But now: this marks a clear contrast between what David had wished would happen and what actually happened. Contrary to his hope the child had died.

The two questions in this verse are not asked in order to find information. Rather they are strong assertions. They can possibly be rendered in some languages as affirmations. The words why should I fast? may be better rendered in some languages by a statement like “there is no longer any reason for me to fast.” Can I bring him back again? may be expressed as “I cannot possibly make the baby live again.” If the rhetorical question is retained, some other ways of saying this are “Can I cause him to live again?” or “Can I do anything to make him come back to life?”

I shall go to him: the ancient Israelite notion was that everyone who died went to Sheol, the place of the dead (see the comments on 1 Sam 2.6, and compare also 2 Sam 22.6). David almost certainly had this concept in mind when he asked this question. He realized that sooner or later he would also die and go to the place of the dead, thus joining his son. Some may prefer to translate “I will follow him in death” or “I shall go someday to the place of the dead where he is now.”

He will not return to me: the negative future tense is intended to indicate the impossibility of the child’s returning to life and reinforces what has already been said. In many languages this will be more naturally expressed as “he cannot come back to me.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .