² tn The form is a Niphal participle, masculine singular. If it is modifying “understanding” it should be a feminine form. If it is to be translated, it would have to be rendered “and to acquire understanding is to be chosen more than silver” (cf. KJV, ASV, NASB). Many commentaries consider it superfluous. NIV and NCV simply have “to choose understanding rather than silver!”

³ tn The syntax of the second clause shows that there is subordination: The vav on וְיִכֹּנוּ (v^eyikkonu) coming after the imperative of the first clause expresses that this clause is the purpose or result. People should commit their works in order that the Lord may establish them. J. H. Greenstone says, “True faith relieves much anxiety and smoothens many perplexities” (Proverbs, 172).

¹ sn The Hebrew term עֶצֶב (ʿetsev, “painful toil; labor”) is first used in scripture in Gen 3:19 to describe the effects of the Fall. The point here is that people should be more afraid of idle talk than of hard labor.

³ tn The Hebrew switches to the perfect verb form to introduce the speech in the following verses. It lets us know what her message has been. It is possible that the imperfect verb in the previous verse should be understood as a past habitual, “she would call” or as a preterite (without the vav consecutive), “she called.”

³ tc The LXX supports the reading of the verb as a perfect. But at the similar construction in 9:16, the LXX reads a participle, which would be present time. The consonants are the same for both forms. It is possible that the verb should be read as a participle in both verses. The present tense could certainly fit the context.

¹ tn The verb שָׁכַנְתִּי (shakanti) is a perfect form which should normally be past or perfective. Some of this root’s perfect forms follow stative morphology (though the imperfect forms consistently use the morphology of dynamic verbs). The meanings of some verbs drift across the stative vs. dynamic boundary over time. If interpreted as a stative verb, it would be present tense.

² tc Heb “sons.” The MT reads בַבָּנִים (vabbanim) “among the sons,” perhaps meaning “young men” (cf. Song 2:3; HALOT 138, s. v. I בֵּן). Based on the Syriac, Targum, and Vulgate, perhaps the text should read בַנְבָלִים (van^evalim, “among the fools”).

⁴ tn Heb “be bold.” The verb רָהַב (rahav) means “to act stormily; to act boisterously; to act arrogantly.” The idea here is a strong one: storm against (beset, importune) your neighbor. The meaning is that he should be bold and not take no for an answer. Cf. NIV “press your plea”; TEV “beg him to release you.”

¹ tn The form הֹרֵתִיךָ (horetikha) is the Hiphil perfect with a suffix from the root יָרָה (yarah, “to guide”). This and the parallel verb should be taken as instantaneous (or performative) perfects, translated as an English present tense: The sage is now instructing or pointing the way.

⁴ tn The verb עָרְבָה (ʿar^evah) is from III עָרַב (ʿarav, “to be sweet; to be pleasing; to be pleasant”; BDB 787 s.v. III עָרַב). It should not be confused with the other five homonymic roots that are also spelled עָרַב (see BDB 786-88).

⁴ tn Heb “righteousness and justice and equity.” The three nouns that follow “instruction in prudence (or skillful living)” are adverbial accusatives of manner, describing the ways in which prudent living should be manifested: “with righteousness, justice, and equity.” The term “with” does not appear in the Hebrew text, but is implied by the syntax and inserted for clarity.

¹ tn The verb form in the Kethib (consonantal Hebrew text) appears to be a Hiphil imperfect from the root מוּט (mut, “to sway”), but the Hiphil occurs only here and in Ps 55:3, where it is preferable to read יַמְטִירוּ (yamtiru, “they rain down”). In Ps 140:10 the form יַמְטֵר (yamter, “let him rain down”) should probably be read.

¹ tc Heb “who raise themselves up against you.” The form וּבִתְקוֹמְמֶיךָ (uvitqom^emekha) should be emended to וּבְמִתְקוֹמְמֶיךָ (uv^emitqom^emekha), a Hitpolel participle (the prefixed מ [mem] of the participle is accidentally omitted in the MT, though a few medieval Hebrew mss have it).

¹ tn Heb “this has been to me.” The demonstrative “this” (1) refers back to the practices mentioned in vv. 54-55, or (2) looks forward to the statement in the second line, in which case the כִּי (ki) at the beginning of the second line should be translated “that.”

⁴ tn Heb “from the womb of dawn.” The Hebrew noun רֶחֶם (rekhem, “womb”) is probably used here metonymically for “birth.” The form מִשְׁחָר (mishkhar) occurs only here and should be emended to שַׁחַר (shakhar, “dawn”) with the מ (mem) being understood as a duplication of the mem ending the preceding word. The phrase “womb [i.e., “birth”] of dawn” refers to sunrise.

² tn The verbal form in this line appears to be an imperfect, which may be taken as customary (drawing attention to typical action in a past time frame) or as generalizing (in which case one should use the English present tense, understanding a move from narrative to present reality).

¹ tn The active participle is understood as past durative here, drawing attention to typical action in a past time frame. However, it could be taken as generalizing (in which case one should translate using the English present tense), in which case the psalmist moves from narrative to present reality. Perhaps the participial form appears because the statement is lifted from Job 12:21.

¹ tn Heb “and strength, a king, justice he loves.” The syntax of the Hebrew text is difficult here. The translation assumes that two affirmations are made about the king, the Lord (see v. 1, and Ps 98:6). The noun עֹז (ʿoz, “strength”) should probably be revocalized as the adjective עַז (ʿaz, “strong”).

³ tc The form should probably be emended to an active participle (שֹׁלְמָיו, shol^emayv) from the verbal root שָׁלַם (shalam, “be in a covenant of peace with”). Perhaps the translation “his friends” suggests too intimate a relationship. Another option is to translate, “he attacks those who made agreements with him.”

¹ tn Heb “these things you did and I was silent.” Some interpret the second clause (“and I was silent”) as a rhetorical question expecting a negative answer, “[When you do these things], should I keep silent?” (cf. NEB). See GKC 335 §112.cc.