Ixcatlán Mazatec: “with your best/biggest thinking” (source: Robert Bascom)
Noongar: dwangka-boola, lit. “ear much” (source: Portions of the Holy Bible in the Nyunga language of Australia, 2018 — see also remember)
Kwere “to know how to live well” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Dobel: “their ear holes are long-lasting” (in Acts 6:3) (source: Jock Hughes)
Gbaya: iŋa-mgbara-mɔ or “knowing-about-things” (note that in comparison to that, “knowledge” is translated as iŋa-mɔ or “knowing things”) (source: Philip Noss in The Bible Translator 2001, p. 114ff. )
Chichewa: nzeru, meaning both “knowledge” and “wisdom” (source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Kako: “heart thinking” (source: Reyburn 2002, p. 190)
In Hungarian Sign Language it is translated with a hand gesture referring to God to indicate a human quality to communicate that wisdom does not originate from man but is linked to and connected with the fear of God (source: Jenjelvi Biblia and HSL Bible Translation Group):
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Ecclesiastes 2:12:
Kupsabiny: “And as I wished to look at words/matters of wisdom and investigate madness and stupidness, I asked myself, ‘What has not been done that a king who will replace a previous one is going to do?’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “So, for the sake of learning, I, the one who has wisdom, thought about what it is to go on behaving recklessly and becoming a fool. What more can a successor to the former king do than that one has already done?” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “What can- the succeeding kings -do? What else but what have-been-done already in past-time. I also tried to compare wisdom and foolishness.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
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.”
So I turned reflects the next step in Qoheleth’s thinking and so can be rendered by a verb of thinking: “I began to think about” or “I began to reflect on,” or by a more literary expression, “I turned my thoughts to” or “My reflection turned to.”
Wisdom and madness and folly: as Revised Standard Version shows, these three nouns are linked in Hebrew by the conjunction “and.” It is clear, however, that wisdom on the one hand is being opposed to madness and folly on the other. Madness and folly are linked together in this verse, suggesting that they have a similar meaning (see comments on 1.17 for the meaning of “madness”). Some languages will prefer to use one expression rather than two. Good News Translation uses “reckless” at this point to translate madness and so catches the mood of thoughtless behavior by which persons can harm themselves and others. Qoheleth intends to investigate every aspect of life, so he must look carefully at both wisdom and folly.
For what can the man do who comes after the king?: Good News Translation moves this phrase to the beginning of verse 12. The question Qoheleth puts here is a rhetorical one. Its purpose apparently is to strengthen his argument that he should consider both wisdom and folly. The initial Hebrew particle ki may be the motive marker for, giving the reason for Qoheleth’s testing of wisdom and folly. Or it could be translated as the emphatic “indeed” or “really” equally well (see comments on this particle, page 13). If the latter, then it expresses forcefully the thought that he can do nothing other than what the king has done. Our translation will be determined by the way we interpret the function of the particle.
An additional problem relates to the meaning of the verb comes after. Two meanings are possible: either to become the next king, or to follow in the way of the king, doing as he would do. There seems no way to settle this problem. However, if we refer to verse 18, where a similar thought occurs, it suggests that becoming the next king is what is in mind here. This gives a translation “What can the next king do?” or “What can the heir to the throne do?”
Only what he has already done: the person who takes over the throne can only do what the previous king did. The sense is that this is an ideal that the new king should follow. This interpretation depends upon understanding he as the previous king and not the man referred to in the question. If that is what is intended, then we can translate as “what the king has already done.” The assumption we make here is that, because the king had examined everything with such care, Qoheleth could do nothing less than that. However, we should be aware that we are making assumptions here, for it nowhere states what the king may have done. If our assumptions from the general context are correct, then Qoheleth bases his investigation on the fact that this was the only responsible policy to pursue. It wasn’t that he was unable to think of some alternative.
Avoiding the use of the rhetorical question may assist our translation. Possibilities are “The person who inherits the throne should follow the example of the previous king” or “Any person becoming king should follow the pattern set by the previous ruler in this matter.” Good News Translation treatment of this section may also be accepted.
It should, however, be noted here that the solution offered above is not without its problems, and that we have only chosen the most likely meaning. Despite this, it seems obvious that Qoheleth uses the question and comment to justify all he did.
Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Zogbo, Lynell. A Handbook on the Book of Ecclesiates. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
2:12a Then I turned to consider wisdom and madness and folly;
Next I began to think about being wise and about being stupid and foolish. -or-
Then I began to think again about being wise, and also about being foolish and doing crazy things. (New Century Version)
2:12b for what more can the king’s successor do
What more could anyone do who comes after the king? -or-
The next king will not be able to do more
2:12c than what has already been accomplished?
He can only do what the king has already done/concluded. -or-
than what I have already done.
2:12a-c (combined)
I asked myself, “What can the next king do that I haven’t done?” Then I decided to compare wisdom with foolishness and stupidity. (Contemporary English Version) -or-
Then I decided to think about what it means to be wise or to be foolish or to do crazy things. And I thought about the one who will be the next king. The new king will do the same as the kings before him. (English Easy-to-Read Version) -or-
Then I decided to think about how a wise person lives. I wanted to think also about how a fool lives. I said to myself, ‘The next king will not do any more than I have done.’ (EASY2015)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.