The introductory particle translated So is particularly important here. It is rendered in some languages as “Accordingly,” “In accordance with this,” or “Even as Boaz said he would do.”

So Boaz took Ruth home as his wife is an important transitional expression. In a sense it forms a conclusion to what has immediately preceded, since there Boaz declared that he would take Ruth as his wife. It also introduces the contents of verses 13-17, which include Ruth’s conception, the birth of the child, and the response of the women to Naomi.

In Hebrew the form of the first clause is literally “so Boaz took Ruth and she became his wife.” A literal translation of the Hebrew becomes very complex in some languages, particularly since a verb “took” might very well imply sexual relations. It is far more satisfactory to understand this verb in the sense of “take home” or “lead someone to one’s house.” It is possible to take this verb in the sense of “to marry” (Bible de Jérusalem), but if that is done, the last part of the clause, “and she became his wife,” is completely redundant. It is possible also to coalesce the two expressions into one, as “Boaz married Ruth,” and some early translators did understand the verb “take” to have this meaning. The words “and she became his wife” are lacking in Septuagint and in the Ethiopic version, very probably because the translators were aware of the tautology. The same is true for Syr: “And Boaz took Ruth as wife.” This is also the reading preferred by Haller, though he gives no arguments for his preference. However, it does seem preferable to understand the first verb as “take home” and the second expression as indicating Ruth’s specific relation to Boaz as wife. There is a further value in this translation from the standpoint of the discourse structure, in that there is thus a shift in the location of the action.

Good News Translation leaves implicit a clause which is literally in Hebrew “he went in to her.” This is a euphemism for the sexual act and is a frequently-used Hebrew expression (e.g., Gen 16.2; 30.3; 38.8; Deut 22.13; and 2 Sam 16.21). Other languages often have parallel euphemistic expressions; for example, “he came near to her,” See the discussion in J. de Waard’s “Do you use ‘clean language’?” The Bible Translator 22 (1971), pages 107-115. The sentence “and he went in to her” is also lacking in the verses mentioned in note 43. Is this an attempt to “purify” the text, or is this merely implicit information in the light of what follows? “he slept with her,” “he was joined to her,” or “he lay beside her.”

It is important to indicate clearly the causative relation in The LORD blessed her, and she became pregnant, since fertility as well as barrenness are often attributed directly to God in the Scriptures (see Gen 29.31; 30.2; etc.). Sometimes conception is spoken of in a more concrete manner; for example, “the LORD caused her to have a baby in her womb,” “the LORD enabled her to receive seed in her womb,” or “the LORD caused her to have a child.” This last translation would combine conception and birth, the latter being spoken of in the last clause of verse 13.

Quoted with permission from de Waard, Jan and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Ruth. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .