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 .

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 .

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 .

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 .

This verse summarizes God’s instructions to Jonah. It begins with a word that is translated in older versions as “arise” (Revised Standard Version). But the Hebrew verb qum is frequently used with a so-called “inceptive” force to mark the beginning of an enterprise or to indicate that the action required is to take place immediately; for example, Gen 19.14, 15; Judges 4.14; Exo 32.1, in all of which Revised Standard Version has “Up!” or “Arise!” In these places the person addressed is not necessarily lying down but is being urged to act immediately (see Isa 52.2 King James Version). So here one could say “Go at once to the great city called Nineveh”—a conventional formula going back to Gen 10.12. As suggested in the phrase “to the great city called Nineveh,” it may be necessary to reverse the order of Good News Translation‘s Nineveh, that great city. The more usual order in languages is to have the generic expression that great city occur first, followed by the more specific name Nineveh; for example, “to the great city which is Nineveh,” or simply “to that great city, Nineveh.” If the phrase “great city” is placed after the term Nineveh, it may be necessary to employ a relative clause; for example, “to Nineveh, which is a great city.”

On reaching Nineveh, Jonah is to “denounce it” (New English Bible) or speak out against it. That is to say, he is to proclaim God’s message of judgment against Nineveh. He is to do so because the evil of the city is staring God in the face (compare New English Bible). The nature of Nineveh’s evil is not disclosed. The language here is similar to that of Gen 18.20, 21 with regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, which were noted for their wickedness.

Speak out against it may be difficult to render satisfactorily in some languages. It may even be necessary to use a form of direct discourse; for example, “say to them, ‘You are guilty’ ” or “declare, ‘You have sinned very much.’ ” In some cases an idiomatic expression may be employed; for example, “hang great blame upon it” or “declare that the people there are covered with guilt.”

The word ki in the Hebrew is open to more than one interpretation. It can mean “that,” introducing a noun clause, or it can mean “for, because.” At first sight it would appear that Good News Translation follows neither of these courses, but the second is in fact implied by the punctuation. Most translators render the Hebrew in the same way as Good News Translation (compare Revised Standard Version, New English Bible), but Jerusalem Bible (so also Moffatt Moffatt) renders the word as “that”: “inform them that their wickedness has become known to me,” though “inform” weakens the element of proclamation in the original. Living Bible has “It smells to highest heaven,” which is vivid but hardly justified as a translation. The Hebrew changes from third singular against it to third plural “their wickedness,” as expressed in New American Bible (New American Bible) and Revised Standard Version, but this does not need to be brought out in a translation. New English Bible avoids this by using “its” with reference to Nineveh, and Good News Translation makes explicit the fact that “their” refers to its people. The literal rendering in Revised Standard Version suggests, as does the Hebrew, that God is watching from up in heaven what takes place down on earth.

I am aware may be rendered merely as “I have seen” or “I know.” Somewhat greater force may be expressed in some languages by inverting the subject and object, for example, “the wickedness of its people has struck my eyes.”

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 .

All persons and animals must wear sackcloth, with its inclusion of the animals in the outward signs of penitence, sounds even stranger than the order for the animals to fast. The same thought is to be found in Judith 4.10. The strangeness is avoided in some translations by the use of some such expression as “they” (New English Bible) or “everyone” Living Bible, but this does not convey to the modern reader the same impression as was made by the original on the first readers. Of course, some say that the expression “both man and beast” has accidentally been copied in verse 8 from verse 7, but an honest translation will either tell the reader this, as in Jerusalem Bible, or translate the present Hebrew text as in Good News Translation, Revised Standard Version, An American Translation, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, and others. Taken literally the Hebrew text will also extend to the rest of the verse the association of animals with humans in the other signs of repentance. But it is legitimate to suppose that the writer had, by the second half of the verse, abandoned the thought of the animals.

It may seem contradictory to speak of persons and animals both “wearing sackcloth,” since animals would not normally be spoken of as “wearing clothes.” Therefore it may be necessary to say “all persons must wear sackcloth and sackcloth must be put on all animals” or “… tied on all animals.”

Good News Translation has the main break in the verse after the first clause, and then by saying Everyone must pray earnestly implies that human beings alone are indicated from this point onwards. New English Bible has the main break after the next clause, and then makes it clear that human beings alone are the subject in the last of the verse by saying “let every man abandon his wicked ways.” Here, as often, the word ʾadam “man,” in the first part of the verse, refers to persons of either sex, as suggested in Revised Standard Version. The use of the Hebrew word ʾish in the second sentence, Everyone, does not even exclude a reference to animals, since it has here a distributive force (compare Gen 15.10; Isa 53.6).

In some languages pray earnestly may be expressed metaphorically as “pray with one’s heart exposed” or “pray with true words.” In some instances the meaning may be expressed as “pray and mean what one says.”

The king is represented as being aware of the kind of behavior that required repentance if Jonah’s words were not to come true and the city was not to be destroyed: wickedness in general and violence in particular were to be stopped. New English Bible is more specific than Good News Translation in this respect, with its reference to “habitual violence” rather than simply his evil actions. This last expression represents the more literal “the violence which is in his hands” of Revised Standard Version. The reference to “hands” here is a clear indication that by this time the writer is not longer thinking in terms of animals, but is concerned with human beings.

In some languages it is quite impossible to speak of “giving up wicked behavior.” One may, however, “stop doing what is bad” or “stop being wicked.” The final expression, his evil actions, may be expressed as “being violent,” or “using violence against people,” or “doing harm to people.”

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 .

The heathen sailors are unwilling, however, to save their lives at the expense of Jonah without at least trying some other remedy. So the narrator ensures that the tension mounts as the sailors exert themselves to try and reach the land. Possibly their intention is pictured in terms, at first at least, of setting Jonah on shore to clear the ship of its dangerous cargo. The verb for rowing is not used elsewhere in this sense, presumably because the Old Testament does not relate stories of events at sea. Normally the verb means “dig,” as in Amos 9.2. Moffatt has “dug in their oars.” In Ezek 27.8, 26 another verb for rowing is used. New English Bible here uses the idiom “to put back to land,” in which it resembles the Hebrew by having no object after “bring back” (compare King James Version and Revised Standard Version). Luther 1984 interprets the verb differently as “return.” The ship is evidently to be understood as the object.

Using the same idiom as in verse 11, the narrator describes how the storm was becoming worse and worse. Consequently their efforts meet with no success, and they got nowhere, an idiom that is no doubt clearer for native speakers of English than for other readers. Bible in Basic English makes the meaning clear, “were not able to do so,” as does New Jerusalem Bible with “but they could not.”

The relationship between “getting the ship to shore” and “rowing” must be expressed quite differently in some languages, since the means, namely, the “rowing,” is the focal activity, and the purpose is to get the ship to shore. Therefore one may restructure the first sentence of verse 13 to read “the sailors rowed with all their strength in order to try to get the ship to shore” or “… to cause the ship to arrive at the shore” or “… to the land.” The closest equivalent of rowing may be simply “paddling.” It is possible to explain the difference in a footnote, but this is usually not necessary.

The storm was becoming worse and worse must often be expressed as “the wind was blowing faster and faster” or “the wind was all the time blowing stronger.”

They got nowhere may be expressed as “they got no closer to land” or “they were as far from land as ever.”

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 .

God then asks Jonah the same question as in verse 4, but with the addition of about the plant, that is, on account of the disappearance of the plant. On that occasion Jonah was indeed angry, as is clear from 4.1. but here he is not so much angry as miserable, or bad tempered.

To be angry about the plant must be expanded somewhat as “to be angry because of what happened to the plant.” It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died.

Jonah did not reply to the question that was put to him in verse 4, but here he replies by asserting emphatically that he had every justification for being angry. Jonah’s response should be parallel to 4.4, but it may be very difficult to speak of “every right.” One may, for example, say “I’m completely justified in being angry,” or “I have a good reason to be angry,” or “my anger is completely reasonable.”

The words angry enough to die can be taken with a double meaning. One is the surface meaning, that his anger is sufficient to justify his request for death. The other meaning takes the words “even unto death” (King James Version) as an expression denoting the superlative (compare Moffatt and New English Bible, “mortally angry,” and Knox, “deadly angry”). The same expression as occurs here in Jonah is also found in a medieval letter written in Hebrew, also with the meaning “I was extremely angry.” It is difficult to do justice to both these senses in one translation, since by emphasizing the idiom expressing the superlative, the literal sense, angry enough to die, is likely to be concealed. The use of hyperbole by Jonah on this occasion is the more absurd when one takes into account the reasons for Jonah’s anger on both occasions: in verse 1, because he was humiliated by the sparing of Nineveh, and in verse 9, because he was inconvenienced by the withering of a plant.

It may be possible to combine the concepts of the intensity of anger together with Jonah’s suggestion of wanting to die (a reflection of verses 3 and 8) by translating “I am so angry that I want to die,” or “I am very, very angry and therefore prefer to die,” or “… want to die rather than live.”

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 .