Behold: this particle focuses attention on the discourse that follows. And in this case it introduces the answer to Joab’s question. See 1.2.

Come here: this begins a quote within the larger quotation of what Absalom said. A further embedded quotation is given later in the discourse of Absalom. Because this verse contains three degrees of quotation, this structure will prove to be very difficult to imitate in other languages. And even if it is possible to imitate it, the resulting translation may be extremely difficult for the average reader to follow. It will be better to translate the sense without direct quotations or by reducing the number of quotations to a minimum. A possible model for this kind of structure will be the following:

• Then Absalom reminded Joab that he had sent word for him [Joab] to come to his [Absalom’s] place because he had wanted to send Joab to King David. He wanted Joab to ask the king why he [the king] had brought him [Absalom] back from Geshur. Absalom thought it would have been better for him [Absalom] to have stayed there. So he asked Joab to let him see the king. He said, “If I have done something wrong, he can kill me.”

In attempting a restructuring of this kind, translators should pay special attention to the pronoun references and the verb tenses, making it clear who is being talked about and when the events occurred. A variety of other structures will also be possible, but this model can at least give some ideas about what may be done in the receptor language.

Let me go into the presence of the king is literally “let me see the face of the king.” See the comments on verse 24.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

A new section is started at this point by New American Bible and Contemporary English Version, but it is probably sufficient to begin a new paragraph.

The summit: this is a reference to the top of the Mount of Olives mentioned in verse 30. In some languages it may be helpful to make this clear.

Where God was worshiped: the passive form here may be made active as “where people used to worship God” (New International Version and New Century Version), or it may be possible to speak of “a place of worship” (Good News Translation) in some languages.

Behold: the Hebrew focusing particle used here may be left untranslated in some languages, or it may be rendered by an entirely different kind of form. Here it serves to highlight the dramatic entrance of Hushai.

Hushai the Archite: apart from the story of Hushai, the only mention of the Archites is found in Josh 16.2. Their territory is said to have been between Bethel and Ataroth, and they were a part of the tribe of Benjamin. The word Archite here is probably intended to indicate the clan from which Hushai came. It may therefore be rendered “of the clan of the Archites.” Good News Translation brings forward from verse 37 the information that Hushai is David’s “friend.” On the meaning and translation of this word, see the comments in verse 37.

His coat rent and earth upon his head: on these signs of mourning, see 1.2 and 1 Sam 4.12. In some cases these ideas will have to be rendered by active verbs with Hushai as subject, “He had torn his coat and put dirt on his head.” New Century Version provides a good model for some languages by making it very clear that these actions were “to show how sad he was.”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Absalom said to him: literally “Absalom said to him, saying….”

Thus has Ahithophel spoken: there is obviously something that has been left to the understanding of the reader at this point. The word Thus, literally “According to this word,” is an indication that Absalom explained to Hushai in some detail the plan that Ahithophel had proposed. But in very many languages it may be better to make the first part of the quotation indirect rather than direct. The translation may read something like “Absalom told him what Ahithophel had proposed and then asked…” or “Absalom reported the plan recommended by Ahithophel. Then he asked Hushai….”

You speak: that is, “you make a different proposal,” “what do you say?” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), or “can you come up with anything better?” (Contemporary English Version). Absalom was giving Hushai an opportunity to suggest a different plan in the event that he did not agree with the one made by Ahithophel. The pronoun you may be understood as emphatic in the Hebrew. In English this emphasis can be shown in print by the use of italic font. Fox, for example, says “If not, you speak.” But translators should use other means if they are available, in order to communicate the meaning to the hearers as well as to the readers.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It may be possible to leave the words to the man who told him implicit in many languages. This will be especially true in those cases where the verb said is translated by “responded” or “answered” as in Good News Translation.

What, you saw him! The initial exclamation translated What in Revised Standard Version is actually the same focusing particle often rendered “Behold,” as in the previous verse, and this particle is translated “behold” by King James Version and New American Standard Bible in this verse. Here it clearly marks Joab’s surprise at the fact that the soldier had not immediately killed the enemy commander. Many languages will have a particle used to show surprise or alarm that will be suitable here. The verb translated you saw actually has no object, but what is understood is certainly either Absalom or, more probably, Absalom in his peculiar predicament. In some languages it will be more natural to say “you saw that matter!” or “you saw him like that!”

Strike him there to the ground: the expected course of action in a normal battle would have been to kill the enemy immediately rather than coming back to Joab to report having seen him hanging in the tree. But the soldier had in mind the final order of David, who pleaded for clemency for Absalom (verse 5).

The reward that may have been given to this unnamed soldier if he had killed Absalom immediately would have been ten pieces of silver and a girdle. Regarding the first of these two elements, the Hebrew text actually says simply “ten of silver.” Since the weight measurement for silver was a shekel, New International Version is justified in supplying the word “shekels.” But since “shekel” is unknown to modern readers, a translation such as that found in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation is better. Most modern versions, including New Revised Standard Version, translate the second term as “belt.” See the comments on 1 Sam 18.4, where a noun with the same root is also translated “girdle” in Revised Standard Version.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

You are my bone and my flesh: this is merely another way of talking about kinship and emphasizing the physical relationship. It stands in apposition with my kinsmen. Different languages have very different ways of communicating this idea, but it is rare indeed that the receptor language will correspond perfectly with the Hebrew expression. For this reason a literal translation is not recommended. Good News Translation has altered the Hebrew my bone and my flesh to the somewhat similar English idiom “my own flesh and blood.” Some languages may say something like “we come from the same ancestor,” “we are [members of] one tribe,” or “we have the same blood.” Compare 5.1 as well as Gen 2.23; 29.14; Judges 9.2. In this context, however, in which the contrast is between the southern tribe of Judah and the northern tribes of Israel, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch may provide a more meaningful model, with “You are comrades from my tribe.”

The final question is a repetition of what has just been said in the previous verse. See the comments there about the translation of the king in a quotation from David himself.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

So: it was because of David’s command that Amasa began to act. For this reason a transition word like So may be appropriate in many languages. But in others no special transition marker will be required. It will be sufficient merely to chain the two actions together.

Went to summon: in Hebrew the verb translated summon is the same as “call … together” in the previous verse. Since the action was not completed, some translators may prefer to say “began to assemble…” or “started bringing the army together” (Contemporary English Version).

The name Judah is replaced by the pronoun “them” in Good News Translation, since it refers to all the fighting men of the tribe of Judah mentioned in verse 4. Some versions substitute “the army” (Contemporary English Version).

Delayed beyond the set time which had been appointed him: the words which had been appointed him are more literally “which he had appointed him.” In some languages the most natural way to communicate the meaning here is to repeat the specific time limit given by David and say something like “he took longer than the three days that the king had given him.” In languages where passive forms are impossible or unnatural, this will certainly be a possibility.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It was apparently the example of Rizpah in looking out for the bones of her sons that reminded David that he should do something about the bones of Saul and Jonathan. Because verses 11-14 deal with the bones of Saul and Jonathan, Contemporary English Version makes this a separate section. However, this is probably not a good idea, since the bones of the seven men who had been hanged or impaled are also included (however incidentally) in verse 13.

Since the name David is used in the beginning of this sentence (in the previous verse), it will be more naturally rendered by the pronoun “he” in this verse in some languages. But this will not be the case if a new section is started at this point.

The men: literally “the owners [or, masters]” (so Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, and see the comments on this term in 1 Sam 23.11). The translation “the people” (Good News Translation) is too general and does not adequately convey the meaning of the Hebrew noun.

Jabesh-gilead: as in 2.4-5 (see also 1 Sam 11.1, 9; 31.11), it is probably better to translate this place name in such a way as to show that Gilead is a region and not simply a part of the name of the town. Some translators may say “Jabesh in the territory called Gilead.”

The relative clause, which begins who had stolen …, is a kind of parenthetic explanation that is really a flashback describing what was done previously. For this reason translators should pay special attention to the verb forms used in the last part of this verse. It may be necessary in some cases to reverse the order of verses 11 and 12 as Contemporary English Version has done.

Public square: or “broad place” (Goldman). The Hebrew term so translated refers to a level, wide space located near the entrance gate of most large cities in the Old Testament. This area was used to handle public business of various kinds. For the account of what happened to the bodies of Saul and Jonathan, see 1 Sam 31.8-13.

The Hebrew verb here translated hanged is different from the verb translated “hang” in verses 6, 9, and 13. The verb here clearly means “to hang.”

On Gilboa: as noted on 1 Sam 28.4 (which see), the Hebrew text here and there says only Gilboa, not “Mount Gilboa.” The same preposition that Revised Standard Version here renders on is rendered “at” in 1 Sam 28.4. Here, as in 1 Sam 28.4, Revised English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible say “at Gilboa.” That Saul died on Mount Gilboa is, however, clearly stated in 1 Sam 31.8.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .