וְהִנֵּה֩ קָ֨מָה כָֽל־הַמִּשְׁפָּחָ֜ה עַל־שִׁפְחָתֶ֗ךָ וַיֹּֽאמְרוּ֙ תְּנִ֣י ׀ אֶת־מַכֵּ֣ה אָחִ֗יו וּנְמִתֵ֨הוּ֙ בְּנֶ֤פֶשׁ אָחִיו֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הָרָ֔ג וְנַשְׁמִ֖ידָה גַּ֣ם אֶת־הַיּוֹרֵ֑שׁ וְכִבּ֗וּ אֶת־גַּֽחַלְתִּי֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר נִשְׁאָ֔רָה לְבִלְתִּ֧י שום־לְאִישִׁ֛י שֵׁ֥ם וּשְׁאֵרִ֖ית עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הָאֲדָמָֽה׃ פ
7Now the whole family has risen against your servant. They say, ‘Give up the man who struck his brother, so that we may kill him for the life of his brother whom he murdered, even if we destroy the heir as well.’ Thus they would quench my one remaining ember and leave to my husband neither name nor remnant on the face of the earth.”
The Hebrew terms that are translated as “family” or “clan” or “house” or similar in English are all translated in Kwere as ng’holo or “clan.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
In the English translation by Goldingay (2018) it is translated as “kin-group.”
See also tribe.
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the exclusive pronoun, excluding the woman of Tekoa.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Samuel 14:7:
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, okiki (お聞き) or “listen” 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. )
That the family would attempt to kill a person who had murdered his own brother is in keeping with the law of Moses as found in Num 35.19-21. In other words the family members had the obligation to punish the brother (see the comments on verse 11 below).
And now: the Hebrew text actually begins with the particle often translated “behold.” This serves to focus the attention of the reader or hearer on what follows.
The whole family: the word used here refers to the extended family. Many English versions, including New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, and New American Bible, have “the whole clan.” See the comment on this Hebrew noun at 1 Sam 9.21.
Against your handmaid: that is, “against me.” See the comments on handmaid in the previous verse.
There is a direct quotation within another quotation here. This may be unnatural in many languages. So the internal quotation may be made indirect as Good News Translation has done.
Give up: the verb used here is actually the ordinary one meaning “give.” Its use in this context seems to imply that the woman had been hiding or protecting her remaining son. Goldman has translated it “deliver,” while others have the English idiom “hand over” (Revised English Bible, New International Version, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). But many languages may prefer a rather literal rendering like “give us the man…” (Anchor Bible).
The man who struck his brother: the verb struck in this expression means “killed” and should probably be so translated in most languages. Hebrew uses two synonymous verbs in this verse, which Revised Standard Version renders struck and slew (see the comments on 12.9). And the man will be more appropriately translated “the son” or “your son.” If the quotation within the quotation is made indirect, this will be “my son,” since the mother is speaking.
The information regarding the responsibility or obligation of the relatives may not be known to many readers today, and for this reason Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente may provide a good model for the first part of this verse:
“… and they say to me, ‘Turn over the murderer to us. We must kill him in order to vindicate his brother whom he murdered.’ ”
And so they would destroy the heir also: according to Revised Standard Version these words are not a part of the quotation of what the clan members say, but New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, and many other modern versions rightly include this as a part of what the avengers say: “ ‘… even if we destroy the heir as well’ ” (New Revised Standard Version). They wanted revenge for the man’s death. In fact some take this to mean that they actually wanted to kill the heir so that they (the other clan members) could take over the family wealth. This seems to be the most likely meaning of the Hebrew text as it stands. The word heir refers to the person who would take over the possessions of the family and also have the responsibility of family leadership.
Quench my coal which is left: this image comes from the practice of starting fires in the morning from hot coals left over from the night before. This figurative expression clearly refers to the destruction of the woman’s only hope for a surviving son to carry on as head of the family. If the figurative expression is likely to be understood in this way, it may be retained. But if readers are likely to understand it in some other way, then a more straightforward translation of the meaning is recommended. In some cases it may be possible to change the form slightly while at the same time retaining a meaningful image. Contemporary English Version, for example, has “Please don’t let them put out my only flame of hope!” Another possible model is that of New Century Version, which spells out clearly the comparison between the son and the fire, “My son is like the last spark of a fire. He is all I have left. If they kill him….”
Neither name nor remnant: the two nouns here do not refer to two different things but rather to the continuation of the family name in the person of a descendant. This may be translated “a person to carry on my husband’s name.” The term used for remnant is found in Gen 45.7 and frequently in the later writings of the Old Testament.
Upon the face of the earth: see the comments on this expression in 1 Sam 20.15.
A number of biblical scholars think that the order of the Hebrew text as we have it today is unacceptable because of a scribal error. According to these experts the text should be corrected by transposing verses 15-17 to this point in the story. This is done by Anderson, Anchor Bible, and Moffatt’s translation. However, this structure is far from certain, and translators are advised to retain the traditional ordering of the text.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.