Disclaimer: I am not a guru on Hebrew Poetry.
Parsing Psa 19:3(4)
אֵֽין־אֹ֭מֶר וְאֵ֣ין דְּבָרִ֑ים בְּ֝לִ֗י נִשְׁמָ֥ע קוֹלָֽם׃
אין־ Particle adverb nothing, is not
אמר Noun common masculine singular speech
ו Particle conjunction and
אין Particle adverb nothing, is not
דברים Noun common masculine plural word, speech
בלי Particle adverb without
נשׁמע Verb nifal participle masculine singular to hear
קול Noun common masculine singular construct voice
ם Suffix third masculine plural
I went out looking for Andrei Desnitsky or John Hobbins talking about the syntax and structure of Psalm 19:3(4 BHS) and didn’t find anything by A. Desnitsky but here are some links to John Hobbins comments on Psalm 19:2 and 19:4 and his translation of Psalm 19.
Psalm 19:2: Text, Translation, and Notes
Psalm 19:4: Text, Translation, and Notes
Psa 19:3(4) What we have is three adverbs, two with nouns followed by one with a participle + noun construct + mas pl suffix . This is a simple species of parallelism. Hobbins makes the structure visible in his rendering:
John Hobbins Psalm 19:3(4)
Thereof is no speech,
thereof no words,
thereof no sound not heard.
Note in the third line that John Hobbins repeats the negative particle (adverb) with both the noun and the verb.
“their voice” קולם
Is tagged as a construct state w/Suffix third masculine plural which here functions like a genitive of possession in greek αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν.
LXX οὐκ εἰσὶν λαλιαὶ οὐδὲ λόγοι,
ὧν οὐχὶ ἀκούονται αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν·
ὧν is marked as an LXX + (plus) reading in Emanuel Tov’s MT/LXX. This means there is no equivalent word in the Hebrew text.
The use of the LXX to disambiguate Hebrew idioms has a very long history both in the English bible and in the ancient church with the Hexapla of Origen serving as an example. Translators of the Hebrew bible don’t always notify the reader when they are using the LXX. However, the ESV rendering “whose voice is not heard” is probably nothing more than an alternate rendering of the construct state + suffix “their voice is not heard” NRSV. It does not require the relative pronoun found in the LXX.
There are numerous types of parallelism in the Hebrew bible. Andrei Desnitsky has written on both Hebrew poetic parallelism and LXX translation of the same. Mostly written in Russian. Alternate source to same article
EDIT after comments:
RE:ὧν ... αὐτῶν
Conybeare & Stock Grammar of Septuagint Greek
- Hebrew Syntax of the Relative. a. One of the most salient characteristics of LXX Greek is the repetition of the pronoun after the relative, as though in English, instead of saying ‘the land which they possessed,’ we were to say habitually ‘the land which they possessed it,’ and so in all similar cases. This anomaly is due to the literal following of the Hebrew text. Now in Hebrew the relative is indeclinable. Its meaning therefore is not complete until a pronoun has been added to determine it. But the relative in Greek being declinable, the translator was forced to assign to it gender, number, and case, which rendered the addition of the pronoun after it unnecessary. Nevertheless the pronoun was retained out of regard for the sacred text.
Conybeare & Stock cite Psalm 18(19):3(4)LXX as an example. But there is no relative pronoun in the Masoretic Text. Perhaps C&S are assuming that the vorlage for the LXX had a relative pronoun. There is nothing in BHS apparatus indicating this.