messenger

The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “messenger” in English is translated in Noongar as moort yana-waangki or “person walk-talk” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

desire / ask for (Japanese honorifics)

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.

Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.

The concept of “desire” or “ask for” is translated in the Shinkaiyaku Bible as o-motome (お求め), combining “seek” (motome) with the respectful prefix o-. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

king

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 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 Kings 20:9

Ahab has agreed to let the Syrian king take his own wives and children, but he refuses to allow the Syrians to come into the city and take whatever they want.

He said; that is, Ahab said. In this context the verb said may be better translated “gave this answer” (New Jerusalem Bible) or “gave the following response” (Bible en français courant).

Tell my lord the king: Nearly all translations take the words my lord the king as words spoken to the messengers of Benhadad about Benhadad. But these words may also be taken as part of Ahab’s message that the envoys are to give to Benhadad. Anchor Bible follows this second interpretation and says “Say: ‘To my lord, the king….’ ” This second interpretation is supported by ancient letters from the ancient Near East in which kings are addressed in this way.

This thing (or, “this matter”) will have to be made clearer in many languages. It is taken by New Century Version to refer to Benhadad’s “second command” (similarly Good News Translation). That is, Ahab could not agree to the threat in verse 6, which included the soldiers of Benhadad taking anything they wanted.

The messengers departed and brought him word again: Him refers to Benhadad. The Hebrew text does not have a word that corresponds to the word again at the end of this verse in Revised Standard Version. But since the time between verses 4 and 5 imply that messengers had earlier taken a message to Benhadad, it is legitimate to say again here.

Good News Translation has restructured this verse in the following two ways: (1) the embedded quotation has been turned into an indirect quotation, and (2) Ahab’s reference to himself in the second person as your servant has been changed to the first person singular.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .