01_van Wieringen_481-497_481-497 10/12/15 10:10 Pagina 483 483 THE “I”-FIGURE’S RELATIONS IN THE POEM IN ISA 38,10-20 483 demands special attention. The vocative occurs within a direct speech spoken by the “I”-figure, which is parallel to the “I”-figure’s direct speech in vv. 10-11. The contrast is clear: at the beginning of the poem the Lord was not addressed, but he is now. This contrast, moreover, is present in the introductions of the direct speeches as well. Whereas, at the beginning of the poem, an explicit yna is used to mark the speak- ing character, a personal pronoun is missing in the introduction of the direct speech in v. 14. The “I”-figure does not even use a verbum di- cendi, which is standard in Biblical Hebrew 4; it is a direct statement with the verb lld (“to fail”). Only the prepositional phrase ~wrml (“upwards”) indicates the direction of the communication 5. Step IV starts in v. 15, where the communication between the “I”-figure and the Lord changes drastically 6. What does this change entail? Two aspects have to be considered. Firstly, from a semantic perspective, vv. 10-14 deal with the death and the end of the “I”-figure. The expressions lwav yr[vb (“into the gates of the netherworld”, v. 10b) and hqv[ (“distress”, v. 14d) frame the first part of the poem. This perilous situation causes the “I”-figure to no longer live: his end comes halfway through his life (v. 10a, ymy ymdb) 7, and as a result he will miss the 4 See S.A. MEIER, Speaking of Speaking. Marking Direct Discourse in the Hebrew Bible (VTS 46; Leiden 1992) especially 42-57. 5 See also Isa 58,4; cf. Isa 40,26. 6 The changes between vv. 10-14 and 15-20 and the use of “ellipsis” (see below) are also arguments for the division of the poem into two units, as is common in Old Testament exegesis. Because most exegetes do not take into account that vv. 16-19 form a direct address by the Lord, a division of the second unit is often incorrectly made between vv. 15-17 and 18-20; see, among others, J.D.W. WATTS, Isaiah 34–66 (WBC 25; Waco, TX 1987) 58; M.L. BARRÉ, The Lord Has Saved Me. A Study of the Psalm of Hezekiah (Isaiah 38,9-20) (CBQMS 39; Washington, DC 2005) 24-34. J. BLENKINSOPP, Isaiah 1–39 (AB 19; New York 2000) 485, considers vv. 16-17 as the transi- tion in the poem from lamentation to thanksgiving and accordingly divides the poem into two parts: vv. 10-16 and vv. 17-20. W.A.M. BEUKEN, “The King Diseased and Healed (Isaiah 38), the King Embarrassed and Comforted (Isaiah 39): What Do These Figures Add to the King Beleaguered and Res- cued (Isaiah 36–37)?”, ETL 86 (2010) 379-391, here 421, places the main caesura between v. 15 and v. 16. A different disposition is proposed in W.A.M. BEUKEN, Isaiah (HCOT II/2; Leuven 2000) 389-390. 7 See also J. BARR, Comparative Philology and the Text of the Old Testa- ment (Oxford 1968) 259, 325.