family / clan / house

The Hebrew terms that are translated as “family” or “clan” or “house” or similar in English are all translated in Kwere as ng’holo or “clan.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)

In the English translation by Goldingay (2018) it is translated as “kin-group.”

See also tribe.

Judah, Judea

The name that is transliterated as “Judah” or “Judea” in English (referring to the son of Jacob, the tribe, and the territory) is translated in Spanish Sign Language as “lion” (referring to Genesis 49:9 and Revelation 5:5). This sign for lion is reserved for regions and kingdoms. (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff. and Steve Parkhurst)


“Judah” and “Judea” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

For more information on translations of proper names with sign language see Sign Language Bible Translations Have Something to Say to Hearing Christians .

See also Judah, Judah (son of Jacob) , and Tribe of Judah .

king

Click here to view graphically

Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
  • Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))

Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:

“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 9:1

So all Israel was enrolled by genealogies; and these are written …: The Hebrew text of this chapter begins with the common conjunction, which Revised Standard Version translates So (also English Standard Version). New International Version, New Century Version, and many other modern versions leave it untranslated, but if the first half of this verse is taken as a part of the previous section (as in New International Version and New Century Version), then a connecting word may be required. The first half of this verse seems to form a conclusion to the genealogies of chapters 1–8. For this reason the Hebrew verb translated was enrolled is better rendered with a past perfect verb in some languages, for example, “had been enrolled” (Nouvelle Bible Segond, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). And these are written is literally “and behold these are written.” The Hebrew word for “behold” is a focus marker calling particular attention to what follows. King James Version and New American Standard Bible render this word as “behold” here, but most modern translations do not translate it. The passive verbs, was enrolled and are written, will have to be made active in certain languages. A possible model that does this for the first half of this verse is “So scribes [or, someone] had written down [or, recorded] the names of all the people of Israel according to their genealogies….”

The Book of the Kings of Israel: Regarding sources used by the Chronicler, see “Translating 1–2 Chronicles,” pages 3-4. After the northern kingdom of Israel was conquered by Assyria in 721 B.C., the name Israel was often used to refer to the southern kingdom of Judah (see, for example, Micah 3.9-10). Here Israel probably refers to both kingdoms.

And Judah was taken into exile in Babylon because of their unfaithfulness: Some translators prefer to render the common Hebrew conjunction for And as “But” (Holman Christian Standard Bible, Revised English Bible), because there seems to be a contrast between Israel and Judah (see the comments below). The Hebrew verb rendered was taken into exile is plural, so Judah here refers to the people of Judah. Good News Translation says “The people of Judah” in order to clarify that Judah does not refer to an individual. In Hebrew the noun rendered Babylon is used to refer to the country Babylonia and to its capital city Babylon. Unlike English, in some modern languages there is no distinction in form between the name of the city and the name of the country. Contemporary English Version correctly says “Babylonia” here. Babylonia occupied the southern part of Mesopotamia in what is now the country of Iraq. The people of Judah went into exile because of their unfaithfulness, which refers to their rebellion against God. Good News Translation says “as punishment for their sins.”

In languages where passives are unknown or unnatural, the passive verb was taken will have to be made an active one. If so, translators may wish to render the last sentence of this verse as “The enemies of Judah forced them to go to Babylonia because of their rebellion against God.” However, the ultimate agent in the mind of the writer may well be God since the context shows that this happened because of the unfaithfulness of the people. So it may be better to use two separate sentences, saying “The enemies of Judah captured them and forced them to go to Babylonia. God allowed this to happen because they had sinned against him.”

The relationship between the two parts of this verse is not clear. New Jerusalem Bible may express the intended meaning: “Thus, all Israel’s official genealogies had been entered in the records of the kings of Israel and Judah before they were deported to Babylon for their infidelity.” According to this interpretation, verse 1a refers to the official genealogies before the time of the exile. However, the difficulty with this translation is that the system of accents in the Masoretic Text clearly marks a major division between the words Israel and And Judah. Therefore some interpreters take the second half of verse 1 with the beginning of verse 2. Osty-Trinquet, for example, says:

• 1 All the Israelites were registered genealogically, and they were written in the book of the kings of Israel.
After Judah had been deported to Babylon for its unfaithfulness, 2 the first to live in their….

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .