Jehoshaphat

The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Jehoshaphat” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the signs for “king” and “mixup” referring to the fateful alliance with king Ahab of Israel in 1 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 18. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Jehoshaphat” 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 .

More information about Jehoshaphat .

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).

Japanese benefactives (tsuiteite)

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 benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.

Here, tsuiteite (着ていて) or “be waring” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on 2 Chronicles 18:29

While Ahab did not believe what the prophet Micaiah had told him, he nevertheless took certain precautions. He attempted to hide his true identity so that his enemies would not recognize him.

And the king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat: Depending on the receptor language, in this context it may be more natural to refer to the king of Israel as “Ahab” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, La Bible du Semeur) or “King Ahab” (New Century Version).

I will disguise myself and go into battle: The Hebrew verbs rendered disguise myself and go may be read as either infinitives or second person singular imperatives. If they are read as imperatives, then the Masoretic Text for this sentence may be translated “Disguise yourself and go into the battle.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh translates the parallel text in 1 Kgs 22.30 this way. But such a translation makes no sense with the rest of this verse. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh states in a footnote to 1 Kgs 22.30 that the Targum and Septuagint read “I will disguise myself and go.” Walsh attempts to make sense of the Masoretic Text of 1 Kgs 22 by arguing that these verbs should be read as infinitives and that Ahab is thinking through his plans. Walsh translates as follows: “To disguise oneself and to go into battle.” In his commentary on 1 Kings, De Vries also reads these verbs as infinitives and translates “With respect to girding for combat and entering into battle.” The best solution seems to be that these two verbs should be read as infinitives, which are sometimes used in exclamatory and excited speech when the action in itself is vividly expressed. They may be rendered “Let me disguise myself and enter the battle!”

The Hebrew verb translated disguise myself may present problems in some languages. The basic meaning of the verb is “to change.” The idea here is that of changing one’s appearance to deceive other people about one’s identity. Possible translation models are “change my clothes” (Parole de Vie) and “make myself look like someone else.”

But you wear your robes: You renders an independent pronoun that is emphatic in Hebrew. It serves to highlight the contrast between the actions of Ahab and Jehoshaphat. However, translating the common Hebrew conjunction that precedes it as but may serve the same purpose in some languages. The robes that Jehoshaphat is to wear are his “royal garments” (Good News Translation), mentioned earlier in verse 9.

And they went into battle: The parallel text in 1 Kgs 22.30 says “and he went into battle,” referring only to King Ahab. Some of the ancient and modern versions have the singular here in 2 Chronicles also (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, La Bible Pléiade). However, there is no reason to change the plural here in the Masoretic Text.

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 .