2So the king called the Gibeonites and spoke to them. (Now the Gibeonites were not of the people of Israel but of the remnant of the Amorites; although the people of Israel had sworn to spare them, Saul had tried to wipe them out in his zeal for the people of Israel and Judah.)
The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Saul” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign that depicts “sword in chest” (referring to 1 Samuel 31:4 and 1 Chronicles 10:4) and also “self-centered.” (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
In Bauzi “swear” can be translated in various ways. In Hebrews 6:13, for instance, it is translated with “bones break apart and decisively speak.” (“No bones are literally broken but by saying ‘break bones’ it is like people swear by someone else in this case it is in relation to a rotting corpse’ bones falling apart. If you ‘break bones’ so to speak when you make an utterance, it is a true utterance.”) In other passages, such as in Matthew 26:72, it’s translated with an expression that implies taking ashes (“if a person wants everyone to know that he is telling the truth about a matter, he reaches down into the fireplace, scoops up some ashes and throws them while saying ‘I was not the one who did that.'”). So in Matthew 26:72 the Bauzi text is: “. . . Peter took ashes and defended himself saying, ‘I don’t know that Nazareth person.'” (Source: David Briley)
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)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Samuel 21:2:
Kupsabiny: “So, that king called the people of Gibeon. They did not belong to Israel, but they were Amorites. The Israelites had sworn that they would not do anything to those people, but Saul fought them because, he thought that those people might one time turn against them.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “(The Gibeonites were not of the tribes [of] Israel. They were the ones spared of the Amorite clan. The Israelites had sworn an oath saying that they would spare them. In spite of that, Saul in his enthusiasm for Israel and Judah tried to destroy them.) So King David called the Gibeonites” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “These Gibeonhon were not Israelinhon but-rather they were the remaining-ones who were alive among the Amornon. The Israelinhon had-promised that they will- not -kill them, but Saul tried to destroy them because of his great concern to/for Israel and Juda. David summoned/called-for the Gibeonhon” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “The people of Gibeon were not Israelis; they were a small group of the Amor people-group whom the Israelis had solemnly promised to protect. But Saul had tried to kill all of them because he was very zealous/wanted very much to enable the people of Judah and Israel to be the only ones living in that land. So the king summoned the leaders of Gibeon” (Source: Translation for Translators)
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.”
Most of this verse constitutes a parenthetical explanation of the status of the Gibeonites and their relationship to the people of Israel. The first sentence of this verse is shifted to the beginning of verse 3 in Good News Translation, so that the entire verse is enclosed in parentheses in that version. If this is done in other languages, the verse numbering should probably be adjusted to show that verses 2 and 3 are combined. Or translators may prefer to follow the model of New Century Version, which places the first sentence of Revised Standard Version at the end of verse 2 rather than at the beginning of verse 3. In this way the integrity of verse 2 is maintained.
Between the first and second sentences in the Revised Standard Version translation, the Hebrew text has the words “and he said to them.” Since David’s words do not immediately follow, and the same words are repeated at the beginning of verse 3, following the parenthetical statement of verse 2, most modern translations do not translate these words. But compare New International Version, which says “The king summoned the Gibeonites and spoke to them.”
So: the common Hebrew conjunction is so translated in Revised Standard Version because David’s action in summoning the Gibeonites is seen as a result of the situation described in verse 1.
Of the remnant of the Amorites: the Amorites were one of the tribes of people who lived in the land of Palestine before the Israelites took it over. In the process of taking the land, the Hebrews killed many of the former inhabitants, but those who remained are called a remnant. These remaining people were allowed to stay in the land, but they became servants to the Israelites (Josh 9.23, 27). Some possible translation models for this expression are “some of the remaining descendants of the Amorites” or “a group of Amorites who were still in the land.”
Had sworn to spare them: in the person of Joshua, the people of Israel had made an agreement with the Amorites to allow them to live (see Josh 9.3-27). Saul’s violation of this peace treaty was considered to be murder that defiled the land (see Num 35.33-34).
The verb tenses in this parenthetical explanation (had sworn and had sought) may present a problem to some translators. It is a kind of flashback to an earlier time when Saul was still alive and struggling against other people who still lived in Canaan. Translators should ensure that their readers understand this as referring to events that had occurred some time in the past and not at the time when David was dealing with the problem. One way of handling this problem may be to add a word or phrase showing clearly that what is said refers to something that had happened earlier. Translators may insert in the middle of the parenthetical explanation, at the point where Revised Standard Version has although, words like “some time before…” or “long ago….”
In his zeal for the people of Israel and Judah: the words in his zeal translate a verb form in Hebrew. The text does not specify the nature of Saul’s zeal, but La Bible du Semeur is probably correct in rendering this “in his nationalist zeal for the Israelites and the Judeans.” It will probably be better in many languages to restructure this clause. New Century Version, for example, says “But Saul was very eager to help the people of Israel and Judah. So he tried to kill all the Gibeonites.” Contemporary English Version expresses the meaning more clearly, “but Saul had tried to kill them because he wanted Israel and Judah to control all the land.”
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.