³ tn Heb “derision of tongue there is no understanding.” The Niphal of לָעַג (laʿag) occurs only here. In the Qal and Hiphil the verb means “to deride, mock.” A related noun is used in 28:11.

² tn The Hebrew text has no object expressed, but one can understand a third feminine singular pronominal object and place a mappiq in the final he (ה) of the form to indicate the suffix.

³ tn The present translation understands כִּי (ki) as asseverative, but one could take it as explanatory (“for,” KJV, NASB) or temporal (“when,” NAB, NRSV). In the latter case, v. 4b would be logically connected to v. 5.

¹ tn Or perhaps, “he” (cf. KJV; NCV “the king of Babylon”). The present translation understands the referent of the pronoun (“it”) to be the “club/scepter” of the preceding line.

² tn The translation understands the prefixed verbs יִשְׂמַח (yismakh) and יְרַחֵם (y^erakhem) as preterites without vav (ו) consecutive. (See v. 11 and the note on “he stirred up.”)

² tn The meaning of this word (נַהֲלֹל, nahalol) is uncertain; some understand this as referring to another type of thorn bush. For bibliography, see HALOT 676 s.v. I *נַהֲלֹל.

² tn Heb “rests upon.” Most understand the verb as נוּחַ (nuakh, “rest”), but HALOT 685 s.v. II נחה proposes that this is a hapax legomenon which means “stand by.”

³ sn In Jewish understanding a husband should provide food and cloth to his wife. These women are so desperate as to be willing to exempt the man from some of his traditional, fundamental duties as a husband.

² tn The Niphal imperfect here is best rendered as a potential imperfect—“cannot be corrected.” The second line of the verse clarifies that even though the servant understands the words, he does not respond. It will take more.

² sn The Hebrew word translated “dullness” describes darkness or dullness of the eyes due to intoxication, perhaps “redness” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV); NIV, NCV, NLT “bloodshot eyes.” NAB understands the situation differently: “black eyes.”

⁴ tn The second half begins with הוֹכִיחַ (hokhiakh), the Hiphil infinitive construct. This parallels the imperfect tense beginning the first half; it forms a temporal or conditional clause as well, so that the main verb is “he will understand.”

¹ tn Heb “lacking of mind.” The term לֵב (lev, “mind, heart”) refers by metonymy to thinking, and by extension to discernment, wisdom, good sense. Cf. KJV, ASV “a man void of understanding”; NIV “a man lacking in judgment.”

² sn The participle מְבַקֵּשׁ (m^evaqqesh) means “seeks” in the sense of seeking to secure or procure or promote love. There can be no friendship without such understanding and discretion.

¹ tn Or “Someone who is slow to anger [has] great understanding.” The translation treats the Hebrew nominal clause as having predicate-subject word order, similar to predicate position for adjectival clauses. But the issue of basic word order is debated.

² tn Heb “the one who is discerning.” The term “discerning” describes someone who is critically perceptive and has understanding. He can be relied on to say things that are wise.

¹ tn Heb “for [it is] pleasant.” The translation assumes that it is the Lord’s “name” that is pleasant. Another option is to understand the referent of “it” as the act of praising (see Ps 147:1).

¹ tn Heb “understand.” The verb used in v. 7 is repeated here for rhetorical effect. The people referred to here claim God is ignorant of their actions, but the psalmist corrects their faulty viewpoint.

² tn Heb “though I do not know [the] numbers,” that is, the tally of God’s just and saving acts. HALOT 768 s.v. סְפֹרוֹת understands the plural noun to mean “the art of writing.”

² sn John 19:28-30 appears to understand Jesus’ experience on the cross as a fulfillment of this passage (or Ps 22:15). See the study note on the word “thirsty” in John 19:28.

¹ tn Or “for,” but Hebrew כִּי (ki) in this case would have to extend all the way back to v. 17a. Another option is to understand the particle as asseverative, “surely” (see v. 22).