Exegesis:
didaskale (cf. 4.38) ‘teacher.’
hēmin ‘for us (Jews)’ – not simply ‘for us Sadducees.’
hoti ‘that’: may be taken as introducing indirect discourse (as done by Revised Standard Version) and so translated ‘that’; it is more probable, however, that it serves here to introduce a quotation as direct discourse (represented in English by colon and quotation marks; cf. Translator’s New Testament). The passage quoted is a free rendering of Deut. 25.5f.
apothanē (cf. 5.35) ‘(if) he die.’
katalipē (cf. 10.7) ‘(if) he leave.’
kai mē aphē ‘but (if) he not leave’: kai here is adversative. The verb aphiēmi (cf. 2.5) ‘leave’ is here equivalent to kataleipō of the previous clause.
teknon (cf. 2.5) ‘child’: here used generically, ‘children,’ ‘offspring.’
hina ‘in order that’: may be taken as dependent upon egrapsen ‘he wrote … that,’ giving the content of what Moses wrote, or else simply as imperatival, hina labē ‘he must take’ (equivalent to the Septuagint volitive future lēmpsetai ‘he shall take’).
labē … tēn gunaika ‘he take … the woman’: the phrase here and in vv. 20-21 indicates marriage, and not simply sexual possession, and means ‘take a wife.’
ho adelphos autou ‘his brother,’ that is, the brother of the dead man (and not the brother of the ‘someone,’ tinos, referred to in the previous clause, in which case it would be the dead man himself, or a third, unnamed, brother: that is why instead of ‘his brother’ in the Greek text, Revised Standard Version has ‘the man’ which makes for clarity and accuracy).
exanastēsē sperma tō adelphō autou ‘raise up seed for his brother,’ ‘produce descendants for his brother’: under the regulations of Levirate marriage, the child born to the marriage of a man with his brother’s widow would be accounted the son of the dead man. It is to be noticed that this clause in Mark is not an exact transcription of the Deuteronomic Law (Deut. 25.5f.) but recalls the language of Gen. 38.8-9.
exanistēmi (only here in Mark) ‘raise up’: not in the modern sense of ‘rearing’ or ‘bringing up’ children, but with the meaning of ‘causing to rise (or, appear),’ in the sense of begetting children.
sperma (cf. 4.31) ‘seed’: here figuratively and generically for ‘children,’ ‘offspring.’
Translation:
For us should not be interpreted as an exclusive first person plural reference, as some translators have done, for though the Sadducees had a particular purpose in asking this question, as related to their interpretation of the law, certainly Jesus was included by the Sadducees in the group who were the recipients of the law of Moses.
Wrote … that if … but … the man must take … and raise up … is a very complex form of indirect discourse. In some instances it is wise to simplify the structure in accordance with the regular patterns of the receptor language, e.g. ‘wrote for us these words, If a man’s brother dies…’ or ‘wrote for us, If a man’s brother dies…,’ thus adapting the form to direct discourse.
Man’s brother must often be ‘man’s older brother,’ since so many languages make a distinction between older and younger, especially in this type of context.
Leaves a wife may be changed in perspective to read ‘his wife is alone and has no children’ or ‘leaves his widow without any children.’
The man must be translated as ‘the younger brother’ in languages in which a clear distinction between younger and older brother must be preserved. Of course, it was not absolutely necessary that the levirate relationship be between brothers of successive ages, but that would be the more normal relationship, and in this context this is obviously the order.
Must take the wife must be translated in such a way as to avoid any concept of improper relations, e.g. ‘must marry the widow’ or ‘must marry the woman.’ In most languages the technical term for ‘wife’ must be avoided, since in many societies she is no longer legally the wife of the deceased.
Raise up children is a very specialized kind of idiom which must be changed in most languages, e.g. ‘have children,’ ‘produce children.’ The use of ‘raising up seed’ (which is the literal translation of the Greek) must generally be avoided, since it is likely to be either meaningless (any meaning it might have would refer to plants) or be very vulgar, as a reference to sexual intercourse.
For his brother is neatly expressed in Cashibo-Cacataibo as ‘for the name of his brother,’ indicating that the children would bear the name of the dead brother. In the Tabasco Chontal the precise relationship must be expressed as ‘to produce children by his sister-in-law for his older brother.’
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .