inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Josh. 9:19)

Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)

The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).

For this verse, Bratcher / Newman recommend the inclusive form (including the leaders and the congregation). The Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation use the exclusive pronoun in the first part (“We have sworn” in English) and the inclusive form in the second part (“we must not touch them” in English).

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Josh. 9:20)

Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)

The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).

For this verse, both the Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation use the inclusive pronoun (including the leaders and the congregation).

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Josh. 22:19)

Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)

The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).

For this verse, both the Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation use the inclusive pronoun (including the priest, the ten chiefs and the people they are representing).

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Josh. 22:31)

Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)

The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).

For this verse, Bratcher / Newman recommend the us of the inclusive form (including the priest, the chiefs and the ones who are being addressed). The Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation, however, use the exclusive pronoun for the first occurrence (“today we know” in English) and the inclusive pronoun for the second occurrence (“is among us” in English).

Translation commentary on Joshua 2:13

The request of the previous verse is repeated and includes all the immediate members of Rahab’s family (father, mother, brothers, sisters) and their families. Verses 12-13 may be combined by relating the sign to the content of the promise in verse 13: “I beg you, swear to me by him that you will treat my family as I have treated you. Prove your faithfulness to me in this way: Let my parents and my brothers and sisters and their families live. Save us from death!”

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Joshua 4:10 - 4:11

Verses 10a finishes the account of the crossing. Everything was done just as the LORD ordered Joshua to tell the people to do, and also as “Moses had commanded Joshua” (Revised Standard Version). This reference to two sets of instructions to Joshua, the Lord’s and Moses’, is not smooth and reflects one of the “seams” in the text, according to many scholars. The Septuagint simplifies considerably by having only “until Joshua did everything that the Lord had ordered him to tell the people.” New English Bible follows the Septuagint, but the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project committee believes that the shorter reading reflects an attempt to simplify the text and should not be followed.

This is what Moses had commanded is literally “according to all that Moses had commanded Joshua” (Revised Standard Version). It may also be rendered, “Moses had already given these instructions to Joshua,” or, “Moses himself had given these same instructions to Joshua.”

As least two factors complicate the restructuring of 10a. First, there is the problem of “seams” in the text, already referred to; second, there is the series of commands (the Lord commands Joshua; Joshua commands the people; Moses commands Joshua).

It may be necessary to shift the impersonal passive structure until everything had been done to an active construction: “until the people had done everything.” The last part of the sentence may then be translated, “that the LORD, speaking through Joshua, had commanded them to do” or “that the LORD had ordered Joshua to tell them to do.”

Some translators prefer to close the paragraph at the end of verse 11, forming verses 12-14 into a separate paragraph. Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version separate the last part of verse 10 from the preceding section and join it to the following section; Bible de Jérusalem, Jerusalem Bible join the whole verse to the following section.

Good News Translation does not have a section heading at 4.10b, but one may be useful so as to break the long narrative. The difficulty is in finding a wording which is not merely a repetition of the section heading at 3.1. “The crossing completed” is satisfactory for translations where an incomplete statement is sufficient, but it is inadequate for readers who expect a complete statement in a section heading. Further complications arise because this entire passage is heavily repetitious of events beginning in 3.1. Perhaps a section heading such as “The people of Israel set up camp at Gilgal” (see verse 19) may best satisfy the needs of the reader.

The people hurried across the river may also be translated, “The people crossed the river as fast as they could.”

On the other side refers to the western shore of the Jordan River. The sentence may be translated, “When the people of Israel had crossed over to the west bank of the river.”

As soon as all the Israelites had reached the west bank, the priests with the LORD’s Covenant Box (“the priests who were carrying the LORD’s Covenant Box”) left the river and took their customary position ahead of the people. So Good News Translation went on ahead; but the Hebrew can be understood “and the Covenant Box of the LORD and the priests crossed ahead of the people,” since the same verb “to pass over” is used of the priests as of the people. This, however, is quite confusing; New English Bible consequently omits “before the people,” which makes sense. But the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project says that the second time “to cross over” is used it means “to pass by,” that is, to move up to the head of the column (so New American Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). The text may then be rendered, “When everyone had reached the other bank, the priests with the Covenant Box went over and took their place at the head of the procession.”

One must be careful not to translate went on ahead with the meaning “went on ahead and left the people behind.” It is possible to translate, following Good News Translation exegesis, “… took their place at the head of the people and led them on.”

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Joshua 6:16

Because of the way in which the story is told (see Revised Standard Version), it may appear that after the priests blew their trumpets, at the finish of the seventh march around the city (verse 16), Joshua gave the people their instructions (verses 16b-19); then the people shouted, the priests blew their trumpets, the people shouted again, and the walls fell in (verse 20). But it seems better to understand the text as New English Bible, Good News Translation have done: just before the priests blew their trumpets, Joshua gave his order; the trumpets were blown, the people shouted, and the walls fell in.A translator of the Hebrew text detects the various doublets, repetitions, and additions which are preserved in the final form of the text, and he/she is forced to decide whether or not to smooth out the text or to translate it as it is, warts and all.

The seventh time around (Hebrew “And it happened on the seventh time”) is difficult, because it contains a hidden subject and predicate. The phrase may need to be translated, “When they had gone around the city seven times….” If this shift is made, then the sentence may continue: “…, the priests got ready to blow their trumpets. So Joshua said to his men, ‘Shout! the LORD has given you the city!’ ” It may be preferable to translate the pronoun you as “us” (inclusive form), so as to indicate that Joshua and the other Israelites were also to share in the victory.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Joshua 7:24

In Good News Translation this verse consists of one rather lengthy sentence, which may need to be divided into at least two smaller units. For example, “Then Joshua and all the people of Israel took Achan and the things that he had stolen down to Trouble Valley. They also took his sons and daughters, his cattle, donkeys, and sheep, his tent, and everything else he owned.”It should be noticed that in verse 24 the silver, the cloak, and the gold bar are among the objects taken to Trouble Valley to be destroyed; but 6.19 specifies that all silver and gold was to be placed in the Lord’s treasury (see also 6.24). The Septuagint omits “the silver, the cloak, the bar of gold,” which may have been added to the original Hebrew text; see Bright.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .