Translation commentary on Jonah 1:11

Here again, in this verse Good News Translation substitutes the historical order for the Hebrew narrative order to give the background to the situation before introducing the words of the sailors. New English Bible retains the Hebrew order, and as in the previous verse introduces the last sentence with an explanatory “for.” Knox gains the same effect by a parenthesis “(Even as they spoke, the waves grew more angry yet).” The description of the storm may, in fact, be a continuation of the words of the sailors, “for the storm is getting worse and worse.” Against this, however, is the fact that precisely the same words occur in verse 13, where they cannot be a part of a speech. The sailors, having learned not only that Jonah was the person who was to blame for the storm, but also that he had done something to arouse God’s anger, now ask how the situation can be saved. In other words, since he knew what had happened to cause the storm, that ought to qualify him to suggest a remedy.

The Revised Standard Version shows a clearer understanding than King James Version of the Hebrew idiom used here: “more and more tempestuous.” In other words, the two verbs used in the Hebrew do not refer to different actions but to the progressive intensification of one action. As against the storm of Good News Translation and New English Bible, some others follow the Hebrew more closely by referring to the “sea”; for example, Revised Standard Version, Jerusalem Bible, An American Translation, Moffatt. In neither Good News Translation nor New English Bible is there any mention of the relation of the storm to the sailors themselves, as in the Hebrew, with its “from upon us.” (Compare Revised Standard Version, Luther 1984, New American Bible, “for us.”)

The question What should we do to you to stop the storm? must often be expressed as a causative; for example, “What should we do to you in order to cause the storm to cease?” or “… cause the wind no longer to blow?”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 4:7

Once again, God “arranged,” but this time for a worm, which attacked the plant. This happened at dawn the next day, in other words, before the sun had risen. The word used here for worm is sometimes found in the singular in a collective sense as in Deut 28.39; Isa 14.11; 66.24, but in such cases the meaning is clearly not singular.

The order of expression in the sequence at dawn the next day, at God’s command, a worm may be quite awkward if translated literally. The relationships can be more satisfactorily expressed in some languages as “at dawn the next day God commanded a worm to attack” or “when the sun rose the next day, God commanded a worm, ‘Attack the plant.’ ”

The final clause and it died must often be set off from the command of God and introduced by some resultative particle; for example, “and so it died” or “and because of this it died.” In a number of languages, however, one must be very careful in the selection of a term meaning to die, since a word that is applicable to people may not be applicable to plants. For plants it may be necessary to say “dried up” or “withered.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 2:5 - 2:6

Since the present verse division is unlikely to be in accordance with the thought of the poet himself, it is best to take these two verses together.

The imagery of the water is continued in this verse, and the psalmist describes how he was overwhelmed by the sea, in language resembling Psa 18.4 and 69.1. According to King James Version “The waters compassed me about, even to the soul.” Instead of “soul,” New English Bible, Bible in Basic English, Mowinckel, and Jerusalem Bible have “neck,” or “throat,” and Good News Translation understands the Hebrew in the same sense by using the word choked. The Hebrew word nephesh has a variety of meanings in the Old Testament (Peacock 1976). It has the meaning of “throat” in such passages as Isa 5.14; Psa 69.1; 105.18; and Prov 23.7, and that appears to be the meaning here rather than “life” as in New American Bible. From this sense of “throat” may have developed the meaning “breath,” as in Job 41.21. Since “breath” indicates the presence of “life,” the word can also have this latter meaning, as in Prov 7.23; Gen 37.21; and Lam 2.12. Frequently the word merely stands for “person” or “self,” or even a personal pronoun, as in Job 16.4. So there is some justification for Revised Standard Version, “the waters closed in over me,” though the parallel in Psa 69.1 argues for the correctness of New English Bible and Good News Translation here.

It may be wrong in some languages to speak of water as “coming over” a person. A more satisfactory expression may be “the water flooded over me.” On the other hand, it may seem better to say “I sank down into the water.”

A term to render choked should not refer to the choking of a person by some violent squeezing of the throat, but choking as the result of being immersed in a liquid. Choked me must therefore be rendered often as “drowned me” or “took away my breath.”

The “ocean” in the second line (New English Bible) is the word that is used at the beginning of the story of Creation in Gen 1.2, and in the account of the Flood (Gen 7.11; 8.2), in all of which passages New English Bible uses the word “abyss.” In other words, the Flood was a combination of rain falling from above and subterranean springs bursting out from below. It is also the word used, as here and in Hab 3.10, for the deepest parts of the sea.

In Revised Standard Version, Jerusalem Bible, and New English Bible the last line of verse 5 is combined with the first line of verse 6, partly for reasons of the poetic structure of the psalm, and I went down is taken along with the line that follows. The division of the Hebrew text into verses came about at a comparatively late date, so the punctuation need not determine our understanding of the sense. In this sentence the poet continues to intensify the picture of someone who is overwhelmed by the ocean. No longer is his head above water, since seaweed is already smothering him. The word “weeds” is the same as is used in the story of the childhood of Moses (Exo 2.3, 5), and in the name for “the Sea of Reeds” in Exo 10.19, etc. It is used here only in reference to the vegetation at the bottom of the sea, so that this is a more realistic description of being overwhelmed by water than any passage in the Psalms. The closest parallel there is perhaps to be found in Psa 18.5, with its imagery of the victim being entangled in the cords of the underworld.

A literal rendering of seaweed wrapped around my head may seem strange, since it would suggest that the seaweed purposely engaged in a particular action. One may need, therefore, to use some such expression as “there was seaweed wrapped around my head.” A descriptive equivalent of seaweed may be “plants that grow in the sea.”

Good News Translation follows the traditional verse division and takes I went down with the words that precede it, to the very roots of the mountains. However, the prefix is sometimes to be understood as meaning “at” rather than “to”; for example, Num 11.10, “at the door of his tent.” Taken in this way, as in New English Bible, “the troughs of the mountains” would refer to the place where the poet feels himself to be entangled in seaweed. The mountains, such as Carmel, which stand on the seacoast, are pictured here as having their roots far down at the bottom of the sea; compare Psa 46.2. There they lie anchored, beneath the water, at the approaches to the underworld.

The next two lines in New English Bible correspond to the second line of verse 6 in Good News Translation, which interprets “I went down” as repeated from the first line. In other words, the land described here in Good News Translation is in apposition to the very roots of the mountains in the preceding line.

The figurative expression the very roots of the mountains may not be possible in some languages, since only trees may be said to have roots. It may, however, be possible to say “I went down to where the mountains begin” or “I went down into the sea to the place where the mountains begin.” In some languages the base of a mountain may be spoken of as “the belly of the mountain,” or “the skirt of the mountain,” or “the buttocks of the mountain.”

In Revised Standard Version, New English Bible, and Good News Translation the relative pronoun “whose” is supplied, though it is not expressed in the Hebrew. This construction without the relative is perfectly normal in Hebrew, but this particular example has seldom been so understood by other translators, with the exception of Moffatt: “a land where bars shut behind me forever.” The “world” to which New English Bible refers is, of course, the world of the dead. Note that New English Bible differs from Good News Translation here in understanding the statement as applying more particularly to the victim whose thoughts are expressed in the poem “would hold me fast.” In this it follows more closely the Hebrew, which does not speak simply of a place that can never hold the person captive forever. A. R. Johnson is formally closer to the Hebrew with “I went down to the land whose bars were to be about me forever,” since there is no verb such as lock or “hold me fast” (New English Bible), but a preposition, the same as in 2 Kgs 4.12.

By use of a figurative equivalent, Good News Translation speaks of the gates of the underworld as being permanently locked to keep those who are already there inside, but not, of course, to bar the entry of newcomers. This thought of the permanence of one’s stay in Sheol is met with frequently in the Old Testament (for example, 2 Sam 12.23; Job 7.9, 10; 10.21; 17.16; Isa 38.10; and others). New English Bible is closer to the Hebrew in speaking of the “bars” that kept the gates of the underworld effectively closed. King James Version and other translations speak of “bars,” but by failing to understand that this is a reference to the underworld and not to the earth itself, the effect is confusing. Thus An American Translation has “The earth with its bars was against me forever,” whatever that may mean. With greater freedom Knox has “the very bars of earth my unrelenting prison.” New American Bible makes it clear that the reference is to “the bars of the nether world,” but New Jerusalem Bible retains “the bars of the earth,” again with no explanation of the meaning as a reference to the world of the dead. This phrase does not occur anywhere else in the Old Testament, so various emendations of the text have been suggested. Thus Snaith, following the Septuagint and Vulgate, would delete one letter and read “… whose bars are everlasting bolts,” and Jerusalem Bible has “I went down to the countries underneath the earth, to the peoples of the past,” but without an explanation for the changes involved.

As already noted, it is important to indicate clearly that the land whose gates lock shut forever is located, figuratively speaking, at the very roots of the mountains. This appositional relationship may be expressed as “to the very roots of the mountains, that is, to the land whose gates lock shut forever.” It may, however, be rather strange to speak of a land having gates, but one can often speak of “a place whose gates lock shut.” The figurative relationship between land and gates may be made clear for some languages by introducing a kind of simile; for example, “the land that has, as it were, gates.”

Instead of employing an active expression such as gates lock shut, it may be better to indicate a particular state; for example, “whose gates are locked shut.” Such a figurative expression must be expressed in some languages by a type of simile, “whose gates are shut, as it were, by a key,” or “whose gates cannot be opened.”

The second part of verse 6 expresses a strong contrast to what precedes, since the sufferer acknowledges that he has been brought back from the depths alive, in spite of the strongly held belief that there was no return from Sheol. All hope, humanly speaking, was already lost, but the Lord had control even of the gates of Sheol (compare Psa 30.3; Job 38.17), just as in Rev 1.18 the Risen Christ has the keys of Death and the underworld.

The word depths is translated by New English Bible and others as “the pit.” This is one of several expressions used in the Old Testament for the underworld (so Bible in Basic English). In King James Version it is rendered “corruption” (compare Psa 16.10, quoted in Acts 2.27, where Greek uses the same word as the Septuagint). The Hebrew word shachath is related, not to the verb shachath “to destroy,” but to the verb shuach “to smite down.” The word occurs a number of times in Psalms and Job in contexts relating to death, often as a parallel to Sheol. Revised Standard Version is somewhat overliteral in speaking of “the life” of the poet as being brought up from “the Pit,” and New English Bible and Good News Translation make the meaning clearer with the word “alive.”

The depths may be expressed as “that deep place,” a phrase that may refer simultaneously to the ocean depths as well as to Sheol.

In a number of languages it may be necessary to render alive as a separate verb expression, since it cannot be readily tacked on to brought me back. Therefore one may need to translate the last clause of verse 6 as “brought me back from that deep place and caused me to live,” or “… to live again,” or “… caused my life to enter me again.”

The poet addresses the Lord as “my God,” the God with whom he has personal dealings as his worshiper (compare Psa 22.1).

For a discussion of the phrase O LORD my God, see 2.1.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 1:1

The book of Jonah, like the other prophetical books of the Old Testament, begins with an introduction or subtitle indicating the circumstances in which God’s message came to the prophet: One day the LORD spoke to Jonah son of Amittai.

The title “prophet” and the verb “prophesy” do not, however, occur in this verse, nor in the whole of the book. The introductory verse is, in spite of this, intended to indicate that Jonah was a prophet, since it states that the LORD spoke to Jonah, or as in Revised Standard Version (Revised Standard Version), “the word of the LORD came to Jonah.” There is no one standard form to introduce all the fifteen prophetical books, but they all have in common a reference either to “the word of the LORD” (Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc.) or to “the vision … that he saw” (Isaiah, Amos, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk). As a rule a date is given that either relates the activity of the prophet to some period in Israel’s history (Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Zephaniah) or states more precisely the exact date at which God’s message was entrusted to the prophet (Ezekiel, Haggai, Zechariah). In Jonah alone does the introduction take the form of a plain statement that, at some unspecified time (One day), the word of the Lord was addressed to the prophet. In this way the reader is indirectly informed that this is no ordinary collection of prophecies, such as those of Amos or Micah, but is a narrative about a prophet.

In some languages one set expression or another is used to indicate the beginning of a story. “Once upon a time” (Judges 9.8 New English Bible [New English Bible]) suggests that what follows is a work of fiction. This is, in fact, how the Winding Quest translation introduces Jonah, “Once upon a time God spoke to Jonah,” but this is unsuitable in a translation. “Long ago” (Ruth 1.1 New English Bible) indicates that the story which follows was written down long after the events it describes.

A literal rendering of One day can be misleading because it might suggest a specific day when the Lord spoke. A more typical equivalent may be “On an occasion” or “On some day.” In this way the indefiniteness of the time is emphasized.

In a number of languages it is awkward to use a double expression of speaking; for example, “The Lord spoke … he said.” A much more natural form of expression may be “One day the Lord said to Jonah son of Amittai, ‘Go to Nineveh….’ ” Other languages, however, may employ a double expression of speaking in the form “The Lord spoke to Jonah son of Amittai. What he said was, ‘Go to Nineveh….’ ”

The first word of the book in Hebrew, wayyehi, often acts as nothing more than an introductory expression that need not be represented in translation. Several books begin with it, and in Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Esther, and Ezekiel its omission in translation would make no difference to the meaning. Here, however, it is the main verb in the sentence, as in New English Bible “The word of the LORD came….” The same verb occurs in a relative clause at the opening of Jeremiah, Hosea, Joel, Micah, and Zephaniah, but in the book of Jonah the prefix to the verb (King James Version [King James Version] “Now the word of the LORD…”) raises the question whether this is to be taken as a conjunction, and if so, with what it links the opening sentence. There is no force in any argument that would try to link Jonah with Obadiah (compare Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel as a linked succession of narratives).

It has been suggested that this book is pictured as the continuation of the section relating to Jonah in 2 Kings 14.25-27. In other words, Jonah, having been assured of God’s gracious attitude to Israel, is entrusted with a mission to condemn Nineveh (Rudolph, page 335).

Like the prophetical books mentioned in the preceding paragraph, this one introduces “the word of the LORD” in the very first verse and tells us that it “came” to Jonah (New English Bible). The word used for “came” is not the usual verb of motion but is used many times to describe the action of the word of God, or even of a human message (1 Sam 3.21 [Good News Translation]; 4.1 [Revised Standard Version]). The individual messages of the prophets often begin with the formula “The word of the LORD came to…” (nearly 40 times in Jeremiah and over 50 times in Ezekiel). This kind of formula became the standard form of introduction to the prophetical books when the individual messages were collected.

“The word of the LORD came” can be translated as the LORD spoke as in Today’s English Version (Good News Translation), or even “Jonah heard the Lord saying to him.” Knox renders “The Lord’s voice came to Jonah,” and the Modern Language Bible leads into the next verse by saying “with this message:….” In the Hebrew expression used here, God’s “word” is described as something with an almost independent existence, in the same way as his spirit “comes upon” Othniel (Judges 3.10), Jephthah (Judges 11.29), Saul (1 Sam 19.23), Azariah (2 Chr 15.1), and Jahaziel (2 Chr 20.14). Similarly, in Ezekiel the hand of the Lord “comes upon” the prophet (1.3, where the word of the Lord is also said to come to him: 3.22; 33.22; 37.1; 40.1).

