PsALM 73 As rInG COMPOsITIOn 25 tinually with you”) that begins the verse is also a verbless clause, here involving an adverb plus a suffixed preposition. Again, in the absence of a finite verb, the subject must be overtly stated. Given the fact that linguistic features that reflect a free choice out of numerous options provide a far more reliable indication of conscious design than con- structions that are rule-bound, the obligatory nature of the latter there- fore renders their rhetorical significance somewhat uncertain 31. In contrast, the two ynaw in v. 2 and v. 28 are both grammatically redundant nominative absolutes, the function of which seems to be primarily emphatic as they draw attention to the contrast with the im- mediately preceding clause. In both cases, since the first person refer- ence is already implied in the pronominal suffixes in ylgr (“my feet”) in v. 2 and yl (“for me”) in v. 28, the two ynaw (“as for me”) can theo- retically be excised from the text without altering the overall sense. Given that both ynaw in v. 2 and v. 28 are involved in the same highly marked syntactic construction and function identically in their respec- tive contexts, they very likely represent the psalmist’s conscious effort to establish a rhetorical link. If so, then to the extent that the disjunc- tive ynaw in v. 28 is generally viewed not as signalling a break but as part of the same rhetorical unit that begins in v. 27, the syntactically identical ynaw in v. 2 should also be similarly regarded. This would pro- vide support for taking v. 2 together with v. 1 as part of the psalm’s in- troduction, so that the inclusio that frames the two sections is indicated not only by the repetition of bwj in v. 1 and v. 28, but also by the re- currence of the two grammatically redundant but functionally identical uses of ynaw in v. 2 and v. 28 32. But even if v. 2 is taken as part of the psalm’s introduction, the question remains as to where this introductory section ends. For even among those who take v. 2 as part of the introduction, opinion is still divided between those who see a break at the end of v. 2 and those who see a break occurring only at the end of v. 3. The former argue that content-wise vv. 3-12 is clearly united by a focus on the apparent prosperity of the wicked 33. In addition, it has also been argued that personal pronoun in v. 22 is likely conjunctive rather than disjunctive since it con- tinues the psalmist’s series of introspective self-disclosures that begins in v. 21. 31 That is not to say that rule-bound constructions can never be rhetorically significant. The issue is how to interpret an obligatory feature: is it present simply because it has to be, or is it imbued with rhetorical significance by the hands of a skilful author? 32 That ynaw is part of the inclusio is also noted by CLIFFOrD, Psalms 73–150, 16. 33 WeIser, Psalms, 508; T.L. sMITh “A Crisis in Faith: An exegesis of Psalm 73”,