6Then he wrote them a second letter, saying, “If you are on my side and if you are ready to obey me, take the heads of your master’s sons and come to me at Jezreel tomorrow at this time.” Now the king’s sons, seventy persons, were with the leaders of the city, who were charged with their upbringing.
The Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, and Greek that is translated in English typically as “obedience” or “obey” is translated in Tepeuxila Cuicatec as “thing hearing,” because “to hear is to obey.” (Source: Marjorie Davis in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 34ff. )
In Huba it is translated as hya nǝu nyacha: “follow (his) mouth.” (Source: David Frank in this blog post )
In Central Mazahua it is translated as “listen-obey” and in Huehuetla Tepehua as “believe-obey” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), and in Noongar as dwangka-don, lit. “hear do” (source: Portions of the Holy Bible in the Nyunga language of Australia, 2018).
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.”
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).
Here the scene shifts back to Jezreel, so the pronoun he at the beginning of this verse refers to Jehu. If there is any doubt about who is intended, then the receptor language should probably replace it with the proper name “Jehu” as in many modern translations (Good News Translation, New International Version, New Century Version, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Nouvelle Bible Segond).
If you are on my side is literally “If you are with me.” This is comparable to the question, “Who is on my side?” asked by Jehu in 2 Kgs 9.32. Other languages may say “If you are for me,” “If you favor me,” or “If you are really my people.”
Take the heads of your master’s sons: The Masoretic Text is literally “take the heads of the men of your master’s sons.” Some Hebrew manuscripts as well as some of the ancient versions omit “of the men.” The intended meaning of both readings is probably the same. Jehu’s order is ambiguous in Hebrew. The word for heads sometimes means “leaders” (see, for example, Exo 6.14; Num 1.16; Deut 1.15; 1 Kgs 8.1). So it is possible to understand these words as an order to bring the leaders of the men of Samaria to Jezreel. The other meaning is, of course, that they should cut off the heads of these men. Rather than attempting to maintain ambiguity, Parole de Vie says “cut off the heads of all the sons and grandsons of the king.” The verbs take and come (in the following clause) may be translated by a single verb such as “bring” (Revised English Bible) in some languages. In fact, the Septuagint has the verb “bring” in this verse.
As in verse 1, the king’s sons refers to the descendants or at least the children and grandchildren of the former king Ahab. This phrase may be rendered “the royal princes” (New International Version) or simply “the princes” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh).
The great men of the city; that is, “the leading men of the city” (New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version) of Samaria. Some other possible translations are “prominent men…” (New American Bible), “the nobles…” (Revised English Bible), and “the leaders…” (New Revised Standard Version). Some translations make it explicit that the city is “Samaria” (Good News Translation, Bible en français courant).
Who were bringing them up: The English idiom here translates a Hebrew verb form that has as its root meaning in this context “grow up” or “develop to adulthood” (the same verb is used in 2 Kgs 4.18.) The descendants of Ahab were in the process of becoming adults under the direction of the leaders of Samaria. New Jerusalem Bible indicates that they were “being educated” by these men. But the term has a broader meaning than mere education although this would be included. New Living Translation probably captures the intended meaning with “where they had been raised since childhood.” Most translations of the Hebrew participle here use the continuous past tense, but La Bible Pléiade claims that the participle has a completed past sense here, so La Bible Pléiade translates “who had brought them up.”
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (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.