12A letter came to him from the prophet Elijah, saying, “Thus says the Lord, the God of your father David: Because you have not walked in the ways of your father Jehoshaphat or in the ways of King Asa of Judah
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, iw-are-ru (言われる) or “say” is used.
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.”
And a letter came to him from Elijah the prophet: The writer does not state exactly when the prophet Elijah sent a this letter to Jehoram, so Bible en français courant adds the words “one day” near the beginning of this verse, which other languages may find helpful. This is the first mention of Elijah in 1-2 Chronicles. Revised Standard Version‘s literal rendering of this clause may give the impression that the letter acted on its own. It will be much more natural to say “Then Elijah the prophet wrote Jehoram this letter” (New Living Translation). It is even better to say “One day, Jehoram received a letter from Elijah the prophet” (Contemporary English Version; similarly New International Version), since this rendering keeps the focus on Jehoram.
Thus says the LORD: See the comments on 1 Chr 17.4. The LORD’s speech continues until the end of verse 15. This embedded quotation may be avoided by making it indirect speech as Good News Translation has done.
The God of David your father: David was not the father of Jehoram, but his ancestor, so Good News Translation says “the God of your ancestor David.”
Because you have not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat your father, or in the ways of Asa king of Judah: This clause begins a long complex sentence that is not completed until the end of verse 15. Verses 12b-13 give the reasons for God’s punishment in verses 14-15. Good News Translation breaks this long complex sentence into several sentences, which other languages may find helpful. For walked in the ways of, see the comments on 2 Chr 6.14 and 11.17. This phrase may be rendered “lived according to the example of” or “imitated the model of.” Jehoshaphat was the literal father of Jehoram, and Asa was his grandfather (so Good News Translation, Bible en français courant). For the positive example of Jehoshaphat, see 2 Chr 17.3-6; for that of Asa, see 2 Chr 14.2-5 and 15.17.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.