like קולי אקרא, Hitzig and Hupfeld regard קולי as the narrower subject-notion beside the more general one (as Psa 44:3; Psa 69:11; 83:19): my voice - I cried; but the position of the words is not favourable to this in the passage before us and in Psa 17:10; Psa 27:7; Psa 57:5; Psa 66:17; Psa 142:2, Isa 36:9, though it may be in Psa 69:11; Psa 108:2. According to Ew. §281, c, קולי is an accusative of more precise definition, as without doubt in Isa 10:30 cf. Psa 60:7; Psa 17:13.; the cry is thereby described as a loud cry.[1]
To this cry, as ויּענני as being a pure mood of sequence implies, succeeds the answer, or, which better corresponds to the original meaning of ענה (comp. Arab. ‛nn, to meet, stand opposite) reply;[2] and it comes from the place whither it was directed: מהר קדשוּ. He had removed the ark from Kirjath Jeraim to Zion. He had not taken it with him when he left Jerusalem and fled before Absolom, 2Sa 15:25. He was therefore separated by a hostile power from the resting-place of the divine presence. But his prayer urged its way on to the cherubim-throne; and to the answer of Him who is enthroned there, there is no separating barrier of space or created things.
Verses 5-6
Psa 3:5-6 (Hebrew_Bible_3:6-7) That this God will protect him, His protection during the past night is now a pledge to him in the early morning. It is a violation of the rules of grammar to translate ואישׁנה: I shall go to sleep, or: I am going to sleep. The 1 pers. fut. consec. which is indicated by the ו, is fond of taking an ah of direction, which gives subjective intensity to the idea of sequence: “and thus I then fell asleep,” cf. Psa 7:5; Psa 119:55, and frequently, Gen 32:6, and more especially
- ↑ Böttcher, Collectanea pp. 166f., also adopts the view, that נפשׁי, פּי, קולי are each appositum vicarium subjecti and therefore nomin. in such passages. But 1) the fact that את never stands beside them is explained by the consideration that it is not suited to an adverbial collateral definition. And 2) that elsewhere the same notions appear as direct subjects, just as 3) that elsewhere they alternate with the verbal subject-notion in the parallel member of the verse (Psa 130:5; Pro 8:4) - these last two admit of no inference. The controverted question of the syntax is, moreover, an old one and has been treated of at length by Kimchi in his Book of Roots s. r. אוה.
- ↑ Vid., Redslob in his treatise: Die Integritat der Stelle Hos. vii. 4-10 in Frage gestellt S. 7.
