way of false mimicry, translates the first participle with ‘are telling.’ The English phrase, which might seem like an appropriate calque of the Hebrew, is time- and aspect-specific (present ingressive). As such it is not a faithful rendering of the Hebrew. Straight aspectless presents, capable of bearing a timeless quality in English, best translate the Hebrew participles in this context. Cf. KJV, REB, NAB, ESV, etc.

 NRSV ‘the firmament proclaims his handiwork’ strikes me as unidiomatic English. I don't want to give up ‘his handiwork,’ which goes back to the KJV if not before. It has a certain je ne sais quoi, and is understandably repeated in many modern translations. It is probably best to follow KJV and translate the verb loosely by 'show,' which I now do, after having been attracted initially by the solution offered by NAB, which has: ‘the sky proclaims its builder’s craft.’ [Assist by elf, see comment below]

As noted in a previous post, the Hebrew of Ps 19:1 instantiates a ring structure. But ring structures like this one are untranslatable.

Comments

[elf]

I like the way you translated the participle. Aside from the fact that the present ingressive doesn't correspond to the Hebrew, it feels weak, whereas the Hebrew participle is clean and forceful. I'm not sure whether that's due to tense and aspect of "are telling" or the fact that it's a compound verb.

In any case, I also like the way your translation keeps the lines short. Is that why you left out the conjunction? "And" is a good literal translation in this case, but it's clumsy somehow.

I'm not sure what you think "its makers craft" adds to the translation. "Handiwork" is certainly more literal. The NAB version is a little bit strange, since "sky," unlike "firmament," doesn't evoke something solid that can be "built." Maybe the translators were trying to compensate for choosing the more common term "sky" by alluding to the solidity evoked by raqia`.

[JohnFH]

Hi elf,

I'm glad you are finding the discussion interesting. I find your comments insightful.

The conjunction vav, a linguist might say, has no meaning whatsoever, but has a discourse function. In ancient Hebrew poetry, paired versets or lines ("lines" as I use the term) are often conjoined by vav, whereas adjacent lines or strophes are often in apposition (juxtaposed without an intervening conjunction).

Thus, in Psalm 19, the lines of the strophes (the next level in the prosodic hierarchy) equivalent to verses 2 and 3 are conjoined by vav, whereas the strophes themselves are concatenated asyndetically. With the support of the consistently enjambed lines, a rhythm is established, quickly replaced, as is typical in AHP, by a new rhythm in verses 4 and 5a, in which two (2:2):3 structures are conjoined by vav between the (2:2) and 3, with the lines themselves (the (2:2):3 structures) joined asyndetically. The rhythm is changed up again in 5b-7, followed by verses 8-10 which are consistently vav-less. And so on.

Personally, I enjoy these details to no end. For the crucial distinction between rhythm and meter, see this blog's glossary and definitions.

As you noticed, I sometimes drop the conjunction in translation. The goal is usually to mimic the overall compactness of the original. This is not without drawbacks, however. The little vav is a key player in the sound orchestration of the original, which I also wish to mimic, if only partially.

My goal with "proclaim its maker's craft" was to make the sense of the original more obvious than it is in a literal translation. Another option is to translate the verb loosely, by the idiomatic equivalent 'show,' and leave 'handiwork.' That works in English, as in, "The quilt shows Mary's handiwork." Which takes us back to the KJV.

You've helped me think this through again. The KJV most likely cannot be improved upon.

I've modified my translation accordingly.

[elf]

In ancient Hebrew poetry, paired versets or lines ("lines" as I use the term) are often conjoined by vav, whereas adjacent lines or strophes are often in apposition (juxtaposed without an intervening conjunction).

Cool! I really have to do some reading on biblical poetry.

[JohnFH]

Elf,

you've come to the right place. Have a look around.