dog

Dogs were domesticated very early and were used for hunting and as watchdogs in the ancient world. In Egypt as early as 4000 B.C. people made pottery images that indicate that sleek fast hunting dogs were bred which looked like the modern greyhound. From Babylonian sculpture we know that around 2500 B.C. large hunting dogs that looked like the modern bull-mastiff were kept by people in the Mesopotamian civilizations.

Among the Jews however while dogs were kept mainly as watch-dogs they were held in contempt and left to feed themselves by scavenging. This habit of scavenging and the fact that dogs were possibly associated with some Egyptian gods meant that dogs were seen as very unclean animals by the Jews. The dog found in Jewish settlements in Bible times was probably the pariah dog Canis familiaris putiatini which looked something like a small light brown Alsatian or German shepherd. This type of dog in its wild and domesticated forms is found all over the Middle East and on the mainland coasts of South and Southeast Asia (where it is known as the crab-eating dog). The Australian dingo is also very similar.

Small pet dogs were kept in homes in the Greek and Roman civilizations by gentiles but not by Jews. This is probably the type of dog referred to by the Greek word kunarion in Matthew 15:26 and Mark 7:27.

[Sarah Ruden (2021, p. 27), who translates kunarion as “little doggy,” says the following: “In the entire Greek Bible, only [these two passages] use this diminutive (kunarion) of the word for ‘dog,’ a rare and largely comical word. This word choice weakens the usual sense of dogs as dirty and uncivilized and excluded from the home, much less from the table that symbolized God’s providential bounty.”]

As mentioned above dogs were held in contempt as unclean. To call someone a dog was therefore very derogatory and to refer to someone as a “dead dog” was even more so. Israelites viewed dogs as second only to pigs as unclean animals. Dogs as scavengers around the villages ate anything from household refuse to animal carcasses and human excreta. They even ate human corpses that lay unburied after battles. Furthermore the dog was possibly one of the symbols of the Egyptian god Anubis (although many modern scholars believe the symbol to be the jackal).

With all of the above in mind it is understandable that dying and then being eaten by unclean dogs was seen as the worst of all possible fates.

In the first century A.D. gentiles were considered to be unclean and were referred to by Jews in a derogatory way as “dogs.” There is therefore strong irony in the expression in Philippians 3:2 where Judaizing Christians are referred to as dogs.

One additional connotation associated with dogs in the Bible is sexual perversion and promiscuity a connotation probably arising from the fact that sexually aroused male dogs do not always differentiate between sexes as they seek to mate and the fact that dogs of both sexes mate repeatedly with different partners.

Source: All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible (UBS Helps for Translators)

complete verse (2 Samuel 16:9)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Samuel 16:9:

  • Kupsabiny: “Abishai the son of Zeruiah told David that, ‘King, why do wait for this dog to insult you? Let me go and cut off his head.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “Then Abishai, son of Zeruiah said to the king, "Look, why should this dead dog be cursing you? I will go over there and chop his head off."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Abishai the child of Zeruya said to the king, ‘Beloved King, why are you letting this man who is just like a dead dog curse you? Allow me to cut-off his head.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Then Abishai said to the king, ‘Your Majesty, this man is as worthless as a dead dog! Why should he be allowed to curse you?/He should not be allowed to curse you. Allow me to go over there and cut off his head!’” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Japanese benefactives (-sete)

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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) can be used, as in mi-kao (御顔) or “face (of God)” in the referenced verses.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

king

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:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • 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.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 16:9

Then: the Hebrew conjunction here merely indicates the next step in the fast-moving story of David’s encounter with Shimei.

Abishai the son of Zeruiah: as in 1 Sam 26.6, it may be better to make it clear to the reader that Zeruiah was Abishai’s mother and not his father. Compare also 2.13, 18; 8.16; and 14.1.

This dead dog: see the comments on the used of the expression dead dog at 9.8 and 1 Sam 24.14. Here Abishai is belittling Shimei as much as possible. Contemporary English Version retains the image but fills out the meaning, with “this man is as useless as a dead dog!” Abishai is not really asking for information, so in some languages it may be better to turn this question into a statement. Compare Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, “This wretched man should not curse the king.”

My lord the king: in most languages the pronoun “you” will be a much better translation of these words, since Abishai is speaking directly to King David. But somewhere in the quotation or the introduction to it, the wording should show that Abishai paid proper respect to King David. In some languages the most natural way to do this will be to introduce the question by saying “Abishai said respectfully…” and then use only the pronoun “you” in the words of Abishai.

Go over: the verb used here should be one that depicts a person going across a ravine to the opposite hillside. Verse 13 describes the setting more clearly, but the verb here means “cross over.” The Hebrew contains the common particle of entreaty, which may be translated “let me go over, please” (New American Bible).

Take off his head: a more natural verb in most languages will be “cut off” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “chop off” (Contemporary English Version). Other languages may have special terms meaning to “behead” a person.

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 .