Criswell Theological
Review 2.1 (1987) 3-17
[Copyright © 1987 by
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
THE STRUCTURE OF MALACHI:
A TEXTLINGUISTIC STUDY
E. RAY CLENDENEN
I. Introduction
Although
English versions of the prophecy of Malachi divide the
book into four chapters, and the MT divides it into
only three (4:1-6
counted as
a division into six units, referred to as oracles,l or disputations,2
followed by one or two epilogues or appendices
(usually considered
to be later additions).3 As given by O.
Eissfeldt, the units are as
follows:4
1:2-5 Yahweh's love for Jacob
1:6-2:9 Reproach of the priests
2:10-16 Condemnation of divorce
2:17-3:5 Reply
concerning divine retributions
1 W. Neil, "Malachi," IDB 3.228-32.
2 E. Pfeiffer, "Die Disputationsworte im Buche Maleachi," EvT 19 (1959)
546-68.
But
cf. H. J. Boecker, "Bemerkungen
zur formgeschichtlichen Terminologie des
Buches Maleachi," ZAW 78 (1966) 78-79, who prefers the
term "discussion speech"
(Diskussionsworte), and A. Graffy,
A Prophet Confronts His People (
Institute
Press, 1984) 15-17, 22, who demonstrates that the dialogues in Malachi have a
different structure and aim than the genre
"disputation."
3 B. Childs, Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (
tress, 1979) 495-96.
4 O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction (
1965) 441-42.
5 A few conclude this unit with 3:6. Cf.
S. R. Driver, An Introduction to the
Literature of the Old
Testament (Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1913) 356; E. Achtemeier,
Nahum-Malachi (Atlanta: John Knox,
1986) 186; E. J. Young, An Introduction to the
Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) 285; W. C. Kaiser, Jr., Malachi: God's
Unchanging Love (Grand Rapids: Baker,
1984) 87-88, 116.
4
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
3:6-12 Regarding the
tithe
3:13-21 Regarding the
day of judgment
3:23-24 Appendix: Proclamation of Elijah to
precede Yahweh
Though having an appeal on formalistic grounds,6 such an analysis
fails to appreciate and display whatever unity may
exist in the book.
C.
F. Keil attempted to indicate some unity by
recognizing only three
sections following the introduction: 1:6-2:9
accuses the priests,
16
accuses the people, and
tant and warns the ungodly
of judgment.7 E. J. Young identified only
two principal parts: chaps. 1-2 describe
chaps. 3-4 the judgment and blessing.8
While not disputing that all
these units may exist in some sense in Malachi's
discourse, I believe
that by subjecting it to a textlinguistic
analysis on the model of R. E.
Longacre, a more unified, verifiable, and
satisfying structure is pos-
sible.9
II. Discourse Classification
The first step in such an analysis is to
classify the discourse. This
has been a major emphasis of Longacre's
work, who declares that
Characteristics of individual discourses can be
neither described, pre-
dicted, nor analyzed without
resort to a classification of discourse types.
6 Each of these units begins with
questions and with what I am calling "pseudo-
dialogue," in which the author puts into
words the attitudes of the hearers and then
responds to them (except in the third unit which
begins with questions but the pseudo-
dialogue does not occur until
7 C. F. Keil, The Twelve Minor Prophets (2 vols.; reprinted, Grand Rapjds:
Eerdmans, 1949) 2.427-28.
8 Young, Introduction, 285.
9 For a historical introduction to the
fields of discourse analysis and textlinguis-
tics" cf. T. A. van Dijk,
“Introduction: Discourse Analysis as a New Cross-Discipline,"
1.1-10
and R. de Beaugrande, "Text Linguistics in
Discourse Studies," 1.41-70 both in
Handbook Discourse
Analysis
(3 vols.; ed. T. A. van Dijk;
Jonanovich, 1085). For a theoretical
introduction, cf. R. de Beaugrande and W. Dress-
ler, Introduction to Text Linguistics (London: Longman, 1981); T. A. van
Dijk, Text
and Context Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse (
Longman,
1977); G. Brown and G. Yule, Discourse
Analysis (
Press,
1983); J. E. Grimes, The Thread of Discourse (Berlin: Mouton,
1975). For an
evangelical argument on the importance of textlinguistics for exegesis, cf. J. H. Sail-
hamer, "Exegesis of the
Old Testament as a Text," A Tribute
to Gleason Archer (ed.
W. C. Kaiser, Jr. and R. F. Youngblood; Chicago:
Moody, 1986) 280-82. For the
textlinguistic model of Longacre, cf. especially R. E. Longacre,
The Grammar of
Discourse (New York: Plenum,
1983); “The discourse structure of the Flood Narra-
Clendenen: THE STRUCTURE OF
MALACHI 5
It is pointless to look in a discourse for a
feature which is not character-
istic of the type to which
that discourse belongs.
So determinative of
detail is the general design of a discourse type
that the linguist who
ignores discourse typology can only come to
grief.10
The
strength of Longacre's system of discourse typology
is its success-
ful use in analyzing texts
in dozens of contemporary and ancient
languages. He classifies discourse on the basis of
four pairs of
parameters: (1) agent vs. thematic orientation, (2)
contingent temporal
succession vs. logical succession, (3) future
orientation ("projection")
vs. present or past, and (4) the presence or
absence of tension,
manifesting itself in plot, argument, or the
overcoming of certain
obstacles.11 The first two pairs of
parameters allow a distinction of
four basic discourse types: (1) narrative--agent
orientation with con-
tingent temporal succession,
(2) procedural--thematic orientation with
contingent temporal succession, (3) behavioral--agent
orientation with
logical succession, and (4) expository--thematic
orientation with
logical succession. Each of these categories may
be further divided,
then, by means of the other parameters. A text,
however, must be
understood on at least two levels--(l) the surface
structures including
the author's choice of words and grammar and (2)
the notional (deep
or semantic) structures including the author's
purpose or intention for
the text. The classification of a discourse,
therefore, must take both
levels into consideration, since it is possible for
there to be disagree-
ment or "skewing"
between the surface and notional structures of a
discourse. For example, an author may give advice
(behavioral) in
the form of a story (narrative), or he may explain
the nature of
something (expository) by describing how it is put
together (pro-
cedural). There are a variety
of reasons for such skewing in a dis-
course. Longacre suggests
that drama (a surface structure type that is
simply an alternative way of telling a story) and
narrative are the
discourse types ranked highest in vividness, which
explains their
tive," JAAR 47 (1979) 89-133; "A Spectrum
and Profile Approach to Discourse Analy-
sis," Text
1 (1981) 337-59; "Interpreting Biblical Stories," Discourse and Literature
(3
vols.; ed. T. A. van Dijk;
Story of Divine
10 Longacre, Grammar, 1. The term
"discourse" is used in this paper to refer to
any linguistic utterance longer than a sentence
which stands as a complete unified
meaningful unit of communication, whether written
or oral, dialogue or monologue,
e.g.,
a play, a fairy tale, a sermon, a political speech, a telephone conversation, a
TV
commercial, or a recipe.
11 Ibid., 3-10.
6
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
popularity as a vehicle for encoding12
various notional structures.13 A
Sunday
morning sermon, for example, tends to be rather dull if it
contains only expository or behavioral surface
structures without some
narrative illustrations. Also, there are certain
situations in which an
attempt to affect behavior will be more
effective or more palatable if
it is mitigated, i.e., if it is made indirect by
refraining from the use of
imperatives or other command forms.14 The
prophet Nathan, for
instance, mitigates his rebuke of King David for
his sin by the use of a
story in 2 Samuel 12.
Just as there are certain characteristic
features that define an
object such as a chair (e.g., seat, back, legs), there
are also features
that define a discourse type. According to Longacre, the notional
structure of a narrative, for example, consists of
exposition, inciting
moment, developing conflict, climax, denouement, final
suspense,
and conclusion.15 A hortatory discourse
(a behavioral discourse type
with future orientation) such as the Book of
Malachi, consists of the
essential features of problem, command,
motivation, and authority.16
A
text, that is, that attempts to affect the future behavior of someone
must state what situation or behavior needs to be
affected (the prob-
lem), what action is
required or recommended (the command), why
that action is necessary (the motivation), and why
the addressee
should listen to the speaker (the authority). There is
no definite order,
however, to hortatory structures. They may be,
as they are in Malachi,
repetitive and recursive.
On the other hand, the classification of the
surface structure of a
discourse is marked most prominently by the choice
of verb forms.
The
indicative simple past, for example, is the most prominent in an
English
narrative, though we would expect the most prominent verb
forms in a hortatory discourse to be imperatives,
jussives (third person
commands), and modals such as "should"
and "ought." The book of
Malachi,
however, is offered here as an example of a book clearly
hortatory in notional structure, yet in which
there are only six com-
mand forms--two jussives and
four imperatives (except for a jussive
in a quote--1:5, and two ironic jussives 1:8, 9).
The majority of the
12 Linguists, especially sociolinguists,
often use the term "code" to describe a
language. To "encode" means to express
a particular meaning or notional structure by
a particular form or surface structure.
13 Longacre, Grammar, 10-13. Note the recent interest
in "story theology"; cf.
P.
W. Macky, "Biblical Story Theology," The Theological Educator 33 (1986) 22-32
and other articles in the same issue, and G. Fackre, The Christian
Story: A Narrative
Interpretation of Basic
Christian Doctrine (Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978).
14 R. E. Longacre,
"Exhortation and Mitigation in First John," Selected Technical
Articles Related to
Translation 9
(1983) 3.
15 Longacre, Grammar, 22.
16 Longacre,
"Exhortation," 3.
Clendenen: THE STRUCTURE OF
MALACHI 7
verbs in independent clauses (assumed to carry the
major argument)
are perfects and imperfects. Much of the book,
then, consists of
mitigated commands which serve to identify the
text as hortatory.
III. Structure
The hortatory structure, authority of speaker,
is encoded in
Malachi
by the much repeated tvxbc
hvhy rmx, “says Yahweh of
Hosts,"
alternating with hvhy
rmx in four cases and lxrWy
yhlx hvhy
rmx
“says
Yahweh the God of Israel," in one. The structure of the
book, however, may be analyzed by observing the
hortatory struc-
tures of problem, command,
motivation, resulting in three chiastic
movements or embedded discourses17 (cf.
Structural Chart which
follows)
STRUCTURAL
CHART OF MALACHI
First Movement
¶MOTIVATION:
Yahweh's Love 1:2-5
PRIESTS
EXHORTED ¶PROBLEM:
Failure to Honor Yahweh 1:6-9
TO
HONOR COMMAND: Stop Vain Offerings
YAHWEH
1:2-2:9 ¶PROBLEM: Profaning Yahweh's Name 1:11-14
¶MOTIVATION: Results of Disobedience 2:1-9
Second Movement
¶MOTIVATION: Spiritual Unity 2:10a, b
PROBLEM:
Faithlessness 2:10c-14
TO
FAITHFULNESS ¶PROBLEM: Complaints of Yahweh's
MOTlVATION:
Coming Messenger of 3:1-6
Judgment
Third Movement
¶COMMAND: Return to Yahweh with 3:7-10a
Tithes
TO
RETURN TO ¶PROBLEM: Complacency toward Serving 3:13-15
YAHWEH
3:7-4:6 God
MOTIVATION: The Coming Day
¶COMMAND: Remember the Law 4:4-6
¶=
Indicates new paragraph.
17 Longacre, Grammar, 13-14.
8
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
First Movement
It is only in view of the rest of the movement
that the first
paragraph (1:2-5) may be seen as motivation. The
thesis "I have
loved you" is stated first, and then the supporting
evidence, consisting
of an embedded paragraph18 that contrasts
Jacob and Esau. It is our
working hypothesis that the hvhy rmx clauses (including the
variants
referred to above) are used in the book to mark
prominence. In this
paragraph, the thesis is marked by this clause.
The evidence for the
thesis is framed by the author's frequently-used
literary device of
pseudo-dialogue introduced by Mtrmxv, "But you say."
The second paragraph (1:6-10) includes both the
problem and
the command elements. The problem is expressed in
the form of a
rhetorical question, "Where is my
honor/fear?" in v 6 and is marked
by an hvhy
rmx clause. We are to understand the problem, then, as
tions as the thesis, followed
again by evidence presented in a pseudo-
dialogue introduced by Mtrmxv. There are two ironic
imperatives in
this section, "Offer it to your governor"
in v 8 and "Appease the face
of God" in v 9, both followed by condemning
questions which are
also marked by hvhy
rmx clauses. Furthermore, there is a vocative, “O
Priests,"
in this section which clearly identifies the audience of the
first movement and serves to mark off the movement by
its recurrence
in the final motivation element in 2:1.
The command element, which is naturally the most
prominent
element in a hortatory discourse, occurs in the
center and, therefore,
the most prominent part of this first chiasm.19
It is actually a mitigated
18 A paragraph may be simplistically
defined as a sequence of sentences marked
off by certain grammatical features (i.e., the use
of particles, back reference, setting,
conclusion, etc.) and
exhibiting thematic unity. The sentences within a paragraph will
display certain definable logical or temporal
relations. To understand those relations it
will often be necessary to group sentences into what
Longacre calls embedded para-
graphs. Cf. R. E. Longacre,
"The Paragraph as a Grammatical Unit," Discourse and
Syntax (Syntax and Semantics
19/12; ed. Talmy Givon;
Academic, 1979) 115-34; “An
Apparatus
for the Identification of Paragraph Types," Notes on Linguistics 15 (July,
1980)
5-22. For some information on paragraph marking in biblical Hebrew, though
primarily for narrative, cf. F. I. Andersen, The Sentence in Biblical Hebrew (The
Hague:
Mouton, 1974) 64-66; and R. Buth, “An Introductory
Study of the Paragraph
Structure
of Biblical Hebrew Narrative" (M.A. thesis, The American
Land Studies, 1976).
19 There is a difference between natural
and marked prominence. The result
element of a sentence, for example, is naturally
more prominent than the reason
element, just as red is more prominent than
green. In the same way, the command
element is the most prominent element of a
hortatory discourse. In addition, every
Clendenen: THE STRUCTURE OF
MALACHI 9
command expressed by an imperfect of wish,
"O that there were
someone even among you who would close the
gates!" There is some
irony here since this is not really the behavioral
change Yahweh is
aiming for. The implication is clear that what Yahweh
desires is the
priests' honor/fear manifested in proper
sacrifices from a pure heart.
It
is interesting to note the discourse strategy of the author in reserving
direct commands until late in the discourse. The hvhy rmx clause in
this element marks the reason for the command, the
existential clause
in v 10, "I have no pleasure in you."
Its prominence, which does not
exceed that of the mitigated command, may result from
its use to
mark the turning point in the chiasm, a fact
indicated by the para-
phrase that occurs in the next clause, "and an
offering I will not be
pleased with from your hand."
The third paragraph (
element which serves to elaborate the first one.
Closure is achieved in
the paragraph by the repetition of references in vv
11, 14 to the name
of Yahweh among the nations. These clauses are
marked for promi-
nence by hvhy rmx clauses since they
serve as the thesis in a contrast
paragraph whose idea is that although Yahweh will
be feared among
the nations,
offered by a pseudo-dialogue introduced by Mtrmxv in v 13. The
result that
nent in this paragraph,
First, he is enraged, and second, he is not
pleased (v 13).
The final slot in the chiastic first movement--the
second moti-
vation element--is filled by a
rather complex paragraph (2:1-9)
introduced by htfv "and now;"
and beginning with the topicalizing
clause, "This is my decree20 for you, O
priests." The decree which
immediately follows is a conditional sentence in
which the conse-
quence of the priests'
disobedience is given, "then I will send upon
you the curse" (v 2). This must be taken as
the thesis of the paragraph,
followed by an elaboration in which Yahweh speaks
in the first of five
language has an inventory of linguistic features
by which it may mark prominence.
Either
the naturally prominent element may also be marked for prominence as in this
passage, or an element lower in natural
prominence may be raised (by a chiastic
arrangement, for example, or an hvhy rmx
clause) so
that it is equal to or almost equal
to the naturally prominent element. Cf. J. Beekman, J. Callow, and M. Kopesec,
The
Semantic Structure of
Written Communication
(
1981) 109-10, 119-20.
20 "Decree" is a better
translation of hvcm in this context than
the more customary
"commandment" since no explicit commandment is given
here; cf. Nah 1:14 for this
use. For an explanation of the linguistic feature
of topicalization, cf. Grimes, Thread of
Discourse, 337-44.
10
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW
hnh ("Behold!")
clauses (v 3) that occur in the book, each of which
gives prominence to what he is declaring about the
future.
2:3--"Behold! I am about to rebuke your
seed."
3:1--"Behold! I am sending my messenger.
. . . Behold! He is
coming."
4:1--"For behold! The day is coming. . ."
4:5--"Behold! I am sending to you Elijah
the prophet. . ."
He
then states the results of his future actions, "and you shall know
that I have sent you this decree to be my covenant
with Levi" (v 4),
followed by an elaboration upon the covenant in
an embedded para-
graph where he contrasts Levi with the contemporary
priests (vv 5-
9).
Note that both the first and last slots of the first movement contain
embedded paragraphs where a contrast is made, the
scope of the
second (contemporary priests and Levi) being more
narrow than that
of the first (the nation of
understood as motivation (1) because of the series
of grammatical
perfects in the thesis expressing the
consequences of disobedience
and (2) because of the hnh clause which
consistently in the book
signals motivation based upon the future
(occurring each time with a
participle). The clauses marked by hvhy rmx are (1) the conditional
clause in the thesis in v 2, (2) the result of
Yahweh's curse (v 4), and
(3)
the antithesis in the contrast paragraph, "But
you turned aside
from my way" (v 8). Though motivation is most
prominent in "the
paragraph, the initial condition in v 2 is
certainly a mitigated com-
mand, as is the contrast
with Levi whose faithfulness is highlighted in
vv 5-7. The dependent yk ("for") clauses which comprise v 7
contain
two modal imperfects stating what a priest should
do, "For the lips of
a priest should guard knowledge, and instruction
they should seek
from his mouth." Furthermore, there is a
reference to the problem in
the antithesis in vv 8-9, "But you turned
aside from the way." The
fact that this paragraph is so notionally
"packed," uses the prominent
hnh clause, and is so
grammatically complex, may indicate that it is
the climax, emotional
of the surface structure of the first movement.21
21 The "peak" of a discourse is
the section at which the discourse reaches the
highest level of tension or cruciality
such as generally occurs at the climax or resolution
of a narrative. It is a term that describes the
surface structures of the discourse and will
be marked by certain surface features peculiar to
the language. Longacre has compiled
an inventory, however, of the various ways
languages mark peak, especially in nar-
rative: (1) rhetorical
underlining, (2) concentration of participants, (3) heightened
vividness, (4) change of pace, (5) change of
vantage point and (6) use of special
particles or onomatopoeia. Longacre,
Grammar, 24-38; "
Turbulence,"
Beyond the Sentence: Discourse and
Sentential Form (ed. Jessica Wirth;
Analysis," 347-58.
Clendenen: THE STRUCTURE OF
MALACHI 11
The theme or "macrostructure"22
of this first movement must be
expressed in terms of the three elements of
problem, command and
motivation:
Problem: The failure of the priests to
honor/fear Yahweh ex-
hibited by their faithlessness
regarding the covenant of Levi,
particularly in their careless
attitude to the offerings.
Command: Honor Yahweh with pure offerings and
upright
service.
Motivation: Yahweh's demonstrated love for
humiliation of those who refuse to
respond.
Second Movement
The first three slots of the second movement are
all encoded in
one paragraph (
first two of which fill the motivation slot and serve
as the premise on
which the third question is based.
"Is there not one father to us all?"
"Is there not one God who created us?"
"Why do we treat faithlessly each his
brother?"
The
third question is a mitigated command for which the first two are
the motivation. It actually introduces the problem
slot, however,
since it is restated as the declaration in v 11 that
"
lessly." This charge is
explained and elaborated upon in the rest of
the problem slot (vv 10c-14), including another
pseudo-dialogue in
v 14. Closure is marked at the beginning and end
of the problem slot
by repetition of the verb dgb, "treat faithlessly." There is another
mitigated command in v 12 expressed as a curse
upon those who
marry "the daughter of a foreign god."
The beginning and end of the command slot in
marked by command forms of dgb, preceded by the waw consecutive
perfect of rmw.
So guard
yourselves in your spirit
and let him stop treating faithlessly the wife of your youth
for He hates divorce,
says Yahweh the God of
Israel,
and him (who) covers his
garment with violence,
says Yahweh of Hosts.
22 I am using the term macrostructure to
refer to the "germinal idea" or message
of the text, its "overall meaning and
plan" which exercises a selective control on what is
included and how it is presented; cf. Longacre, "A Spectrum and Profile Approach to
Discourse Analysis," 337. There may be a foregrounded or given macrostructure, as in
Gen
45:5-7; 50:20; and John 20:30-31, in addition to one that is backgrounded or
deduced; cf. van Dijk,
Text and Context, 143-48.
12
CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL
REVIEW