Nkumbi / Mbangala / Songo: “bread that has gone no yeast” — “this is an application of a common construction in Angolan Bantu languages for speaking about the ingredients in some foods: ‘there is salt in the soup’ is rendered literally, ‘the soup has gone salt.’ (Source: Riikka Halme-Berneking in The Bible Translator 2014, p. 353ff. )
And Balak said to him: Some languages may have an introductory word or phrase to indicate that a new episode begins here, for example, “Then” (Good News Bible) or “After that” (Chewa). The pronoun him refers to Balaam, which Good News Bible makes explicit.
Come with me to another place: The Hebrew text includes the word naʾ here, thus making Balak’s request more urgent and compelling. Models that express it are “Please come with me…” (New American Bible) or “Do come with me….” To another place may be rendered “to a different place.” By changing location Balak hopes to achieve his desired outcome.
From which you may see them: The pronoun them (literally “him/it”) occurs four times in this verse. Each time it refers to the Israelites. The first time it may be necessary to render this pronoun as “the people of Israel” for clarity.
You shall see only the nearest of them, and shall not see them all: As in 22.41 (see the comments there), the Hebrew phrase for the nearest of them (literally “the end/outskirts of him/it”) is ambiguous. With this phrase the text aims to dramatize again the great number of Israelites, this time through the mouth of King Balak, who is speaking. Good News Bible combines these two clauses with the previous one for natural English, saying “from which you can see only some of the Israelites.” PV attempts to make these words of Balak sound more logical in their context by saying “There, you will see all the Israelites. From here, you only saw part of them” (similarly Bible en français courant), and so does Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch with “from where you can see the whole people. From here you only see the end of their camp.” These renderings imply that Balak wants Balaam to have a better view from the new place. However, these renderings are quite speculative when compared with the Hebrew text. Contemporary English Version expresses a somewhat different implication by rendering these clauses and the final one as “Maybe if you see a smaller part of the Israelites, you will be able to curse them for me.” The chiastic structure of this verse seems to support this interpretation. Balak fears that seeing all the Israelites will overwhelm Balaam and make him pronounce another blessing, which he does not want to happen.
Then curse them for me from there: Curse renders the same Hebrew verb as in verse 8 (see the comments there).
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
The Hebrew in Numbers 23:23 that is translated as “enchantment” and “divination” in English are translated in Chichewa as “the instruments for practicing sorcery” and “the instruments for doing divination” respectively (source: de Regt / Wendland 2016).
And he came to him, and lo, he was standing beside his burnt offering, and the princes of Moab with him: This sentence is very similar to verse 6 (see the comments there). The only major difference is the use of the Hebrew verb meaning came instead of the verb meaning “returned.” In spite of this difference, Good News Bible uses the verb “went back” both here and in verse 6.
And Balak said to him, “What has the LORD spoken?”: Balak’s question shows how anxious he is to know what the LORD said. He is now portrayed as being more anxious than in verse 6, where he does not ask anything. In many languages only direct speech will bring out this anxiety in an effective manner. This is why we do not recommend the indirect speech in Good News Bible here (“Balak asked what the LORD had said”). There is another reason why Balak’s question should really stand out in translation: it has no parallel in the context of the other prophecies. (Before the third prophecy in chapter 24 Balak does not ask this question either.) Balak explicitly mentions the LORD: this shows his resignation to the fact that it is the LORD, the God of the people whom he is trying to curse, who ultimately decides about who will be blessed or cursed.
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
On the day that the tabernacle was set up: See 7.1, which has the same time setting, but in a longer form. The narrative is still directly connected to the date of Exo 40.17. Many Bantu languages have a demonstrative form that makes reference to such a past event quite specific. In Hebrew this verse begins with the conjunction “And.” Revised Standard Version and Good News Bible omit it for naturalness in English, which other languages may find helpful. For tabernacle, which renders the Hebrew word mishkan (literally “dwelling-place”), see 1.50.
The cloud covered the tabernacle, the tent of the testimony: Revised Standard Version follows the Hebrew text literally by saying the cloud, which indicates that this cloud is already known to the reader. Much of this clause corresponds with Exo 40.34, where it says for the first time that the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting. Good News Bible says “a cloud came and covered it,” which gives the wrong impression that this cloud appears in the narrative for the first time. Although it occurs here in Numbers for the first time, it was already mentioned in Exodus (starting in 13.21). Only a translation such as the cloud or “the cloud-mass” will keep the link with Exo 40.34. For the tabernacle, the tent of the testimony, see the comments on 1.50, even though the wording is a little different there. Good News Bible says simply “the Tent of the LORD’s presence,” but translators should be more precise here as in the Hebrew text. A consistent rendering in the translation is needed, especially in the case of such important thematic expressions.
And at evening it was over the tabernacle like the appearance of fire until morning: New Revised Standard Version reorders this clause without changing its meaning, saying “and from evening until morning it was over the tabernacle, having the appearance of fire.” New International Version makes explicit that the pronoun it refers to the cloud by saying “From evening till morning the cloud above the tabernacle looked like fire.” “Looked like fire” (also Good News Bible) does not render the Hebrew word marʾeh, which means appearance or “brightness” in this context. The Hebrew shows that the comparison with fire is not so directly and easily made. A translation such as “as it were, like fire” expresses better the comparative idea here in Hebrew. Possible models for this whole clause are “and from evening until morning the cloud rested over the Tabernacle in the likeness of fire” (similarly New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), and “and the cloud, appearing like [a] fire, covered the Tabernacle from evening until morning.”
So it was continually: Good News Bible and Contemporary English Version omit this clause. But with it the Hebrew marks explicitly that what is described here happened continually, time and time again. (Good News Bible expresses this idea very briefly in verse 17 by using the word “Whenever.”) There is no reason to omit this clause, especially in such a rhythmically fashioned text. Possible models here are “This was always the case” and “This happened every time [or, continually].”
The cloud covered it by day, and the appearance of fire by night: As Revised Standard Version‘s footnote indicates, the phrase by day is not based on the Hebrew text but follows the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Peshitta. Revised Standard Version‘s rendering suggests that the cloud and the appearance of fire are really two different things. Although a separate cloud and appearance of fire seem to be in agreement with Exo 13.21 and 40.38, it does not agree with (Revised Standard Version‘s own rendering of) the preceding verse 15, just discussed above, where the appearance of fire is only the nightly manifestation of the cloud. Translators should follow the Hebrew text here by saying “the cloud covered it, appearing as fire by/at night” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Levine) or “the cloud covered it; at night, it [the cloud] had the appearance of a fire” (Nouvelle Bible Segond). These renderings are not only in line with verse 15 but with verse 21 as well.
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “front of the tent” in English is translated in Chichewa as “eye of the tent” (source: de Regt / Wendland 2016).
The people of Reuben, Israel’s first-born: It should be made clear that Israel refers to Reuben’s father Jacob, who was renamed Israel, and not to the people of Israel. It is probably for this reason that Good News Translation has actually replaced Israel with “Jacob.” However, the Hebrew brings out that the people and their common ancestor share the same name. So a better way to avoid confusion between the ancestor and the people named after him is to keep the name Israel by beginning verse 20 with “The people of Reuben, the firstborn of Israel’s sons” or “The people of Reuben, the firstborn of the ancestor Israel.”
Various formulaic expressions recur throughout verses 20-43 and are the same for the census of every Israelite tribe. In translation these expressions should be rendered consistently in terms of wording and order of occurrence. If a language requires that the various expressions are put in a different order, this should be done consistently for every tribe as well. The recurring expressions are as follows:
1. Their generations refers to the descendants of a particular ancestor through an unspecified number of generations. So a rendering such as “their descendants” (Bijbel: Vertaling in opdracht van het Nederlandsch Bijbelgenootschap) or even “their successors” is more accurate and probably less puzzling than their generations. Compare also New Revised Standard Version with “their lineage.”
2. By their families, by their fathers’ houses: See verse 2. The Hebrew kinship terminology here is better rendered “according to clan and family” (Good News Translation) or “by clans and families.”
3. According to the number of names: See verse 2. In verse 22, which introduces the census of the tribe of Simeon, the following phrase precedes this one: those of them that were numbered. This phrase is absent elsewhere in verses 20-43. Good News Translation omits this phrase, but the Hebrew Old Testament Text Project (Hebrew Old Testament Text) recommends keeping it. Were numbered renders the same Hebrew verb translated “number” in verse 3 (see the comments there).
4. Head by head: See verse 2.
5. Every male from twenty years old and upward: See verses 2-3.
6. Who were able to go forth to war means “who were fit for military service” (Good News Translation; see verse 3). Good News Translation moves this clause closer to the beginning of the sentence. This is helpful since it makes it clear from the start that only those fit for military service were included. Except for the beginning of verse 20, there is no past tense verb form in the Hebrew of verses 20-43. This clause is the same as in verse 3 and may not need a past tense in translation by saying “those able to go forth to war.” However, the Hebrew past tense form at the beginning of verse 20 makes it clear that the list of verses 20-43 as a whole does refer to the past. This past tense is expressed in NET Bible, which begins verse 20 with “And they were as follows: The descendants of Reuben….”
7. The number of the tribe of …: The Hebrew word for number renders the verb paqad translated “number” in verse 3 (see the comments there). New Revised Standard Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translate this phrase as “those enrolled of/from the tribe of….”
Of the people of Joseph, namely, of the people of Ephraim … Of the people of Manasseh…(verses 32-35): Ephraim and Manasseh were sons of Joseph, a son of Jacob (see verse 10). These two tribes are combined here under the name of their ancestor Joseph. Good News Translation has omitted this connection between Ephraim and Manasseh. But even in a list layout, this problem can be solved by inserting “Joseph’s sons” in the list (so New Afrikaans Version) or by listing “tribe of Ephraim, son of Joseph” and “tribe of Manasseh, son of Joseph” (so Bible en français courant).
Of the people of Naphtali (verse 42): Strictly speaking, the preposition corresponding to Of is lacking in the Hebrew text. The reason for this may be to mark the fact that the people of Naphtali are mentioned last in this list (so Rendsburg). Ancient translations have treated this phrase in the same way as with the other tribes.
These are those who were numbered, whom Moses and Aaron numbered with the help of the leaders of Israel, twelve men, each representing his fathers’ house (verse 44): The Hebrew verb rendered were numbered and numbered is paqad (see verse 3, where it is translated “number”). New Revised Standard Version is better with “were enrolled” and “enrolled.” For leaders (nasiʾ in Hebrew), see the comments on verse 16. The leaders of Israel, twelve men are the tribal representatives listed in verses 5b-15.
So the whole number of the people of Israel (verse 45) is literally “And they were all those enrolled of the people of Israel.” The connector So is not in the Hebrew, but such a conjunction is helpful to indicate that verses 45-46 are a conclusion for verses 17-44. Number renders the Hebrew verb paqad again (see verse 3), so it is better translated “enrolled” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).
Their whole number was (verse 46) is literally “and all those who were enrolled were.” Once again, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translates the Hebrew term paqad for number more accurately by rendering this phrase as “all who were enrolled came to.”
Thousand: The surprisingly high numbers in verses 20-46 have been the subject of much discussion among scholars. There is one point that has sometimes been made which, if valid, would affect translation. The Hebrew word for thousand is ʾelef, which is the same word rendered clans in verse 16 (see the comments there). The word ʾelef is not necessarily a precise number and can also mean “division” or “contingent.” So if we read the numbers in this way (that is, ʾelef meaning “contingent”), then the number forty-six thousand five hundred for the tribe of Reuben in verse 21 should be rendered “46 contingents that together numbered 500 men.” With this interpretation of ʾelef, the tribes together would consist of 598 (that is, 46 + 59 + 45 + 74 + 54 + 57 + 40 + 32 + 35 + 62 + 41 + 53) contingents, and the total number of men would only be 5,550 (that is, 500 + 300 + 650 + 600 + 400 + 400 + 500 + 200 + 400 + 700 + 500 + 400). The number of men in one contingent would have to vary between 5 (in the tribe of Simeon) and 15 (in the tribe of Gad). According to this view, the thousands were only treated as part of the actual numbers at a later stage in the transmission of the Hebrew text. And only this led to the addition of the total number of 603,550 in verse 46. So this alternative meaning of ʾelef might explain what lies behind the text. But there are many problems with this view, especially in relation to other parts of this book (see, for example, 11.21) and in other books as well (see, for example, Exo 38.26, where the same number 603,550 occurs, and Exo 1.7, 9, where it is implied that the Egyptians were afraid because there were too many Israelites). And even if it were to be a valid point of view, the total number in verse 46 still shows that the text itself treats the thousands as part of the actual numbers. (The same applies to 26.51 in the context of chapter 26, the second census of the Israelites.) The word ʾelef in the census lists of Numbers must surely mean “thousand,” because every time it alternates with “hundred” and other numbers. Thus, as in the case of similar issues of this nature (where we lack the necessary explanatory or background information), it is the actual text with its high numbers that should be translated. The text may reflect an epic tradition that attributed great numbers to the Israelites in the wilderness, conveying a sense of the grandeur of the LORD’s army (so Davies, page 17; Levine, page 139; Milgrom, page 339); God promised many descendants to Abraham. The large numbers imply that there is no ground for Israel’s fear of other nations.
Good News Translation has severely reduced verses 20-46, and it has completely omitted verse 44. But Good News Translation‘s list layout in itself is helpful, not least because the Hebrew in verses 20-43 seems like a list: many of its sentences are not grammatically complete. Bible en français courant has a list layout as well but in a more convincing way: it combines only verses 20-43, while its rendering of verses 44-46 is set off as distinct, not part of the list as such. (Bible en français courant is also different from Good News Translation in that the list layout in Bible en français courant is without headings. Instead, every line in the list in Bible en français courant begins with “tribe of….”) Alternatively, for each tribe the verses about it can be put in a separate paragraph (so New International Version). The numbers can be printed in figures in any case, not only to make the translation easier to read but also because figures are probably more fitting in a list of this kind. Finally, even a translation similar to Revised Standard Version but with fewer or no verbs (so Revised English Bible, De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling) would bring out the list character of verses 20-43 more clearly.
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Exodus. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
The Hebrew has no past tense verbs in these verses. From the book’s point of view, only verse 22 is bound to refer to the past. La Nouvelle Bible Segond uses the present tense in verse 21, and the past tense in verse 22. In some languages it may be possible to bring out the list character of the text here by leaving out verbs altogether.
Of Gershon were the family of the Libnites and the family of the Shime-ites; these were the families of the Gershonites: Verse 18 already refers to Gershon and his sons Libni and Shimei. As in verse 18, the Hebrew word for family and families (mishpachah) is better rendered “clan” and “clans” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, La Nouvelle Bible Segond). Although the literal rendering of Revised Standard Version may seem repetitive here, Good News Translation‘s less repetitive model is misleading, because it speaks of “The clan of Gershon.” However, there were two Gershonite clans, not one. Therefore Good News Translation should not be followed as a model here. If it is necessary to reduce the repetitiveness, Bible en français courant provides a better model, saying “Gershon was the ancestor of the Gershonites, [who were] divided into two clans, those of the Libnites and of the Shimeites.”
Their number according to the number of all the males from a month old and upward was seven thousand five hundred: The pronoun Their refers to the clans of Libni and Shimei. The Revised Standard Version footnote here mentions that the Hebrew repeats “their number.” Their number is better rendered “Their enrollment” (New Revised Standard Version) since the Hebrew word for number is the verb paqad (see 1.3, where it is translated “number”). The actual Hebrew word for number occurs in the phrase according to the number. Good News Translation expresses both the ideas of “number” and “enroll” here. For the possible meaning of the Hebrew word for thousand (ʾelef) as “contingent” or “division” at an earlier stage in the transmission of the Hebrew text, see the comments on 1.20-46. However, the present text no longer allows for this meaning since it adds up seven thousand five hundred and other high numbers in verse 39, so translators should keep the high numbers.
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
