Translation commentary on Leviticus 4:24

The pronoun “He” in Good News Translation refers to the ruler or leader who has committed the sin and has brought the animal as a sacrifice.

Shall lay his hand upon the head: see 1.4 and 4.15.

Kill: or “slaughter.” See 1.5.

In the place where they kill the burnt offering: this detail in the ritual does not appear in verses 4 or 15. However, this does not seem to imply that the slaughter of the male goat is performed in a different place from the slaughter of the bull in the two preceding cases. Consequently Good News Translation fills out the implied information by adding “on the north side of the altar.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 6:10

And: the transition word in Revised Standard Version is very weak. The rendering in the receptor language should make it clear that what is described in this verse takes place the day after the events mentioned in the previous verse. It may be possible to say “Then” (as in Good News Translation, New English Bible, New International Version, and others), but in some cases it may be necessary to say “the next day” or “on the following morning.”

Linen: a white cloth material made from the fibers of flax and known for its strength and coolness. In those areas where flax is unknown, one may have to use a more generic expression such as “fine white cloth.” Or it may be necessary to settle for an approximation in the text and add an explanatory footnote.

Garment: an outer garment corresponding most closely to a “robe” or a “cloak.”

Breeches: an undergarment for the lower body. Moffatt and New English Bible translate “drawers,” while Good News Translation has “shorts.” New International Version is close to the meaning, although more removed from common language, when it renders the word “undergarments.” The closest natural equivalent in the receptor language should be used.

Upon his body: this information may be left implicit in many languages. But New International Version retains this to emphasize the fact that the clothing in question is immediately “next to his body.”

The ashes: Good News Translation “the greasy ashes.” See 1.16.

In some languages it may be more natural to mention the actions of the priest first and then add “In order to do this, he [the priest] must wear the proper clothing: a linen robe and linen shorts.” It should also be noted that in some languages it will be more natural to mention the underclothing first and then the outer clothing. But in others the reverse will be more natural.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 7:19

Revised Standard Version and a number of other English versions begin a new paragraph at the beginning of this verse, but Good News Translation takes the first part of this verse as belonging to the previous paragraph (similarly Bible en français courant and Traduction oecuménique de la Bible). Some versions assume that the general rules begin at verse 18 (see New Jerusalem Bible). Translators are advised to follow the paragraphing of Good News Translation at this point.

Flesh: the word thus translated in Revised Standard Version could theoretically refer either to the meat of the peace offering mentioned in the previous verse or to meat in general. However, it is almost certain that it refers more specifically to the meat offered to the LORD. Therefore it may be advisable to translate “that meat” or “this meat,” clearly referring back to verse 18. Moffatt renders the term “sacrificial flesh.”

Unclean: that is, ritually unclean (see 5.2).

With fire: see verse 17.

All who are clean …: or “ritually clean” (see 5.2).

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 8:16

This is essentially a repetition of what is found in 3.3-4 and 4.8-10a.

He: although some feel that the structure of the Hebrew requires us to understand Aaron as the implied subject, again the pronoun refers to Moses, and this should be made clear in the receptor language. The proper name is, in fact, used at the end of the verse, but it will be more helpful to the reader if it is shifted forward.

Burned them: see 1.9.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 9:13

Compare 1.12.

Piece by piece, and the head: the structure of Revised Standard Version at this point is awkward and needs restructuring. Since the head is one of the pieces of the animal, Good News Translation has “the head and the other pieces.” In some cases one may prefer “the head and all the other pieces.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 11:4 - 11:6

Nevertheless: the transition word is important here. It marks a sharp contrast between what may be eaten (verse 3) and what must not be eaten (verses 4-6). An American Translation and New Jerusalem Bible have “However,” while New American Bible and Good News Translation have “but.” New International Version attempts to mark the contrast by beginning a new paragraph at this point, but a good translation of the transition word will probably be better in most languages.

You shall not eat: used with the negation, this verb form takes the character of a strong prohibition (compare verse 2), which is made clearer in Good News Translation, “you must not eat.”

The camel: the use of the singular to represent the entire class of animals is common in Hebrew but unnatural and unacceptable in many other languages. It will give the wrong impression if used in translation.

