The Idea of Hebrew Poetry

[클레오]

HebrewPoetryPaper.doc

               The Idea of Hebrew Poetry

_______________

                        Old Testament History II

Professor Meyer

                                A Paper

                               Presented to

                              The Faculty of

                        The Capital Bible Seminary

________________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts in Christian Counseling and Discipleship

             ________________

by

        Hyun Jung Kim (Hannah)

              ID 701994

              Box # 120

              May. 08. 08

Hebrew Poetry was the way ancient people wrote and thought, especially theologically. The Hebrews did not write in prose, but it was something they adopted from the Egyptians. The prophets are all in poetry, not in prose as many believe it to be. Some poetries in the New Testament like “Song of Marry” and Philipians 2 are very important Hymns. The problems are most people lose track of what poetry is all about; a lot of times the Old Testament is left out; the poetry of the Bible is not taught well. The songs and psalms of the Bible were not written in quantitative meters nor do they have regular rhyme or alliterative patterns. The basic feature of biblical songs is the recurrent use of a relatively short sentence form that consists of two brief clauses. The clauses have some element in common, so that the second half seems to echo, answer, or other wise correspond to the first. Anyone who interprets Hebrew poetry must understand the parallelism. Sir Robert Lowth saw that parallelism was very important in Hebrew poetry, so he proposed three broad types of parallelism in his work De sacra poesi Hebraeorum in 1753. Terms such as synonymous, antithetic, and synthetic parallelism are common in introduction to Hebrew poetry written after the time of Lowth.

First of all, Lowth considered “Synonymous Parallelism” the most sublime. Many times we look at it seeing that the colon A is the same as colon B only in different words. “Synonymous Parallelism” consists chiefly in a certain equality, resemblance, or parallelism where the same sentiment is repeated in different, but equivalent terms.

In Isaiah 1:3 is an example given by R. K. Harrison that a donkey (B) is more stupid animal than ox (A).  The author tried to compare with donkey and Israel who do not understand God’s will. There is a sharpening of the first phrase in the second phrase. Colon B is sharper than colon A. The second statement focuses the first statement. “A” colon gets the reader in the general vicinity, but the “B” colon is where the psalmist takes the point home and this is what needs to be preached on. For example, in Psalm 23 the main point is found in the latter half of the Psalm. We do not just stop at the first half of the Psalm, but make the latter half the main point. When we do that we see that our relationship to our Savior is far better than a shepherd and sheep relationship. Another example, there is a climax as a final poetic line at the end of the “Song of Hannah” in 1Sam 2:10.

 “He will give strength to his king

 and exalt the horn of his anointed.”

In addition, Exodus 6:3 shows us a parallelism with “El Shaddai(God Almighty)” and “YHWH (the LORD)”. Moreover, the bicolon is the most fregquently occurring combination, for example:

                     It is good to give thanks, O LORD,

             to sing praises to your name, O Most High.(Psalm 92:1)

A short pause is implied at the end of “LORD” and a longer pause after “Most High”.

Second, Lowth proposed “Antithetical Parallelism” which is not confined to any particular form; for sentiments are opposed to sentiments, words to words, singulars to singulars, plurals to plurals.” For example, Prov. 27:6 includes two antithetical bicola.

“Faithful are the wounds of a friend,

but deceitful are the kissed of an enemy”. (Proverb 27:6)

We can see how to relate the clauses from “Faithful/deceitful, the wounds of friend/the kisses of an enemy”. The author tried to stress what they mean and what they look for or what they expect through the focusing.  It is very important to relate between colons and clauses. The “but” reinforces the semantic antithesis for the English reader. The concluding bicolon of Psalm1 also illustrates what Lowth would have called antithetic parallelism.

 “For the LORD knows the way of the righteous,

but the way of the wicked will perish”. (Psalm1:6)

Third, Lowth calls the third species of parallelism “Synthetic”. He defines it as syntax in which sentences answer to each other, not by the interaction of the same image or sentiment, or the opposition of their contraries, but merely by the form of construction. Lowth recognized that cola could be related even if there was no semantic parallelism. He offered Hos. 14:5-6 as an example;

             I will be as dew to Israel

He shall blossom as the lily.

And he shall strike his roots like Lebanon.

His suckers shall spread,

And his glory shall be as the olive tree,

And his smell as a cedar of Lebanon.

In these verses there is neither apparent semantic synonymity nor antithesis; rather, in Hebrew the lines are of similar length and involve other kinds of semantic development, and grammatical devices that enforce parallelism, for example, simile. Moreover, Psalm 1:2 has been cited as a Synthetic Parallelism. This is A/B=B’/A’ style.

 “But his delight is in the law of the LORD,

and in His law he meditates day and night”.

The idea of sharpeness in Hebrew poetry is the most important. For example,

“Like a thornbush in a drunkard’s hand is

 a proverb in the mouth of a fool”(Prov26:9)

“The words of the wise are like goads,

 their collected saying like firmly embedded nails” (Ecclesiastes12:11).

We can see B colon is sharper than A colon and focusing the second level.  The single poetic line is a “unit of attention” but not necessarily a “unit of sense.” Those discussing Hebrew Poetry, while certainly interested in the line, have turned to the diverse   elements that make up both units of attention and units of sense. The fact that parallelism is so central to Hebrew Poetry demands attention to the word as well as to the way words are linked. Attention to these meters is accomplished through turning to what may be termed grammatical and semantic parallelism. O’Connor’s examined word order in each poetic unit Isa. 9:6 illustrates a bicolon where each colon includes a subject, a verb, and a modifier.

                   For a child has been born for us,

                        A son given to us

By paying careful attention to the individual words that make up each of the cola, one can notice that word is missing, usually from the second colon. Nonetheless the force of that word in the first colon carries into the second colon. Deu. 32:7 exhibited morphologic parallelism:

               Ask your father, and he will inform you

                  Your elders, and they will tell you

  The imperative “ask” is not stated in the second colon; nonetheless its semantic force is presumed. Jeremiah 51:31 serves as another example of gapping. The verb “does run” carries into the second colon. Just as runners run to meet runners, so do messengers run to meet messengers;

                Runner to meet runner, does run

                  Messenger to meet messenger

  Lowth argued that the dominant feature of that literature “consists chiefly in a certain quality, resemblance, or parallelism, between the members of each period; so that in two lines things for the most part shall answer to things, and words to words, as if fitted to each other by a kind of rule or measure.

I strongly believe if someone wants to interpret Hebrew poetry he/she musts understand Robert Lowth’s lecture and the parallelism.  There are significant works since Lowth. Ugaritic text brought a lot of light in semantic poetry, and linguistic tools from Chomsky and Roman Jakobson has shed some light. The relationship between colons is very important. Kugel gives the following categories and example; meta comma (Psalm 31:24), citation (Psalm 31:22), sequence of actions (Psalm 80:8), various subordinations (Psalm 33:22), commonly paired elements establish parallelism (Psalm 42:8), Repeated elements (Psalm 22:4), each term of A paralleled in B, all of B in apposition to part of A (Pslam 12:3), AB/B’C// (Psalm 50:4), Blessed + Attribution (Pslam 28:6), A is a statement, B question (Psalm 6:5), and the idea of “Sharpness” (Proverbs 26:9). I think the most essential in Hebrew poetry is the parallelism with sharpening and focusing. Furthermore, meter and parallelism of Hebrew Poetry were integrally related. When I read the Hebrew Poetry I must focus on the line and the relationship of lines to each other, and relationships between parallelism and meter.

 References

1. Bible

2. Class notes

3. http://books.google.com

“Interpreting Hebrew Poetry” by David L. Petersen, Kent Harold Richards, Fortress Press, 1992