Translation commentary on Zechariah 4:13

See the comments on verse 5, which is almost identical in sense, although the wording has minor differences. Translators should note that Good News Translation puts the introductory words “He asked me” before the question itself, rather than afterwards as in verse 5. Good News Translation also uses the word “answered” here, as against “replied” in verse 5. Translators should consider whether identical wording in the two verses or minor variations like those of Good News Translation will lead to better style in their own languages.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Zechariah 7:6

Like the previous verse, this one also has the form of a question, but this time a positive answer is expected. Good News Translation restructures it as a positive statement, and translators who have put a statement in verse 5 should do the same again. Contemporary English Version again keeps the form of a question, but indicates that the question expects a positive answer. Translators who used a question in verse 5 should also use a question here.

When you eat and when you drink, do you not eat for yourselves and drink for yourselves?: In some languages it may be better to express this as two separate sentences, such as “When you eat, you do it for your own pleasure. And when you drink, you do it for your own pleasure.” In other languages a single word carries the meaning “to eat and drink,” and in situations like this, there is no need to make two statements.

This verse explains and clarifies the previous one. Some hearers might have claimed that when they fasted, of course it was in honor of the LORD. So, in order to challenge this, the prophet adds the second question. It was obvious that when people ate and drank, they themselves got pleasure from it, even if the occasion was a religious one. The prophet suggests by this that just as the people ate and drank selfishly, so they fasted selfishly, whatever motives they might profess. They showed more concern for the ritual of fasting than for the meaning behind the fasts. They should have repented for their wrong actions which had led to the events that the fasts commemorated. In some languages the argument may be clearer if stated the opposite way, combining the second part of verse 5 with verse 6 as follows:

• When you eat and drink, you do it for your own benefit. In the same way, when you fasted and mourned these seventy years in the fifth and seventh months, you did it for your own benefit. You did not really honor me.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Zechariah 9:2

This verse continues to list places that are under the LORD’s eye: Hamath, Tyre, and Sidon. All three are to the north of Israel, though not as far north as Hadrach and Damascus.

Hamath also, which borders thereon: The province of Hamath shared a common border with both Hadrach and Damascus (Chary). Many modern versions mention one or the other: “Hadrach” (Good News Translation), “Damascus” (Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).

Tyre and Sidon, though they are very wise: There is a minor problem in that the verb translated are … wise is singular in form, whereas it describes two cities, Tyre and Sidon, and a plural would be expected. However, these two names are, like Sodom and Gomorrah, linked together so often (for instance in Jer 47.4; Joel 3.4) that many scholars are happy to regard them as a unit for which a singular verb is appropriate. This seems to have been the view of ancient translators, as both the Septuagint and the Vulgate translate with a plural verb.

There is a problem in interpreting the clause that Revised Standard Version renders though they are very wise. The conjunction translated though can carry this meaning, but more often it means “because, for.” The meaning though fits with the Revised Standard Version interpretation of verse 1 in which “the word of the LORD is against” the places named; it is seen as against Tyre and Sidon despite their wisdom. But if we reject the interpretation “against” in verse 1, then we should also reject the interpretation though in verse 2. If the translator interprets verse 1 to mean that people look to the LORD, then in verse 2 it makes good sense to say that Tyre and Sidon do so “because they are very wise.” If on the other hand, the translator interprets verse 1 to mean that the LORD has his eye on people everywhere, then verse 2 makes the best sense when understood to say that he has his eye on Tyre and Sidon “with all their skill” (Good News Translation), “whose skill is great” (Bible en français courant), or “where the people are so clever” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch; similarly Contemporary English Version). Lamarche has proposed linking this final clause of verse 2 with what follows in verse 3, but this suggestion creates an awkward structure and has not been widely accepted. Translation models for the whole verse are:

• He has his eye on Hamath which borders Damascus [or, Hadrach], and on Tyre and Sidon with all their great wisdom.

• The neighboring state of Hamath will also look to the LORD, together with Tyre and Sidon, because their people are so wise.

The first possibility is somewhat preferable, but the translator must make a choice of interpretation which is consistent with the choice made in verse 1.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Zechariah 11:6

For I will no longer have pity on the inhabitants of this land: This clause gives the reason for the command to the prophet to “Become shepherd of the flock” in verse 4. The prophet’s mission is not to save the flock, but to supervise them until the inevitable day of their slaughter. We might compare the task assigned to Jeremiah at an earlier period (Jer 1.13-19). The “flock” of verse 4 is now identified as the inhabitants of this land, that is to say the province of Judah within the Persian empire. Both Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version are too general with “anyone on earth” and “the people of this earth” respectively.

Says the LORD: The Hebrew formula neʾum YHWH, rendered says the LORD, has several functions as a discourse marker. In this case it can confidently be interpreted as marking the end of the first half of the paragraph that constitutes the direct speech of the LORD (compare Hag 2.4). This is because it is immediately followed by the Hebrew particle hinneh (Lo), which here, as often elsewhere, functions as the marker of the beginning of a new discourse unit.

Lo, I will cause men to fall each into the hand of his shepherd: Revised Standard Version translates the particle hinneh by Lo, which is very old-fashioned English. There is no equivalent term in today’s English, and so most modern versions simply omit it (see the discussion on “behold” in 1.8). The Hebrew word functions more as a discourse marker (or perhaps as a focus marker within the clause) than as an element that carries meaning within the sentence, and such discourse information is conveyed in other ways in English. New American Bible attempts to be equivalent by saying, “Yes, I will deliver…,” and Meyers & Meyers render “I will indeed deliver….” These are both acceptable possibilities in English, but translators will have to decide whether or not there is any suitable equivalent in their own languages. Men in this context does not exclude women, so Good News Translation renders “all the people” and New Revised Standard Version “every one.” To fall … into the hand of is a Hebrew idiom. Its meaning is well expressed in modern English as “put … in the power of” (New English Bible, Good News Translation). New International Version and Jerusalem Bible make a commendable attempt to translate in a way that is both clear, and comparable with the Hebrew idiom by saying “hand … over.” New Jerusalem Bible has dropped this expression in favor of one that catches more of the menacing overtones of the context: “put … into the clutches of.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh also catches the emotive impact well with “place … at the mercy of.” The various renderings cited illustrate the variety of possible approaches, and may stimulate translators to consider (both here and elsewhere) the range of options available in their own languages.

For his shepherd the traditional Hebrew text reads “his neighbour” (King James Version, Revised Version), and the Revised Standard Version rendering depends on reading the consonants of the Hebrew text with different vowels, though there is no footnote to acknowledge the change. This change is not made by New Revised Standard Version, which has “each into the hand of a neighbor.” Among modern versions only Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, and Revised English Bible make the change. Those who do so interpret his shepherd in a figurative sense as a ruler, and thus parallel with his king in the next phrase. This makes the two phrases say essentially the same thing, and is not very convincing. Good News Translation, while not using the word “shepherd,” accepts the proposed change in the Hebrew text and renders both shepherd and king by the single expression “their rulers.” All other modern versions translate shepherd as “neighbor” or something equivalent like “hand over every man to the next” (Jerusalem Bible), “place every man at the mercy of every other man” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), or “turn neighbor against neighbor” (Contemporary English Version). The Hebrew expression underlying this phrase is a common one, and indeed a feminine form of it occurs in verse 9. There is no need to depart from the traditional Hebrew text (“his neighbor”), and we advise translators not to do so. The question is not even discussed in Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament.

His king: Since there was no king in Judah after the exile, the word here probably stands for rulers in general (compare Good News Translation). The sentence as a whole is describing a situation of social anarchy, with people being oppressed both by their rulers and by their fellow citizens. It is impossible to identify any historical situation that fits the description in detail. An alternative translation model for these two clauses is: “I will turn people against each other, and put them in the power of their ruler.”

And they shall crush the earth: The subject of the verb (they) may be the ruler from the previous clause, though it could well be a more general reference to all the parties in the conflict. Crush is a metaphorical term. It is expressed more clearly in New Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation as “devastate.” The Hebrew word the earth may mean either the earth (Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version) in the sense of “the [whole] world” (Jerusalem Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), or “the land” (New International Version, Revised English Bible), “the country” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Jerusalem Bible), that is to say, the Holy Land. There are numerous places in the Old Testament where it is not certain which is intended, but in the present context, it seems more likely that the word has the same sense as it had earlier in this verse, and that the land of Judah is intended. Translators are advised to translate accordingly.

I will deliver none from their hand: Every person will suffer from the oppressive behavior of others. Deliver is expressed in modern terms as “save” (Good News Translation), or better “rescue” (New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Jerusalem Bible, Beck, Contemporary English Version). From their hand means “from their power” (Good News Translation), or more idiomatically “from their clutches” (New Jerusalem Bible).

An alternative translation model for this verse is:

• I will no longer have pity on the people of Judah. I will turn the people against each other and put them in the power of their rulers. These rulers will ruin the land [of Judah], and I will not rescue anyone from their power.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Zechariah 13:9

And I will put this third into the fire: This third is of course the third of the people who survive and remain in the land. At first sight into the fire may seem to be another kind of punishment, but the next two clauses indicate that it is not punishment, but rather testing. Good News Translation makes this clear with “I will test the third that survives.” The fire is metaphorical, and the picture is drawn from the technology of smelting (that is, refining) metal.

And refine them as one refines silver, and test them as gold is tested: Precious metals like silver and gold are melted so that when the metal is in liquid form, the impurities can be removed. In this way the materials are tested and the metal brought to a higher level of purity. New English Bible and Revised English Bible use the technical terminology “assay them as gold is assayed.” Refine is also a technical term, and some versions replace it with “purify,” which is not only simpler language but also hints at the application of the metaphor to the people of God (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version; similarly New Living Translation, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). The metaphor of refining metals is found a number of times in the Old Testament (see for instance Psa 66.10; Pro 17.3; Isa 1.25; Isa 48.10; Jer 9.7; Ezek 22.17-22; Mal 3.3; see also Wisdom of Solomon 3.5-6).

A possible alternative model for these first three lines is the following:

• Then I will purify the third that survives and test them just as gold and silver are tested and purified.

In languages that do not use the passive, translators may say:

• Then I will purify those who survive and test them just as metalworkers test and purify gold and silver.

The result of this purifying and testing is stated in the rest of the verse. It takes the form of two pairs of clauses, each pair describing a reciprocal relationship between the people and the LORD.

They will call on my name, and I will answer them: They translates a Hebrew pronoun that is singular, referring back to the “one third” group. This is clearly collective in sense, and so will be translated as plural in many languages. Most English versions use a plural, the exception being New Jerusalem Bible (compare Bible de Jérusalem, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). The expression call on my name means “pray to me,” and is so translated in Good News Translation (also Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Compare 7.13.

I will say, ‘They are my people’; and they will say, ‘The LORD is my God’: I will say is actually a perfect verb form in Hebrew, but most translators follow the ancient versions in treating it as a future, which seems to fit the context better than a past. The difference in Hebrew is only one letter. Revised Standard Version is somewhat inconsistent in translating the Hebrew singular pronouns as They … they … yet retaining the singular possessive my God. New Revised Standard Version smooths this out by changing to “our God” (so also New English Bible, New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Good News Translation puts the two quotations into indirect speech, but this loses the vigor of the Hebrew. In languages where direct quotations are acceptable style, they are preferable here.

The language of the declarations ‘They are my people’ … ‘The LORD is my God’ is the traditional language for expressing the covenant relationship (compare Deut 26.17-18; Jer 7.23; Jer 24.7; Jer 30.22; Jer 31.33; Jer 32.38; Ezek 11.20; Ezek 14.11; Ezek 36.28; Ezek 37.23, 27; Zech 8.8). Its use here indicates that the prophet has in view a renewal of the covenant relationship between the LORD and his people as a result of the time of testing and purification. Translators should translate the traditional expressions here in the same way as they have been translated elsewhere.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Malachi 1:13

‘What a weariness this is,’ you say: The Hebrew text begins with the word translated you say. In verses 2, 6, and 7, the same word is used to introduce an Objection element in the dispute. In these places (and also in 2.14, 17; 3.7, 8, 13) the word introduces a question that constitutes the Objection. Here however, what follows is not a question, and so it seems better to treat this as a continuation of the prophet’s Response to the previous Objection in verse 7. (The word has a similar function again in 3.14). Perhaps Revised Standard Version intends to suggest this interpretation by placing the content of the direct quotation before the verb of speaking which introduces it.

What a weariness this is translates a somewhat colloquial expression in Hebrew. The priests are showing their lack of interest in their priestly duties referred to as this. There are various idiomatic ways in which this could be said in English: “What a burden!” (New American Bible), “Oh, what a bother!” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), and “How tiresome it all is!” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible; similarly Revised English Bible). Other possibilities include “What a nuisance all this is!” and “What a bore this job is!” The Good News Translation rendering “How tired we are of all this!” could be expressed more idiomatically as “We’re fed up with all this!” In many languages there will be a natural way of making this feeling clear.

You sniff at me incorporates one of the traditional Jewish scribal alterations to the Masoretic Text, which has “at it” instead of at me, as stated in the Revised Standard Version footnote. The alteration is accepted by a majority of modern scholars and translators, including Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, New Jerusalem Bible, Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, Bible en français courant, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch. Despite the wide acceptance of the alteration, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project reject it. The Masoretic Text “at it” would mean “at the priestly duties” rather than at the LORD personally. (Compare “at his commands” in New Living Translation.) The overall sense is not greatly different, because a wrong attitude toward the duties given by God to the priests is essentially the same thing as a wrong attitude toward God himself. Whichever form of the text translators follow, they should mention the other in a footnote. They should also be aware that the alternatives are both ancient traditions, and neither is a modern scholarly conjecture.

The verb translated sniff at indicates a gesture of disrespect. Several versions try to make this clearer by adding an adverb, such as “disdainfully” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible), “contemptuously” (New International Version), or “scornfully” (Revised English Bible). Good News Translation uses the idiom “you turn up your nose at me” (similarly New Living Translation). This is very natural in English, but probably cannot be used widely as a translation model. In other cultures there may be some other gesture associated with the nose which indicates disrespect, and it may be possible to use it here. For instance, Biblen: Det Gamle og Det Nye Testamente has “you blow on it,” and Contemporary English Version has the more general expression “you even make vulgar signs at me.” If there is no such possibility, then it may be necessary to give the meaning without describing the action; for instance, “you have only scorn for me” (Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente) or “you treat me with scorn.” It is also possible that the Hebrew word may mean “you provoke me to anger,” and this option is taken by Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch.

Says the LORD of hosts: See the notes on verse 8. Here the formula probably reinforces the impact of the previous statement.

You bring what has been taken by violence or is lame or sick: The prophet is speaking of sacrificial animals, as in verse 8. The verb translated taken by violence is ambiguous. Many scholars think it refers to animals that had been mauled by predators such as wolves, but had been rescued before they died. Such animals were not to be eaten, but were to be used to feed the dogs according to Exo 22.31. Thus they were certainly not to be used for sacrifices to the LORD. It would be in keeping with the casual attitude of the priests to accept such animals as sacrifices. This view is represented in New International Version “injured” (also in Contemporary English Version footnote) and New English Bible/Revised English Bible “mutilated.”

However, the majority of translators follow the ancient Greek and Latin versions in taking the verb to mean “stolen.” In support of this view, Verhoef notes that the Hebrew word has no definite article while the words for lame and sick do. He argues that this is because unlike the other two words it introduces a new category of unsuitable animal, mentioned here for the first time. The lame and the sick were mentioned above in verse 8 (where the Hebrew words do not have the article), whereas this is the first mention of stolen animals. If the word referred to injured animals, we would expect to find the article used here. Although the Law never actually prohibits the offering of stolen animals as sacrifices, it is clear that they could not be acceptable to the LORD because the person offering them had broken the commandment that forbids stealing (Exo 20.15; Deut 5.19).

To sum up, this Handbook recommends that translators accept the meaning “stolen.” At any rate, they should make a decision one way or the other, and should not follow the example of Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version in translating ambiguously. They may of course put an alternative rendering in a footnote if they wish.

And this you bring as your offering: This clause essentially repeats the thought of the previous one, and Good News Translation runs the two together with “As your offering to me you bring….” Translators may follow this example if they wish. The word translated offering usually refers to grain offerings, but in this context it clearly includes animal offerings (compare 1.10; 2.13).

Shall I accept that from your hand?: The wording of the question is very similar to that in the statement at the end of verse 10. See the notes there. Here that refers to the offerings described in the previous sentence. The question is sarcastic, and amounts to a strong negative statement. In languages where rhetorical questions are not well understood, translators may either supply an answer, such as “Certainly not!” or indicate the expected answer (“Surely you don’t think that I will accept such offerings from you?”). Or else they may use a negative statement; for example, “You certainly cannot expect that I will accept such offerings from you.”

Says the LORD: The formula occurs here without the usual “of hosts.” The longer form is found in the Septuagint and is accepted by Bible de Jérusalem and Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible. Translators should follow the Hebrew text and use the short form, as in Revised Standard Version and most other versions (compare Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project). Here the formula probably marks the transition from the dialogue form of verses 12-13 to the pronouncement in verse 14.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Malachi. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Malachi 3:16

This verse begins a new paragraph within the dispute, as both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation recognize. It is unique in the book of Malachi, in that it is set in a narrative-like framework. The phrase “narrative-like” is deliberate, for this is not ordinary narrative such as occurs in some prophetic books (compare Isa 7.1-2; Jer 28; 36-39; Amos 7.10-14; Zech 7.1-4). Though it begins with a description of the actions of a particular group of people of the prophet’s own time, it quickly moves on to a glimpse of the heavenly court, bringing to mind ideas associated with the last times.

Then those who feared the LORD spoke with one another: Then normally has a meaning that relates to time, indicating the next event in a sequence, and that is the meaning represented in Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, and most other versions. However, the Septuagint has “These things” instead of “Then,” apparently translating a different Hebrew word. The effect of following the Septuagint (as do Jerusalem Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, and surprisingly New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) is to make those who feared the LORD refer back to “You” in verse 14, so that the skeptical remarks in verses 14-15 are taken to be what those who feared the LORD said when they spoke with one another. The sense seems to hold together much better if we follow the Hebrew and translate Then …. This establishes the actions of those who feared the LORD as a sharp contrast with the opinions expressed in verses 14-15 by those who had turned away from him. Indeed, such people had been described in verse 5 as those who “do not fear me” (Revised Standard Version), and there is nothing that suggests they had repented, as scholars like Baldwin, Merrill, and Vuilleumier have to suppose. It is altogether simpler and clearer to understand those who feared the LORD to be “the inner circle of the truly godly” (Cashdan). In this context feared may be rendered as “revered” (New Revised Standard Version) or “truly respected” (Contemporary English Version; similarly Beck), so a translation model for the whole clause is “Then those people who truly respected the LORD….”

The Hebrew verb translated spoke is in the same reciprocal form as in verse 13, but here the idea of discussion is expressed in Hebrew in the phrase translated with one another. (Compare similar phrases in Zech 11.9 and 14.13.) For spoke with one another, Contemporary English Version has “started discussing these things.”

The LORD heeded and heard them: The Hebrew verbs translated heeded and heard are often used together, for instance in Job 33.31; Isa 28.23; 42.23; Jer 8.6 and 23.18 (Revised Standard Version using “give heed,” “listen,” “hearken,” “hear,” or “attend”). In some languages it may be more natural to translate with a single verbal phrase, such as “listened attentively” (New American Bible; similarly Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), “paid attention,” or “took notice.”

And a book of remembrance was written before him: There is some hint in the word and that it was as a result of the LORD’s attention that the book was written. In some languages this idea is conveyed simply by putting the two statements one after the other. In other languages it may be necessary to make the consequence clear. Among English versions New King James Version does this by saying “So” instead of and; translators might say, for example, “So he had their names written….”

The Hebrew phrase for a book of remembrance occurs only here. In all likelihood, the prophet had in mind the Persian court practice of making records of notable events, such as “the book of memorable deeds” mentioned in Est 6.1. It would be more natural to say “a record book” (New American Bible) or just “a book.” In terms of what we know about the history of books, it would be more accurate to say “a scroll” (New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Living Translation), but in many languages there will be no suitable term, and “a book” will be the closest available equivalent. The idea of a book containing the names of the faithful is found elsewhere in such places as Exo 32.32-33; Psa 69.28; Dan 12.1; Php 4.3; Rev 17.8; 20.12-15; 21.27.

The verb was written is passive in Hebrew, but in languages that have no passive, it will be necessary to restructure so as to express a subject. Translators should avoid saying that the LORD wrote the book. Since it was written before him, that is, “in his presence” (Good News Translation, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, New Living Translation), it is clear that someone else wrote it. The idea is that the writing took place in the heavenly court, but the writer is not stated. Translators may say “the LORD caused that they write the names of those … in a book” or “the LORD told someone to write…” without giving more detail.

Of those who feared the LORD and thought on his name: The phrase of those probably assumes that the book consisted of a list of “names” (New Living Translation, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch; similarly Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). The other possibility is that the book recorded the actions of those listed.

Those who feared the LORD is the same phrase as occurred at the beginning of the verse. Here it is paralleled by a second phrase, and thought on his name. The two phrases go together and describe the same group of people. If translators say “revered” or “respected” in the first phrase, they may say in the second “esteem His name” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New American Standard Bible), “meditate on His name” (New King James Version ), or “loved to think about him” (New Living Translation). As often, the LORD’s name stands for his person, and in many languages it will be rendered as “him.”

It is possible to restructure the verse as follows:

• Then those people who truly respected the LORD and honored his name, started discussing these things. When the LORD heard them, he had their names written [or, caused someone to write their names] as a reminder in his book.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Malachi. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Haggai 1:2

In Hebrew the words Thus says the LORD of hosts are repeated in verse 5 and verse 7. Good News Translation translates them here, but omits them in the other places so as to be able to treat 1.4-11 as the unbroken words of the LORD through the prophet. Translators in many other languages will find that the rendering of Good News Translation is more natural style in their languages: “The LORD Almighty said to Haggai.” However, translators need to be aware that the repetition of this formula has a function at the discourse level, and marks the beginning of a new paragraph in each case. Even if it is not natural to repeat the formula in their language, translators should preserve its function of indicating the beginning of a new paragraph. See further comments on verses 5 and 7, and also on verse 9, where a similar formula with a different discourse function occurs.

Good News Translation adds the words “to Haggai” to make it clear that this part of the message is introductory, and is not spoken directly to Zerubbabel and Joshua as verse 1 would otherwise suggest. The content of the direct speech in this verse forms the basis for the message in 1.3-11, but is not part of that message. This is why 1.2 is included with 1.1 as part of the introduction to the prophecy as a whole.

This people say: The expression This people (Good News Translation “These people”) rather than “my people” is somewhat reproachful (compare Isa 6.9, 10; 8.6, 11, 12; Jer 6.19, 21), and translators are urged to find expressions in their languages that convey the idea of reproach.

The time has not yet come to rebuild: Although a start had been made (Ezra 1–3), the work of rebuilding the Temple had run into difficulties and had been abandoned. The people had become discouraged, and a series of bad harvests (1.6, 11) had turned their minds to more urgent physical needs. It is possible also that some of the people thought that the rebuilding of the Temple should wait until the end of the seventy years mentioned in Jer 25.11; 29.10. This would not be until the year 516 B.C. The time has not yet come may be expressed as “this is not the right time” (Good News Translation; similarly Contemporary English Version) or “it is too soon” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

The house of the LORD: In languages that do not have a suitable term for “the Temple” (Good News Translation), it may be possible to translate it as “God’s house” or “the building where the LORD is worshiped.” To translate like this will probably be better than to borrow the word Temple from English or some other major language. In certain languages that do not use indirect speech, this final sentence may be rendered something like “These people say, ‘This is not the right time for us to rebuild the Temple [or, the LORD’s house].’ ”

An alternative translation model for verses 1-2 is:

• On the first day of the sixth month of the second year that Darius ruled as emperor of Persia, the LORD used [or, caused] Haggai the prophet to give a message to the governor of Judah who was Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and to the High Priest who was Joshua the son of Jehozadak. The LORD who is all-powerful first said to Haggai, “These people say, ‘This is not the right time for us to rebuild God’s house.’ ”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Haggai. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .