Translation commentary on Zechariah 8:15

So again have I purposed in these days to do good to Jerusalem and to the house of Judah: So introduces the second half of the comparison begun in verse 14. Again represents what is a verb in Hebrew. New Jerusalem Bible links this with the verb purposed, and says “so now I have changed my mind and intend….” I have purposed may be expressed as “I have decided” (Beck, Contemporary English Version) or “I have made up my mind.” The words in these days really contrast with the time clause “when your fathers provoked me to wrath” in the previous verse, and the contrast may be brought out more clearly by placing this expression at the beginning of the verse as Good News Translation does with “But now….” To do good is a very general term, which is rendered by the general term “bless” in Good News Translation. In this context it means “make [or, cause to be] prosperous.”

To Jerusalem and to the house of Judah refers of course to people rather than places, and Good News Translation expresses this as “the people of Jerusalem and Judah.” In some languages it may be clearer to say “the people of Jerusalem and the rest of Judah.”

Fear not closes this half of the comparison, and indeed the whole complex structure that began in verse 9. It is similar in function to the same command in verse 13.

An alternative translation model for this verse is:

• But now I am planning to make the people of Jerusalem and Judah [or, the rest of Judah] prosper again. So don’t be afraid.

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 10:8

As in verse 6, it will probably be helpful in most languages to begin a new paragraph at this point.

I will signal for them and gather them in: The word translated signal is literally “hiss” (King James Version, Revised Version) or “whistle” (New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Revised Standard Version is following the example of the ancient Greek version in using a more general term. Most scholars interpret “whistle” as a picture drawn from the way a shepherd calls to his sheep to gather them together (compare Jdg 5.16). A similar picture is found in Isa 5.26 and 7.18, where the LORD is calling foreign nations to punish his people. Here the opposite is the case—the LORD is calling his own people back from exile. In cultures where sheep are kept, it may be helpful to say “I will whistle for them as a shepherd calls his sheep,” but in areas where sheep are little known, it may be more appropriate to use a more general term like signal or “call” (Good News Translation; compare Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). In some areas people may have customary ways of communicating over long distances other than speech, such as the use of whistles, smoke signals, or talking drums. In such situations these customs may provide terms that could be used to translate signal here.

I have redeemed them: In Hebrew the verb is a perfect form, but this may be an example of the so-called prophetic perfect, in which events still future are referred to as if they have already happened. Thus some versions translate it as a future: “I will rescue them” (Good News Translation; compare the Septuagint, New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). Others, such as Bible en français courant and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, say “I have decided to rescue them,” and this may be a helpful model.

They shall be as many as of old: Inevitably the upheaval of going into exile led to a reduction in the numbers of the LORD’s people. Now the LORD promises that these numbers will be restored. Jewish scholars have often seen in these words a reference to the earlier period when the people were in Egypt and multiplied rapidly (Exo 1.7, 12). As they increased in a foreign land then, so they will increase in their current countries of exile. Compare Ezek 36.10-11. Contemporary English Version has a helpful model: “And there will be as many as ever before” (similarly Good News Translation).

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 12:12 - 12:14

These verses give a more detailed description of the organization of the mourning mentioned in 12.10-11. Basically the mourning would be done in family groups with the sexes separated. This separation may be due to some special role that women fulfilled in ritual mourning (compare Jer 9.17-22). Similar customs are still found in some parts of the world.

The land shall mourn, each family by itself: The land is here a figure of speech called a metonymy, and stands for its inhabitants. Family does not refer to a small family consisting only of parents and children, but to an extended family group having a common ancestor. In some languages it would be better translated “clan.” It is, however, a smaller unit than a tribe, as this term is used in the Bible (compare Josh 7.16-18). By itself is repeated several times in this passage. It is not certain whether it means “in its own place” or “at its own time.” If the first is meant, then the families are thought of as mourning simultaneously in different places. If the second, then they are thought of as mourning in sequence, one after the other, perhaps in a single place such as at the Temple. If there are different terms in their language, translators may choose whichever seems more culturally appropriate. A few English versions (King James Version, Revised Version, Moffatt, New American Bible) use the term “apart,” which indicates separation in space rather than time.

The family of the house of David by itself: This refers to the descendants of King David, still leading citizens after the exile. In this context the focus is on physical descent from the royal line rather than on status as rulers.

And their wives by themselves: In Hebrew the word for wives is the same as the word for “women.” In this context it is not just married women who are referred to and a more general term like “womenfolk” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) is preferable.

The family of the house of Nathan by itself: Some scholars understand the reference to be to the prophet Nathan (2 Sam 7.2), but in this context it seems much more likely to be to a son of David called Nathan (2 Sam 5.14; 1 Chr 3.5; 1 Chr 14.4). This son is also mentioned in Luke’s list of ancestors of Jesus (Luke 3.31). Thus a minor line descended from David is mentioned as an example. This would be parallel to the mention of both Levi and Shimei below.

The family of the house of Levi by itself: This refers to the descendants of Levi, that is the hereditary priests, who were also influential after the return from exile.

The family of the Shimeites by itself: This name is the only one in the list to have a definite article rather than the phrase “house of” before the name. There is no discernible significance in this variation, and indeed the ancient Syriac and Aramaic versions have the same phrase here as occurs with the other names. Translators need not try to make a distinction. Shimei is not the person who insulted David in 2 Sam 16.5-8, but rather a grandson of Levi (Num 3.17-18; 1 Chr 6.16-17). Thus he stands as an example of a branch of the priestly line just as Nathan stands as an example of a branch of the royal line.

And all the families that are left: This probably refers to the other families in the royal and priestly lines not mentioned by name above.

Each by itself, and their wives by themselves: See the notes above. In some languages the repetition of the first phrase six times and the second one five times may be very poor style. In such cases, it is appropriate to restructure these three verses so as to eliminate the repetition. Good News Translation offers a good example of how this can be done, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch offers another. But if the repetition can be kept without sounding unnatural, it may prove a useful way of emphasizing how solemn and sincere the mourning was.

If the identification of Nathan and Shimei above is correct, it may be of some significance that the mourners consist of royal and priestly families, with no mention of prophets. Perhaps this indicates that the person that they had pierced, and were now mourning, was a prophetic figure of some kind. See also the notes on 13.3. Some translators may wish to add footnotes identifying Nathan and Shimei since these names are not likely to be correctly understood otherwise.

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 1:4

This verse continues with the Response element of the dispute. But whereas verses 2c-3 are a direct quotation of the LORD’s words, embedded into the utterance of the prophet, verse 4 begins with the words of the prophet himself: If Edom says …. The Hebrew here uses Edom instead of Esau, and thus makes it clear that the reference is not to the historical figure, but to the nation descended from him. So Good News Translation has “If Esau’s descendants, the Edomites, say…” and Contemporary English Version has “Esau’s descendants may say….” We may assume that they are addressing the LORD, since it is the LORD who replies in the second half of the verse.

We are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins: We here is exclusive and stands for the cities of Edom. This is brought out in Good News Translation “Our towns have been destroyed…” (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). In some languages it will be necessary to use the active and say, “Our enemies have destroyed our towns….” We will rebuild or “… build … again” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) is the rendering in all available modern versions. The Hebrew is literally “we will return and build” (King James Version, Revised Version). The verb “return” is often used in Hebrew in combination with another verb to mean “to do something again,” and that is how most translators have understood it here. However, it is possible that in this case it retains its basic meaning of “return” (as in 3.7), so that the Edomites who had been expelled from their traditional land are claiming that they will return to it and build. It is taken this way in the ancient Greek and Latin versions, and modern translators may accept this possibility if they prefer it.

The LORD of hosts says: The expression the LORD of hosts (New International Version “the LORD Almighty”) is the most common way in which God is referred to in the book of Malachi. Here the Hebrew actually has the expression that is often translated “Thus says the LORD of hosts” (for example, Hag 1.2; Zech 1.3). This expression normally marks the beginning of a new unit or subunit of the discourse (as for instance in Hag 1.2, 7; 2.11; Zech 7.9; 8.2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 19, 20, 23). Revised Standard Version is not justified in dropping the word “thus.” If possible, an expression such as “this is what” should be incorporated here, as it is in New International Version. New International Version offers the best model at this point, with a new paragraph beginning “But this is what the LORD Almighty says.” Good News Translation has shortened the LORD of hosts to “the LORD,” but that is not appropriate at the first occurrence of the expression in the book, and translators should not follow this example.

They may build, but I will tear down: The pronouns They and I are emphatic in Hebrew to show the sharp contrast between what the people of Edom may intend and what the LORD will permit. The expression tear down is common in American English, but is replaced by “break … down” in the Australian edition of Good News Translation. British translations prefer to say “pull down” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible/Revised English Bible). This variation is merely a dialect difference, and no distinction of meaning is intended. A possible model using indirect speech is: “But I, the LORD All-Powerful, promise to tear down whatever they build” (Contemporary English Version).

Till they are called the wicked country, the people with whom the LORD is angry for ever: These two labels for Edom are parallel with each other, and declare that people will recognize that God’s anger has been shown both against the land and against the people of Edom. In many languages they are called will be better expressed as “People will call them,” as in Good News Translation. The phrase the wicked country may sound odd in some languages because land is not capable of moral action. In such situations it may be helpful to restructure it as “the land where evil reigns” (compare Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), “the land full of sinful people,” or even “the land God has forsaken” (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

Angry presents problems in some languages when used to describe God. The term chosen should indicate justifiable indignation against something that is wrong, rather than irritation arising from circumstances. For ever has the sense of “for all time” rather than “for eternity.”

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 3:7

The first two sentences of the verse in Revised Standard Version form the Assertion element of the dispute.

From the days of your fathers refers back not just one generation but to ancient times. It is expressed in more natural modern English as “ever since the time of your ancestors” (Contemporary English Version; compare New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New Living Translation). Translators should avoid giving the impression that the people of Malachi’s day were alive in the days of their ancestors. To prevent this mistake, it is possible to use a simile: “Just as your ancestors did, so you too have….”

You have turned aside from my statutes: The verb translated turned aside is the same verb as occurred in 2.8. The accusation made there against the priests is now extended to the people in general. The word translated statutes is one of the many terms used to refer to the laws of God. No doubt the Law of Moses is primarily intended. Other renderings are “turned away from my laws” (Good News Translation) and “evaded my statutes” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible).

And have not kept them: This clause states the same fact as the previous one, but expresses it negatively. The Hebrew does not have anything equivalent to them, but this is supplied translationally without depending on any change to the Hebrew text. Contemporary English Version links this clause neatly with the previous one and says, “you have ignored and disobeyed my laws.” New Living Translation catches the force vividly with “you have scorned my laws and failed to obey them.”

Return to me, and I will return to you, says the LORD of hosts: These words are almost identical with those in Zech 1.3 (see the comments there). Translators may wish to move the quotation formula says the LORD of hosts to the beginning of the verse in order to identify clearly that the prophet is quoting the words of the LORD. Compare the comments on verse 1. The direct quotation extends to the end of verse 12.

But you say, ‘How shall we return?’: This sentence is the first Objection element in the dispute. It is introduced by But you say … as previous Objection elements have been (compare 1.2, 6, 7; 2.14, 17; 3.8, 13). Since the content of what is said is again a question, translators may prefer to render this as “But you ask.” The words of the objectors here and in verse 8 are second degree quotations.

The words of the quotation How shall we return? may be taken as a sincere question in which the speakers inquire by what means they can show repentance. Good News Translation “What must we do to turn back to you?” sounds as if it is intended to carry this meaning, as do many other versions. Some commentators, however, regard these words as an expression of surprise that the speakers should be called to repent at all (for instance, Vuilleumier, Verhoef). Understood in this way, the question amounts to a protest of innocence (J. M. P. Smith, Merrill). This interpretation fits the context well: the people have nowhere shown any willingness to repent, and there is no reason to suppose they are doing so now. Translators are advised to translate in such a way that they do not rule out the understanding of these words as a declaration of innocence. Moffatt “How do we need to come back?” is a suitable model. Translators could also say something stronger, such as using the idiomatic expression “What on earth should we repent of?” which conveys a feeling of indignation (so Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, 2. Edition). Whether the questioners really wanted an answer to their question or not, they are given one, but not until verse 10.

Note that Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible consider the following question at the beginning of verse 8 to be a continuation of the words of the objectors. See the comments below.

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 2:12

If one carries holy flesh: The meaning of the expression holy flesh is given in fuller form in Good News Translation as “a piece of consecrated meat from a sacrifice.” Holy (Good News Translation “consecrated”) means “offered to the LORD.” Some translators may need to expand this a little further and say, “If a person takes [or, carries] a piece of meat from an animal sacrificed to the LORD.” In certain languages it will be necessary to make it clear that priests first sacrificed an animal, cut it up and offered the meat to the LORD. In such cases translators may say, “If a person takes a piece of meat from an animal that priests have sacrificed and offered to the LORD.”

In the skirt of his garment: Good News Translation has “in a fold of his robe.” The people of that time and place wore long and flowing garments, so it was quite possible for a man to make a kind of bag from “a fold of his robe,” and carry things in it. Presumably a fold made in this way would be somehow hitched around a belt to prevent the loss of the items carried. In the case of meat, presumably it would have been wrapped up to stop the robe becoming stained. Any robe used in this way to carry consecrated meat itself became holy (Lev 6.24-28). Garment or “robe” will be translated in many languages as “long outer garment.”

And touches with his skirt bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any kind of food: The basic foods, bread, wine, and olive oil had been referred to in 1.11, though the Hebrew words used were different there. Here the list is extended by the mention of pottage or “cooked food” (Good News Translation), and finally any kind of food. Pottage is a fairly general term referring mainly to “stew” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation) or “broth” (Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible/Revised English Bible), probably made mostly from vegetables (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). So in some languages translators may render pottage as “cooked vegetables” or even “vegetable stew.”

Does it become holy?: The main point of the question was whether the robe could then pass on holiness to any other items of food it touched. This is expressed very clearly in Good News Translation: “If he then lets his robe touch any bread, cooked food, wine, olive oil, or any kind of food at all, will it make that food consecrated also?” Translators could also say, “Is it also consecrated to the LORD,” or even “Would those foods that were touched then become acceptable for sacrifice?” (Contemporary English Version). In some languages different words may be required to express become holy in relation to the different kinds of food mentioned.

The priests answered, “No”: The Hebrew text never states that Haggai obeyed the command in verse 11 to ask the question. However, this is assumed, and in many languages it will be helpful to state it. One way of doing this is found in the opening words of Good News Translation, “When the question was asked….” Another way is found in Bible en français courant and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, which say in effect, “ ‘No,’ replied the priests to Haggai’s question.” Such renderings avoid giving the impression that the priests answered directly to the LORD. This kind of logical gap in a narrative is called an ellipsis. In languages with no passive, translators may say, “When Haggai asked the question…” (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

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 .

Translation commentary on Zechariah 2:3

And behold: This is translated in Good News Translation by “Then I saw.” Translators may also say, “After that I saw.”

The angel who talked with me is the same person as the one mentioned in 1.9, 13, 14, 19. For angel see the notes on 1.8.

Came forward presumably means from Zechariah’s side. Some translations (Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible) follow the Septuagint and translate “stood still,” but the Hebrew makes good sense and there is no need to depart from it. In certain languages Zechariah will be considered the focus or center of attention, and this will be shown by special auxiliary verbs giving the direction of the action. In such cases translators may express came forward as “stepped forward [go]” or “walked forward [go] away from me.” Compare “the angel who was talking to me walked away” (New Jerusalem Bible).

Another angel came forward to meet him: This is a new figure who has not appeared before, and should be clearly introduced as a new participant. In English the word another indicates that this is a new participant. As with the previous sentence, many languages use auxiliary verbs to show the direction of the motion; for example, “another angel walked forward [come] toward the first angel.” Compare New Jerusalem Bible “another angel came out to meet him.”

An alternative translation model for this verse is:

• After that I saw the angel who had been speaking with me walk forward from beside me toward another angel who was coming forward to meet him.

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 5:1

Again I lifted my eyes and saw, and behold: These words, with the addition of Again, are the same as in 1.18; 2.1. See the comments on 1.18. In those earlier occurrences Good News Translation translated these words as “In another vision I saw,” but here it uses “I looked again, and this time I saw.” Contemporary English Version also offers a helpful model with “When I looked the next time, I saw.”

A flying scroll: Scrolls were made of parchment (specially prepared sheep or goat skin), and were used for writing messages that needed to be recorded for future reference, such as books of Scripture (compare Jer 36.2). In this case the scroll was flying. Good News Translation makes this clearer by saying “a scroll flying through the air.” The scroll was apparently moving under its own power and was not being held by anyone.

When not in use, a scroll could be rolled up to make it easier to store. As the following verse makes clear, the scroll in this case was unrolled, and in some languages it may be helpful to say so here when the scroll is first mentioned, as Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch does; for example, “I saw an open [or, unrolled] scroll flying through the air.” In areas where scrolls are unknown, it may be necessary for translators to borrow either the English term or a word from some neighboring language with a footnote or item in the glossary explaining what a scroll is. This is probably better than trying to translate scroll, as, for example, “a long piece of paper [or, parchment] with writing on it.” In any case it will also be helpful for translators to include a picture of a scroll like the one in this Handbook.

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 .