35The battle grew hot that day, and the king was propped up in his chariot facing the Arameans until at evening he died; the blood from the wound had flowed into the bottom of the chariot.
The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated into English as “chariot” is translated into Anuak as “canoe pulled by horse.” “Canoe” is the general term for “vehicle” (source: Loren Bliese). Similarly it is translated in Lokạạ as ukwaa wạ nyanyang ntuuli or “canoe that is driven by horses.” (Source: J.A. Naudé, C.L. Miller Naudé, J.O. Obono in Acta Theologica 43/2, 2023, p. 129ff. )
Other translations include:
Chichicapan Zapotec: “ox cart” (in Acts 8) (ox carts are common vehicles for travel) (source: Loren Bliese)
Chichimeca-Jonaz, it is translated as “little house with two feet pulled by two horses” (source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
HausaCommon Language Bible as keken-doki or “cart of donkey” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
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:
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.”
The battle grew hot is literally “the battle went up.” Gray says “the conflict … mounted,” in the sense that the intensity of fighting increased. In other languages translators may say something like “the combat became very violent” (Parole de Vie) or “the fight grew fiercer” (Moffatt).
The king was propped up in his chariot facing the Syrians: The text does not indicate why Ahab was held up in his chariot. Perhaps this was an attempt to keep the Israelite soldiers from knowing that their king had been seriously wounded. But any suggested reason is only speculation and must not be inserted into the translation of this verse. In languages where this passive construction may need to be made active, translators may say “the king found a way to support himself in an upright position in his chariot while he faced the Syrians.”
Syrians is literally “Aram” (see the comments on the collective use of this singular noun in 1 Kgs 20.20).
Until at evening he died: This expression is awkward in English. New Century Version renders it as a separate sentence at the end of the verse, saying “That evening he died.” The word for evening must refer to a time of day in the late afternoon but just prior to the setting of the sun since “sunset” is mentioned at the beginning of the next verse.
The blood of the wound flowed into the bottom of the chariot: Bottom translates the Hebrew noun that often is used of a person’s lap or bosom or of the fold of a garment above the belt where possessions were kept. Its use here in verse 35 is unusual, but the context makes it clear that the meaning is the interior or bottom of the chariot.
The Hebrew text speaks of Ahab’s death before mentioning that his wound bled. Good News Translation sees it as more logical to reverse the order of these two elements, mentioning first the bleeding and then the king’s death. If the order of the Hebrew presents logical problems in the receptor language, the Good News Translation model may be followed.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.