Pharaoh

The term that is used for monarchs in ancient Egypt and is transliterated as “Pharaoh” in English is translated in Finnish Sign Language with the sign signifying the “fake metal beard (postiche)” that was word by Pharaohs during official functions. (Source: Tarja Sandholm)


“Pharaoh” in Finnish Sign Language (source )

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Pharaoh .

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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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 Kings 9:16

This verse and the beginning of verse 17 consist of a parenthetical statement, explaining how Gezer had been destroyed earlier and why it had to be rebuilt. Revised Standard Version and New Living Translation place this comment within parentheses to show its parenthetical nature. Contemporary English Version shows that verses 16-17a refer to previous events by beginning verse 16 as follows: “Earlier, the king of Egypt….” New Century Version does the same kind of thing by beginning this verse with “In the past….” This solution will be preferable in a number of languages.

Pharoah king of Egypt: See the comments at 1 Kgs 3.1 and 7.8.

Burnt it with fire: This expression is redundant and will sound unnatural if translated literally into some languages. New International Version is more natural in English with “set it on fire.” But there may be other ways to express this same idea in the receptor language. International Children’s Bible says simply “burned it.” But since the Egyptian king probably did not actually do it himself, other languages may use a causative verbal form here, such as “caused it to be burned.”

The Hebrew text states specifically that the Egyptians had slain the Canaanites who dwelt in the city. Unfortunately Good News Translation does not keep the specific identity of the people who lived in Gezer, referring to them only as “its inhabitants.” But according to Josh 16.10 and Jdg 1.29, the Israelites had not been able to drive out the Canaanites who lived in the city of Gezer. Translators should not follow Good News Translation here.

Had given it as dowry to his daughter: Dowry translates a Hebrew noun meaning “a farewell gift” or “a dismissal gift,” which the father of a bride gives to the bride. Hebrew has a different noun which is also translated “dowry” but which refers to the gift that a groom pays to the bride’s father. In this context it would be a mistake to translate what many cultures understand as “a dowry.” It is rather “a marriage gift” (Revised English Bible) or “a wedding gift” (New Living Translation) to the bride.

Regarding the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Solomon had married, see 1 Kgs 3.1.

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 .