Some translators have felt that an expression such as “the Lord spoke to Jonah” is not really adequate to render the implications of the expression “the word of the Lord came to Jonah.” In order to suggest something of the role of the prophet receiving a special message from the Lord, these translators have preferred an expression such as “the Lord uttered a special message to Jonah” or “the Lord revealed to Jonah what he should do.” In this way something of the emphasis of “the word of the Lord coming” can be communicated, thus suggesting the prophetic role that Jonah was to have.

The expression “the word of the Lord came” also occurs in the New Testament in Luke 3.2, where the use of these words suggests to the reader that John the Baptist is indeed a prophet.

In the Good News Translation text the Hebrew proper name, generally transliterated as “Yahweh” but traditionally pronounced as “Jehovah,” is here indicated by capital letters LORD, following the widespread usage in English. By the use of capital letters the Hebrew name may be distinguished orthographically from the Hebrew title ʾadonay, rendered as LORD in Good News Translation. The rendering of “Yahweh” as LORD goes back to ancient tradition among Jews, who regularly marked the four-consonant Hebrew name with the vowels of ʾadonay, and in reading substituted ʾadonay for “Yahweh.” The proper name for God was regarded as so holy that it was only very rarely pronounced. Since an orthographic distinction between the rendering of “Yahweh” and ʾadonay is not necessarily recommended in other languages, no attempt is made to maintain this distinction in the discussions in this volume.

The only other place in the Old Testament where Jonah is mentioned is in 2 Kgs 14.25, where he is described both as a prophet and as the Lord’s “servant.” Nothing else is known about that prophet, but the author of the book of Jonah wishes his readers to understand that Jonah and the prophet were one and the same person, since the name of his father is identical. The Jonah of 2 Kings lived in the eighth century B.C., so it is implied that that is the period of the events in this book. There is nothing to indicate who wrote the book, and no suggestion that the author was Jonah himself.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 3:7

This verse repeats the substance of verse 5, but this time the decision that “everyone should fast” originates from the king. Here, He sent out a proclamation represents the causative form of the verb “to proclaim,” with an impersonal unspecified agent, followed by the verb “and he said.” In view of the causative element in sending out the proclamation to the people, it may be best to render the first part of this verse as “caused the people of Nineveh to hear a proclamation” or “he ordered men to proclaim to the people of Nineveh.”

Then the content of the proclamation is introduced by the phrase “By order of the king and his officials.” The inclusion at this point of the officials, or “great men,” resembles Dan 6.17, where the king’s seal and that of his nobles are both affixed to the stone over the mouth of the pit of lions in which Daniel was imprisoned. But this is more characteristic of a later period in the Old Testament. For the king to refer to himself in this way in the third person may be unnatural in some languages.

The subject and predicate relationships in This is an order from the king and his officials must be inverted in a number of languages; for example, “The king and his officials announce this order to you” or “… make this command.” Since, however, it is the king himself who caused the proclamation to be made, it may be necessary in a number of languages for the king to speak of himself in the first person; for example, “I the king and my officials command you….”

The ban on eating and drinking goes further in this proclamation than in the parallel passage in verse 5, since animals are included here, in two pairs: “Neither man nor beast, neither cattle nor sheep, shall taste anything.” The verb that follows is one that applies only to animals feeding, hence New English Bible “to graze.” The final prohibition in the verse, against drinking water, applies to both men and animals. Obviously the ban applies to any other liquid, too, with the force “they are not to drink anything.” In some languages, such as English, it is perfectly natural to use verbs such as “eat” and “drink” with no expressed object, as in Good News Translation, whereas in other languages the verb sounds incomplete without an object.

In view of the seeming duplication of commands, No one is to eat anything and all persons … are forbidden to eat or drink, it may be important to introduce or drink as simply “or even to drink anything.” In some languages, of course, eat or drink may be summarized simply as to “consume solid or liquid food.”

The classification implied in all persons, cattle, and sheep may seem extremely strange in some languages, for it would appear to leave out goats, pigs, and other domestic animals. It may therefore be better to reflect more closely the form of the Hebrew itself; for example, “no person nor domestic animal whether large or small shall eat anything.” Obviously only domesticated animals could be involved in such a command, since they would be under the control of persons who would make provision for their food. It would seem quite ludicrous in some languages to use a form for “animals” that would imply wild animals, since such a proclamation would either have no effect upon them or would be interpreted to mean that the king in some miraculous way was able to command the behavior of wild animals.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 1:12

Jonah advises the sailors to lift him up and throw him into the sea. Only by this human sacrifice, as it were, could the sea be calmed down from its raging. Luther 1984, New American Bible, Revised Standard Version add “that it may quiet down for you,” since the expression is the same as in verse 11, with “for you” replacing “for us.” The drawing of lots has only confirmed for Jonah what he knew all along, that his own actions had caused the storm that was so dangerous for those who traveled with him. There was still the faint possibility that the loss of his life might save the lives of the innocent people on the ship with him. If he were no longer on the ship, then the lives of all the others on board would be safe.

The pronoun it in Good News Translation it will calm down is ambiguous, because it could refer to either the storm or the sea. The result would be essentially the same, whatever the reference is, but the expression that follows needs to be appropriate to the storm or to the sea, depending upon the grammatical reference. If, for example, it refers to the sea, some languages require a rendering such as “it will become smooth again” or “the waves will cease.” If, however, the reference is to the storm, a translation such as “it will not blow any more” or “the wind will stop” may be more appropriate.

It is my fault may be expressed as “I am to blame” or “it is because of me.”

Though it is quite appropriate in English to speak of “being caught in a storm,” this may seem quite strange in some languages, since “being caught” would refer only to a person being caught by another individual or by an animal. Accordingly it may be important to say “this violent storm has surrounded you” or “this great storm has come upon you.” So New American Bible has “that this violent storm has come upon you.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 4:8

Then the sun rose on that same morning, and once again God “arranged” for a hot east wind to blow, to make matters still worse for Jonah. The meaning hot can only be guessed from the context. It does not occur anywhere else in the Old Testament but is found in one of the hymns at Qumran, also referring to an east wind. Various guesses at the meaning have been made, on the basis of etymology. One possibility is a connection with one of the Hebrew words for “sun,” in a slightly different spelling. Another is a connection with the verb “to be silent,” hence “oppressive, sultry,” as Revised Standard Version, Revised Standard Version, Modern Language Bible, New Jerusalem Bible. Koehler’s lexicon suggests that the word harishith is really an error for hariphith, for haraph “to be sharp.” But since this adjective does not occur elsewhere, the suggestion is not very convincing. It is generally agreed, however, that the meaning is “very hot,” so that New American Bible, Bible in Basic English, and An American Translation have “burning,” and Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, New American Standard Bible “scorching.” Moffatt is still more vivid with “sweltering,” and Knox uses the special term “sirocco,” the hot wind that blows across the desert, particularly in North Africa. Jonah was to the east of Nineveh and would be exposed to the full force both of the east wind and of the rising sun. The writer, having in mind the situation in Palestine where the hot wind blows from the east across the desert, thinks in the same terms of Nineveh.

God sent a hot east wind must be restructured as a causative in many instances; for example, “God caused a hot east wind to blow.” A verb meaning “send” may be readily employed with persons as objects, but not with a physical event such as “wind.”

According to Good News Translation Jonah was about to faint from the heat of the sun beating down on his head, though the verb in its only other occurrence in Amos 8.13, means “to faint” rather than “to be about to faint.” Presumably, although on the point of fainting, Jonah needed to be conscious enough to address God in the last part of the verse. The verb could perhaps here refer to sunstroke (compare Isa 49.10). Knox, more picturesquely, has “all of a sweat.” Though the rendering by Knox is picturesque, it may be regarded as misleading, since as long as a person is sweating, he is not likely to faint or to suffer from sunstroke. It is the failure to sweat that causes faintness. There is, of course, a problem in this verse, since the reader may wonder why Jonah is not seated under the shade of the shelter and thus avoiding the sun’s rays beating down on his head. Good News Translation deals with this problem to some extent by speaking of “faint from the heat of the sun,” but the additional phrase beating down on his head may suggest to some readers a special difficulty concerning Jonah’s actual location.

Only rarely can one translate literally the sun beating down on his head, since the sun does not employ physical violence. In some instances one may speak of “the sun touching his head with heat,” or “the sun burning his head,” or “the sun causing his head to be very hot.”

So he wished he were dead, as in verse 3. But this time Jonah does not ask God to take away his nephesh (see 2.5, 6), but requests that his nephesh might die, since as he said previously, “I am better off dead than alive.” The wording of Jonah’s request is the same as that of Elijah in 1 Kgs 19.4. There is something paradoxical in the notion of the request for one’s own death. Similarly, in Exo 4.19, Moses is given the assurance that those who seek his life, in other words, who demand his death, are themselves dead (compare Matt 2.20). In 1 Kgs 3.11 Solomon is commended for not seeking the life of his enemies, in other words, their death (compare Job 31.10).

The context and the resemblance to verse 3 both indicate that Jonah is here addressing God. He is not simply expressing to himself the desirability of death rather than life, as in a literal translation “and he begged his soul that it might die.”

Jonah’s wish for death must be expressed in many languages as direct discourse, for example, “he wished, ‘I would like to be dead,’ ” or “he said to himself, ‘I wish I were dead,’ ” or “… ‘I do not want to live longer.’ ”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Jonah 2:7

Now, for the third time, the psalmist mentions his desperate situation, as he had already done in verse 2 and in verses 3-6a. So once again the reference is to the situation before Jonah had been brought back alive from the underworld. The word life is not the same as that which is used in the previous verse, but is the word translated “neck” by New English Bible in verse 5, and by King James Version, Revised Standard Version, and others as “soul” in this verse. The Hebrew word nephesh has a variety of meanings, as already noted, and here New English Bible has “my senses failed me.”

The translation of nephesh depends to some extent on the way in which the accompanying verb is understood. Good News Translation understands the verb as having the meaning “to faint,” hence When I felt my life slipping away. In much the same way An American Translation has “when I was losing consciousness,” and New Jerusalem Bible “When my life was ebbing away.” A sense of “despair” is another possible meaning of the verb, as can be seen from the passages in the Psalms where it occurs (107.5, where the same expression is used as here in Jonah; 142.3; 143.4).

The figurative expression my life slipping away can only be expressed in some languages as “I was dying.” The entire first clause may then be rendered as “when I felt that I was dying.”

At the time of his greatest despair, the psalmist prayed to the Lord. New English Bible uses here the verb “remembered,” but in contexts of prayer this means more than simply calling to mind. It involves mentioning the Lord by name, as in Jer 20.9 and in Psa 77.3, where the psalmist is no doubt praying to God as well as thinking about him.

In rendering O LORD and you, it may be important to place them together, in which case, O LORD may be a type of attributive or modifier of you; for example, “then I prayed to you, who are my Lord.”

The poet goes on to speak of his prayer achieving its objective by reaching the Lord in his holy Temple. This expression is the same as that which was used in verse 4, though that in itself is no proof that the earthly Temple in Jerusalem is meant here. In Micah 1.2, for instance, the reference may well be to God’s heavenly temple, and that meaning seems most appropriate in this present context, where the speaker is not necessarily thinking in terms of the land of Israel. It is evident from such passages as Solomon’s prayer in 1 Kings 8 that the ideas of the earthly Temple and of its heavenly counterpart were closely related in Israelite thought.

In your holy Temple may be expressed as “in the holy place where you dwell.” When, however, it is combined with the verb heard, it may be important to indicate the place as a source; for example, “you heard me from your holy Temple” or “… from your holy house.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .