² tn The term means “taste; judgment.” The related verb means “to taste; to perceive,” that is, “to examine by tasting,” or examine by experiencing (e.g., Ps 34:9). Here the idea is expressed with the participle in construct, “those returners [of] good sense,” those who answer tastefully, with discretion. Cf. NIV “who (+ can NRSV) answer discreetly.”

¹ tn Most translations render the verse as a question (“Have you seen…?” so KJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman) while sometimes this construction is turned into a conditional sentence. But the Hebrew has a perfect verb form (רָאִיתָ; raʾita), expecting past time, without an interrogative or conditional marker. See the note at Prov 26:16.

¹ tn The verse begins with the direct object רִיבְךָ (riv^ekha, “your case”) followed by the imperative from the same root, רִיב (riv, “argue”). It is paralleled by the negated Piel jussive. The construction of the clauses indicates that the first colon is foundational to the second: “Argue…but do not reveal,” or better, “When you argue…do not reveal.”

² tn The verb סָבָא (savaʾ) means “to imbibe; to drink largely.” The participial construction here, סֹבְאֵי־יַיִן (sov^eʾe yayin), describes “drunkards” (cf. NLT) which is somewhat stronger than saying it refers to “people who drink too much” (cf. NIV, TEV).

¹ tn The verb פֶּן־תֶּאֱלַף (pen teʾelaf) is translated “lest you learn.” The idea is more precisely “become familiar with his ways.” The construction indicates that if one associates with such people he will become like them (cf. TEV “you might learn their habits”).

¹ tn The construction uses the verb יָרִיב (yariv) with its cognate accusative. It can mean “to strive,” but here it probably means “to argue a case, plead a case” (cf. KJV, NASB, NIV, NRSV). How the Lord will do this is not specified—either through righteous people or by direct intervention.

¹ sn This proverb, written in loose synonymous parallelism, instructs that the scorner should be removed because he causes strife. The “scorner” is לֵץ (lets), the one the book of Proverbs says cannot be changed with discipline or correction, but despises and disrupts anything that is morally or socially constructive.

¹ sn The expression translated “the human spirit” is the Hebrew term נִשְׁמַת (nishmat), a feminine noun in construct. This is the inner spiritual part of human life that was breathed in at creation (Gen 2:7) and that constitutes humans as spiritual beings with moral, intellectual, and spiritual capacities.

¹ tn The construction joins the Piel participle מְשַׁדֶּד (m^eshadded, “one who robs”) with the Hiphil imperfect יַבְרִיחַ (yavriakh, “causes to flee” = chases away). The imperfect given a progressive imperfect nuance matches the timeless description of the participle as a substantive.

⁴ tn Heb “to pass over” (so KJV, ASV); NCV, TEV “ignore.” The infinitive construct עֲבֹר (ʿavor) functions as the formal subject of the sentence. This clause provides the cause, whereas the former gave the effect—if one can pass over an offense there will be no anger.

³ tn Heb “finds good” (similar KJV, NASB); NCV “will succeed.” The MT reads לִמְצֹא (limtsoʾ), a Qal infinitive construct. The LXX (as well as the other major early versions) renders it as a future, which reflects a Vorlage of יִמְצָא (yimtsaʾ). The infinitive is used here in a modal sense, meaning “is destined to” or “is certain of” finding good in life.

² tn The idiom “lifting up the face of” (שְׂאֵת פְּנֵי, s^eʾet p^ene) means “to show partiality” in decisions (e.g., Deut 10:17; Mal 2:9); cf. CEV, NLT “to favor.” The verbal form is the Qal infinitive construct from נָשָׂא (nasaʾ), which functions as the subject of the clause.

³ tn The form is the Hiphil infinitive construct from נָכָה (nakhah, “to strike; to smite”). It may well refer to public beatings, so “flog” is used in the translation, since “strike” could refer to an individual’s action and “beat” could be taken to refer to competition.

² tn The construction אַף כִּי (ʾaf ki, “how much more!”) introduces an argument from the lesser to the greater: If all this is open before the Lord, how much more so human hearts. “Hearts” here is a metonymy of subject, meaning the motives and thoughts (cf. NCV “the thoughts of the living”).

² tn Heb “crooked of ways”; NRSV “devious in conduct.” This construct phrase features a genitive of specification: “crooked in reference to his ways.” The term “ways” is an idiom for moral conduct. The evidence that people fear the Lord is uprightness; the evidence of those who despise him is the devious ways.

¹ tn Heb “wise ones of women.” The construct phrase חַכְמוֹת נָשִׁים (khakhmot nashim) features a wholistic genitive: “wise women.” The plural functions in a distributive sense: “every wise woman.” The contrast is between wise and foolish women (e.g., Prov 7:10-23; 31:10-31).

¹ tn Heb “are to ambush blood.” The infinitive construct אֱרָב (ʾerov, “to lie in wait”) expresses the purpose of their conversations. The proverb either compares their words to an ambush (cf. NAB, NRSV “are a deadly ambush”) or states what the content of their words is about.

² tn This construction is one of the “how much more” arguments—if this be true, how much more this (arguing from the lesser to the greater). The point is that if the righteous suffer for their sins, certainly the wicked will as well.

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 two words are synonymous in general and so could be taken to express a superlative idea—the “whole world” (cf. NIV, NCV). But תֵּבֵל (tevel) also means the inhabited world, and so the construct may be interpreted as a partitive genitive.