The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated into English as “chariot” is translated into Anuak as “canoe pulled by horse.” “Canoe” is the general term for “vehicle” (source: Loren Bliese). Similarly it is translated in Lokạạ as ukwaa wạ nyanyang ntuuli or “canoe that is driven by horses.” (Source: J.A. Naudé, C.L. Miller Naudé, J.O. Obono in Acta Theologica 43/2, 2023, p. 129ff. )
Other translations include:
Chichicapan Zapotec: “ox cart” (in Acts 8) (ox carts are common vehicles for travel) (source: Loren Bliese)
Chichimeca-Jonaz, it is translated as “little house with two feet pulled by two horses” (source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
HausaCommon Language Bible as keken-doki or “cart of donkey” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
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)
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.”
Jehu mounted his chariot, and went to Jezreel: The first verb used here in Hebrew may mean “to climb up on” and may be translated as Revised Standard Version and many other versions do. But the basic meaning includes “all aspects of riding, from the mounting of an animal or vehicle to the moving forward toward one’s destination” (Cogan and Tadmor, page 109). So it may mean “to ride,” which is the next step after getting into a chariot. Jewish Publication Version translates “Jehu rode in a chariot, and went to Jezreel.” But Contemporary English Version translates the two verbs naturally into English as “Jehu got in his chariot and rode to Jezreel.” Clearly the means of “going” was riding in the chariot. Revised Standard Version adds the words his chariot, which are only implied in the Hebrew text.
For: The connecting word here introduces the reason for Jehu’s going to Jezreel. Some languages may require a word like “because [that is where Joram was in bed recovering].”
Joram lay there: The Hebrew verb used here literally means “to lie down,” and the same verb is sometimes used of having sexual intercourse (2 Sam 11.4) or simply of ordinary sleeping (2 Sam 11.9). In this case, however, it is quite clear that the writer’s intention is to show that “Joram was lying ill” (New Revised Standard Version). This should not be taken to mean that he had contracted some additional illness in addition to his battle injury, but that he had not yet recovered from the wounds he suffered in the battle with the Syrians (see verse 15 and 2 Kgs 8.28-29). It may be better to translate something like “Joram was still in bed recovering from his injury.”
Ahaziah … had come down to visit Joram: See the comments on 2 Kgs 8.28. Ahaziah had most likely come from Jerusalem or Samaria. While this certainly involved proceeding from a higher elevation to a lower one, it may not be natural in other languages to use a verb like had come down. The perspective of the writer may also be important. But modern versions are divided on this matter. Revised English Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, and New Jerusalem Bible use the form “had gone down,” indicating that the writer was elsewhere, but others have “had come down” (New Revised Standard Version) or simply “had come” (New American Bible). What is important is that Ahaziah “was there” (Good News Translation) and this more neutral form may be the best model for many languages to follow.
It is interesting to note that Contemporary English Version restructures verses 14-16 together, providing what may be considered a more logical order:
• King Joram of Israel had been badly wounded in the battle at Ramoth, trying to defend it against King Hazael and the Syrian army. Joram was now recovering in Jezreel, and King Ahaziah of Judah was there, visiting him.
Meanwhile, Jehu was in Ramoth, making plans to kill Joram. He said to his officers, “If you want me to be king, then don’t let anyone leave this town. They might go to Jezreel and tell Joram.” Then Jehu got in his chariot and rode to Jezreel.
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.