Since camels are unknown in many parts of the world, a borrowed word may have to be used and explained in a footnote or glossary. It is also advisable to use illustrations in order to help the reader. Technically, the word used here refers to a “dromedary,” which has only one hump on its back and is somewhat smaller than a camel. But in ordinary English the term “camel” is used for both the dromedary and the camel. If the receptor language distinguishes between the two, then the word for dromedary should be used.

The animal referred to in English as rock badger is a small grass-eating animal found in the Near East and North Africa. It is about the size of a rabbit and normally lives in groups in rocky terrain. Neither the badger nor the hare actually chew the cud as cows do, but by the way their jaws move they give the appearance of doing so, and for this reason they are excluded from the edible animals. On the other hand, some writers have suggested that the word usually translated hare is really some other animal that actually does “chew the cud.” But this not taken seriously by Old Testament scholars.

There were several species of hare or “rabbits” in Palestine. They are members of the rodent family and have ears that are longer than those of other rodents.

The three animals mentioned here do not constitute a complete list but merely serve as examples. For this reason, in some languages it may be advisable to add “for example” at the most natural place in verses 4-6.

Is unclean to you: this expression is found in verses 5 and 6 in Revised Standard Version but is rendered only once in Good News Translation. The passive construction of Good News Translation leaves implicit the words to you. But this may be translated as in New English Bible, “you shall regard it as unclean.”

Verses 4-6 contain a great deal of repetition which may be eliminated in languages where such style is considered heavy or awkward. Good News Translation provides a good model for reducing the repetition.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 12:1 - 12:2

Said to Moses: see 4.1.

Say to the people …: see 1.2.

If a woman conceives, and bears a male child: the Hebrew language often uses expressions like this, putting together two verbs where the first one indicates the beginning of a process and the second one describes the main action. This type of construction is not normal in many languages, since the first verb is implied by the second. A woman cannot give birth unless she has first conceived. So the verb “conceive” may be left implicit in many languages. The verb translated bears literally means “brings forth seed.” Since each language has its own way of referring to childbirth, the translator must look for the most natural way of expressing this idea to a group of readers or hearers composed of men, women, and children.

In some languages it will be much more natural to say “a son,” as in Good News Translation, in place of a male child, but in others the expression may be just like Revised Standard Version. The Hebrew actually only says “a male,” leaving the word “child” implicit.

Seven days: since the number seven has special significance (see 4.6), some translators may wish to retain it in translation, but in some cases it may be necessary to say “a week,” because that is much more natural.

As: this word indicates a comparison between the uncleanness of the woman at childbirth with the uncleanness at the time of her monthly period of menstruation. The similarity involves both the amount of time required and the consequences of the woman’s uncleanness.

At the time of her menstruation: literally “in the days of her separation for her weakness.” The experience described here is common to women in every culture all over the world. But the way of talking about it varies widely from one language to another, because it is a very private matter. Some of the ways that this idea is expressed in other cultures are “to cause blood to flow,” “to see blood,” “to see the moon,” “to have the sickness of women,” and “to be avoided.” The translator must be sure that the words chosen in the receptor language are natural, understandable, and suitable to the context of regulations concerning cleanness and uncleanness.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Leviticus 13:30

Deeper than the skin: see verse 3.

Yellow and thin: New American Bible translates “fine yellow hair,” and New English Bible “hair [that] is yellow and sparse.” The word translated thin may also mean “small,” or in some cases “withered.” But here it is probably better to think in terms of an area where there are less hairs and where the hairs are yellow.

It is an itch: the word used here literally means “a tearing off,” something so annoying that the person who has it cannot keep his hands off it. Various attempts have been made to identify this with skin diseases known today. Here is a sampling of what modern versions have done with the word: “a scurf” (New English Bible), “a scall” (New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible), “tinea” (Jerusalem Bible), “ringworm” (An American Translation, Moffatt, and almost all French versions). Only New International Version goes along with the general term itch in Revised Standard Version. Translators should probably use their own equivalent of “ringworm,” or a more general expression as in Good News Translation.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .