7As he went he sent word to King Jehoshaphat of Judah, “The king of Moab has rebelled against me; will you go with me to battle against Moab?” He answered, “I will; I am as you are; my people are your people; my horses are your horses.”
The name that is transliterated as “Judah” or “Judea” in English (referring to the son of Jacob, the tribe, and the territory) is translated in Spanish Sign Language as “lion” (referring to Genesis 49:9 and Revelation 5:5). This sign for lion is reserved for regions and kingdoms. (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff. and Steve Parkhurst)
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)
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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”
He went and sent word: Many modern versions ignore the first verb in this verse (Good News Translation, New International Version, New Century Version, Revised English Bible), because the verb “to go” here in Hebrew is used as a kind of auxiliary verb meaning “to be aroused to action” (Cogan and Tadmor, page 44). But New Revised Standard Version and Hobbs begin the verse with “As he went…,” presumably implying that he went out of Samaria. Translators may follow the model of Good News Translation in saying simply “He sent word.” Sent word is literally “sent,” but most translations add an object, such as “word” or “message,” as the context requires.
The king of Moab has rebelled against me; will you go with me to battle…?: In some languages the use of a direct quotation in this context may not be completely natural. One possible way to render it indirectly would be as follows: “… sent a message to King Jehoshaphat of Judah telling him that the king of Moab had rebelled against Israel and asking him to join in battle against the people of Moab.”
The implied information in this verse includes the fact that Joram’s messenger or messengers delivered the message and then returned to him with Jehoshaphat’s answer that follows in the text.
He said, “I will go; I am as you are…”: See the comments on 1 Kgs 22.4. In order to avoid confusion, especially for those who hear the text read, some translations replace the pronoun he with the words “The king of Judah” (Parole de Vie), “King Jehoshaphat” (Good News Translation), or simply “Jehoshaphat” (Nouvelle Bible Segond). The king’s response is an indication of complete availability. The king of Judah begins by affirming his own availability and goes on to state that his soldiers and his horses were also ready to move in support of Joram.
If the whole response must be made indirect, the following is a possible model:
• In response the king of Judah agreed to go. He said that he, his soldiers, and his horses were ready to help, just as if they belonged to Joram.
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.