14When he had come to the king, the king said to him, “Micaiah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I refrain?” He answered, “Go up and triumph; they will be given into your hand.”
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, some translators select the exclusive form, “since Micaiah would not be expected to participate in the battle,” the Jarai translation, however, uses the inclusive pronoun.
In Malay, the pronoun beta for the royal “I” (or “my” or “me”) that is used by royals when speaking to people of lower rank, subordinates or commoners to refer to themselves in these verses. This reflects the “language of the court because the monarchy and sultanate in Malaysia are still alive and well. All oral and printed literature (including newspapers and magazines) preserve and glorify the language of the court. Considering that the language of the court is part of the Malaysian language, court language is used sparingly where appropriate, specifically with texts relating to palace life.” (Source: Daud Soesilo in The Bible Translator 2025, p. 263ff.)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Chronicles 18:14:
Kupsabiny: “When Micaiah arrived, Ahab asked, ‘Micaiah, should we go to Ramoth-gilead or not?’ Micaiah answered (him), ‘You (plur.) go to fight. You (sing.) will be given victory.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “When he arrived the king asked him, "Micaiah, should we attack Ramoth-gilead or should we not?" He said, "Attack, you will certainly win."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “When Micaya arrived to King Ahab the king asked him, ‘Micaya, shall we (incl.) attack Ramot Gilead or not?’ Micaya replied, ‘[You (plur.)] attack and you (plur.) will-win, for this will-be-given to you (plur.).’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “When Micaiah arrived, the king of Israel asked him, ‘Should we go to attack Ramoth, or not?’ Micaiah replied, ‘Sure, go! Yahweh will enable your army to defeat them!’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Ge’ez, 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.”
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 Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).
And when he had come to the king, the king said to him: The pronouns he and him refer to Micaiah, which New Century Version makes explicit. The king here and in the next verse refers to Ahab and not to Jehoshaphat. If there is any doubt about this, it may be necessary to replace the king with “Ahab” (Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version) or “King Ahab” (Good News Translation).
Micaiah, shall we go to Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear?: This question is the same one that Ahab asked the other prophets in verse 5 (see the comments there). Here the question is directed specifically to Micaiah. Since Micaiah would not be expected to participate in the battle, the pronoun we should be translated as exclusive in those languages that distinguish between first person plural inclusive and exclusive pronouns.
And he answered is literally “And he said.” Revised Standard Version correctly renders the Hebrew verb for “said” as answered to introduce the response of Micaiah (compare verse 5).
Go up and triumph: The Hebrew verbs translated Go up and triumph are plural. For Go up, see the comments on verses 5 and 11.
They will be given into your hand: See the comments on 2Chr 18.5. The pronoun they refers to the Syrians who had captured Ramoth from Israel. Some languages may prefer to render this pronoun as “your enemies” or “the Syrians” for clarity. The Hebrew pronoun for your is plural. If it is necessary to avoid the passive verb will be given, this clause may be rendered “the LORD will give you victory over the Syrians.”
In those languages where direct discourse is uncommon, the two quotations in this verse may be translated as indirect speech by saying:
• When Micaiah came to King Ahab, the king asked him whether or not he and Jehoshaphat should attack Ramoth in Gilead. And Micaiah told him that they should go ahead and attack, because the LORD would give them victory.
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 .
When he came before King Ahab, the king asked him, -or-
Micaiah arrived ⌊where the kings were sitting⌋. King Ahab asked him
18:14b “Micaiah, should we go to war against Ramoth-gilead, or should we refrain?”
“Micaiah, I and my soldiers want to attack the town of Ramoth-gilead. Shall we go or not?” -or-
if they should fight the people of Ramoth-gilead and take their town or not.
18:14c “Go up and triumph,” Micaiah replied,
Micaiah answered, “Attack. You will win the battle. -or-
Micaiah replied that the king and his soldiers should attack and take the town.
18:14d “for they will be given into your hand.”
Yahweh will help you to conquer the town.” -or-
They would be victorious.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.