Symmachus uses the lexeme ἑτερολογία in his translation of Psalm 138[139]:4. The relevant passage reads as follows in the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text:

Hexaplaric Evidence for ἑτερολογία (σ' Ps 138:4a)

The Göttingen Hexapla Database, which is in its Beta version, gives the following information for Psalm 138[139]:4a:

MT

The Tiberian Masoretic Text has the noun מִלָּה, an Aramaic loanword which, in Aramaic, is roughly equivalent to the Hebrew word דָּבָר (“word”).[1] Outside of the Aramaic part of Daniel, where it occurs frequently, מִלָּה is rare in the Hebrew Bible, occurring only in poetry and mostly in the book of Job.[2] When it does occur, it usually means “things humans or deities say to others – words, message, matter.”[3] In Psalm 139:4, it refers specifically to “a single distinct meaningful element of speech or writing, used to form sentences with others – word.”[4] The idea which the verse expresses is that “Yahweh knows every word (מִלָּה) before it comes to our lips, in its entirety, i.e., in its full meaning, including the thoughts behind it.”[5] Perhaps the Hebrew poet chose to use מִלָּה instead of דָּבָר for the purpose of alliteration (see כֻּלָּה at the end of the verse).

LXX

In the Bible, the most common Greek equivalents for מִלָּה are λόγος and ῥῆμα.[6] In Psalm 138[139]:4, the Septuagint according to Rahlfs translates מִלָּה as λόγος.[7] However, most Greek manuscripts read δόλος,[8] and several important witnesses read λόγος ἄδικος (e.g., S, B, A).[9] The Verona Psalter has a mixed reading: δόλος ἄδικος.[10] The reading λόγος is only attested by Jerome, in his Hexaplaric translation (sermo) and in Epistle 106:[11]

            The reading λόγος is probably the earlier reading. Not only does it have solid support from Jerome, but it corresponds clearly to the Hebrew text (מִלָּה) and it best explains how the variant readings, λόγος ἄδικος and δόλος, might have arisen. The addition of ἄδικος can be explained as a clarifying addition based on the context. The reading δόλος, also influenced by the context, might have arisen via its graphic similarity with λόγος (ΛΟΓΟΣ vs ΔΟΛΟΣ) and/or the influence of the Sexta.

            The reason why the variant readings λόγος ἄδικος and δόλος would have made better sense in the context has to do with how the text is divided (stichometry) within the Greek tradition versus the Hebrew tradition.[12] In the MT, v. 4 concludes with כֻלָּֽהּ. The 3fs suffix on כֻלָּֽהּ (“all of it”) clearly refers back to מִלָּה (“word”) in the previous stich, and so these two stichs comprise a tight-knit unit: “Even before a word is on my tongue, O Lord, you know it completely” (NRSVue, italics added). In Greek, however, the word πάντα (“all”), which corresponds to the phrase כֻלָּֽהּ, is not the last word of the stich. Instead, the stich continues: ἰδού, κύριε, σὺ ἔγνως πάντα, τὰ ἔσχατα καὶ τὰ ἀρχαῖα. The final words, τὰἔσχατα καὶ τὰ ἀρχαῖα, correspond to אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם which, in the MT, occur at the beginning of the next line (v. 5). 

When the text is divided as it is in the Greek tradition, then the word πάντα (“all things”), rather than referring back to λόγος, points forward to τὰ ἔσχατα καὶ τὰ ἀρχαῖα with which it is in apposition (“all things: the first and the last”). Thus, v. 4a in the Greek text – ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν λόγος ἐν γλώσσῃ μου – is syntactically independent of what follows. Consequently, the word λόγος makes little sense: “you foresaw all my ways, that/because there is no word (λόγος) on my tongue.” In order to make sense, the subject of v. 4a must be some vice like “deceit” or “injustice,” which is how the readings λόγοςἄδικος and δόλος arose. Symmachus’s translation, ἑτερολογία, appears to assume the same text-division and is yet another way of solving the issue.

Symmachus

According to the Göttingen Hexapla Database (Beta), Symmachus reads ἑτερολογία. The Database has drawn this reading from Field, who presents the Hexaplaric readings for v. 4a as follows: “Ο´. λόγος ἄδικος. Alia exempl. δόλος. Ἀ. λαλιά. Σ. ἑτερολογία. Θ. δόλος. Ε´. ὁμοίως τοῖς Ο´. S´. δόλος.”[13] Field has two notes for these readings. The first note gives his source for Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion, and the Quinta: “Nobil., Vat. Chrysost. affert: Ἄλλος· ἑτερολογία. Syro-hex: ܣ. ܐܚܪܢܝܘܬ ܡܡܠܠܐ.”[14] The second note gives his source for the Sexta: “Hieron. in Epist. Ad Sun. et Fret. 82…”[15]The reference to “Vat” in the first note is a reference to the Vatican manuscript gr. 754 (= Ra 1175), and the reference to “Nobil.” is a reference to the notes of “Nobilius,” who, according to Field, used manuscripts that appear to be closely related to Vat. gr. 754.[16] Four sources, then, are relevant for recovering Symmachus’s reading: (1) Ra 1175 (Vat. gr. 754); (2) John Chrysostom; (3) Jerome’s letter to Sunnia and Fretela (Epistle 106), and (4) the Syro-Hexapla.

Manuscript Attestation and Patristic Evidence

Ra 1175

Ra 1175 (Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. gr. 754) is a 10^th century copy of the Psalms and Odes, surrounded by a marginal Catena commentary.[17] For Psalm 138:4, the Bible text reads δόλος, and the readings of Aquila, Theodotion, Symmachus, and Quinta are given in the margin:

Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. gr. 754 (Ra 1175), f. 334r

The manuscript gives the following Hexaplaric readings:

            α' (Aquila):                 λαλιά·

θ' (Theodotion):          δόλος·

σ' (Symmachus):         ἑτερολογία·

ἡ ε' (The Quinta):        ὁμοί(ως) τοῖς ō·

Chrysostom

Chrysostom’s commentary on Psalm 138:4a, according to the Göttingen preliminary edition, reads as follows (Chr.138.59–61):[18]

Chrysostom mentions the alternative translation ἑτερολογία, which he attributes to “another version” (ἄλλος). In light of the attribution in Ra 1175 and the Syro-Hexapla (see below), it is clear that “another version” in this passage refers to Symmachus.[19]

Jerome

The full quotation of Epistle 106, §82 is presented above. Jerome comments directly on “the sixth edition (sexta editio)” which alone reads dolus (= δόλος). All of the other translations, according to Jerome, either have λαλιά or λόγος. Although Jerome does not mention the reading ἑτερολογία explicitly, his testimony is not inconsistent with it. As Graves explains, “The Symmachus reading ἑτερολογία is not surprising, despite Jerome’s claim that all (other) translators (omnes interpretes) have either λαλιά or λόγος, because ἑτερολογία is related to λόγος and agrees generally with his translation against δόλος, and we have seen Jerome simplify the evidence in this manner previously.”[20] Jerome’s testimony, then, indirectly corroborates the evidence for ἑτερολογία.[21]

Syro-Hexapla

The Syro-Hexapla presents Symmachus’s reading as ܣ. ܐܚܪܢܝܘܬ ܡܡܠܠܐ. This reading appears as follows in Ceriani’s facsimile of the Syro-Hexapla:

Codex Ambrosianus (Syro-Hexapla), f. 36v

The two-word Syriac phrase ܐܚܪܢܝܘܬ ܡܡܠܠܐ (“differentness of speech”) translates the single Greek word ἑτερολογία. The word ܐܚܪܢܝܘܬ (“differentness”) corresponds to the prefix ἑτερο-, and the word ܡܡܠܠܐ (“speech”) corresponds to the λογ- element of the compound.[22]

Refined Representation of Hexaplaric Evidence (σ' Ps 138:4a)

The evidence surveyed above clearly establishes Symmachus’s reading as ἑτερολογία. The evidence also enables a provisional reconstruction of some of the other versions. A refined representation of the reading in question and its attestation looks like this:

Analysis of σ' ἑτερολογία in Ps 138:4a

The word ἑτερολογία, used by Symmachus in Psalm 138[139]:4 to translate the Hebrew word מִלָּה, is a feminine singular noun of the first declension. Elsewhere, Symmachus translates מִלָּה as λόγος (Job 16:4; 19:2; 24:25; 32:11; 35:16; 36:4), λαλιά (Job 32:14, 15; cf. Job 12:11 [Syh]), and ῥῆμα (Job 23:5).[23] In this verse, however, he uses ἑτερολογία, which appears to be a hapax legomenon in extant Greek literature. The lexica consulted analyze the word as follows:

            Although ἑτερολογία is a hapax, and although the immediate context for Symmachus’s translation has not been preserved, the meaning of the word can be inferred from its constituent parts: ἑτερο- + λογία. Compounds ending in -λογία are very common. For example, the lexicon by Liddell and Scott includes the following compounds (among others) for the letter alpha alone:

            ἀει-λογία, ἡ, continual talking

            αἰσχρο-λογία, ἡ, foul language, obscenity

            ἀκρῑβο-λογία, ἡ, exactness, precision in speech

            ἀληθινο-λογία, ἡ, speaking truth

            ἀλλοτριο-λογία, ἡ, unorthodox views

            ἀμουσο-λογία, ἡ, inelegance of language

            ἀργο-λογία, ἡ, empty talk

            ἀρτι-λογία, ἡ, ready speech

Compounds beginning with ἑτερο- are similarly common, for example:

ἑτερο-γνωμοσύνη, ἡ, difference of opinion

ἑτερο-δοξία, ἡ, a taking one thing for another, error of opinion

ἑτερο-δῠνᾰμία, ἡ, shifting of strength

ἑτερο-είδεια, ἡ, numerical diversity

ἑτερο-μετρία, ἡ, difference of metre

Given these patterns, ἑτερολογία must mean something like “different speech” (Liddell/Scott) or “different discourse” (Montanari). In the context (cf. LXX), this must mean “speech that differs from the truth” (Dimitriakos) or “speech that differs from one’s thoughts and intentions,” i.e., “insincere speech.” In the context of Psalm 138[139], the statement “there is no different speech on my tongue” would be a declaration of innocence (cf. Ps 16[17]:1–3).

            Symmachus’s interpretation of מִלָּה in a “negative sense” (Schleusner) appears to be influenced by the context, specifically by the stichometry (see above). His choice of ἑτερολογία, which simultaneously expresses a morally negative quality and belongs to the semantic domain of Speech, allows him to make sense of the text (cf. the alternative Greek translations λόγος ἄδικος and δόλος) while maintaining fidelity to the Hebrew (מִלָּה as -λογία).