Ancient Hebrew verse is carefully wrought
literature. Asymmetries counterpoint symmetries according to patterns designed
to delight the mind and ear. Sameness in lexis is balanced by difference in syntax.
Below the fold, the interplay of syntax and parallelism in Prov 2:1-4 is
patiently explained.
ּ
בְּנִי אִם־תִּקַּח אֲמָרָי וּמִצְוֹתַי תִּצְפֹּן אִתָּךְ
לְהַקְשִׁיב לַחָכְמָה אָזְנֶךָ תַּטֶּה לִבְּךָ לַתְּבוּנָה
בְּנִי אִם־לַבִּינָה תִקְרָא לַתְּבוּנָה תִּתֵּן קוֹלֶךָ
אִם־תְּבַקְשֶׁנָּה
כַכָּסֶף וְכַמַּטְמוֹנִים תַּחְפְּשֶׂנָּה
1 My son, if you take my words
and put my dictates in
your safekeeping,
2 inclining your ear to wisdom,
you will direct your heart
to understanding;
3 My son, if it’s knowledge you cry out for,
understanding you raise your voice for,
4 if you look for her
as for silver,
and dig for her as
for buried treasure,
Prov 2:1-2, the poem’s exordium, is a self-contained unit which
nevertheless concatenates with all that follows. Together with 2:3-4, it
constitutes the “if” part of a complex “if” – “then” sentence that concludes in
2:22.
Translations often ride roughshod over the syntax of 2:2. The infinitive
specifies the circumstances of the following verb: cf. 2:8; in reserve order,
1:5-6. The yiqtol clause in 2:2b is the “then” part of a conditional
sentence, with “then” unexpressed, as often: cf. 6:1-2.
2:3-4 renew the “if” premise which governs the entire poem. For repeated בני, cf. Prov 1:8, 10; 6:1, 3. For repeated אם, cf. Prov. 1:10-11. 2:3-4 related more
closely to 2:5 than does 2:1-2.
The syntax of 2:2 makes it a continuation and conclusion of 2:1. At the
same time, lower level syntactical features tie 2:2 and 2:3 together: the verb
+ ל + object structure repeated four times;
the אזנך-לבך-קולך sequence. The verb + direct object
structure of 2:1 is repeated in 2:4. 2:1 and 2:3 parallel each other
syntactically, but so do 2:1 and 2:4. 2:1 and 2:4 are further tied together by
the recurrence of the semantic field of “hiding away / treasure”: צפן and מטמונים. ABBA (chiasm) and ABAB (alternation) structures within lines and
across the entire unit combine to create a complex weave.
Items in parallelism typically move from simple to more complex:
תִּקְרָא > תִּתֵּן קוֹלֶךָ
אֲמָרָי > וּמִצְוֹתַי
חָכְמָה > תְּבוּנָה
בִּינָה > תְּבוּנָה
כַּכָּסֶף > וְכַמַּטְמוֹנִים
It is possible to treat אתך
in 2:1b as a reprise of בני
in 2:1a – so Dennis Pardee, Ugaritic and Hebrew Poetic Parallelism: A Trial
Cut (‘nt I and Proverbs 2 (VTSup 39; Leiden: Brill, 1988) 95. In line with
example (b) and others further on in Prov 2, such as 2:6b; 2:7b, it nonetheless
seem better to view אתך as a part of the larger recurring pattern in
which a simpler expression is followed up by and paired with a more complex
expression. The simple-to-complex rule is not iron clad, as the following
example shows:
תְּבַקְשֶׁנָּה >
תַּחְפְּשֶׂנָּה
This example is different:
לְהַקְשִׁיב
אָזְנֶךָ > תַּטֶּה לִבְּךָ
The normal move from simple to complex across half-lines does not occur.
The break with the normal pattern coincides with a switch from syntactic
parallelism to syntactic progression across half lines.
In short, repeated parallel structures reinforce a sense of simultaneity in
the opening lines of Prov 2. But the poem moves forward nevertheless because of
changeups on the syntactic level.
Comments