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 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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”
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 show 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, yō ni shite (ようにして) or “do so (so that) / make it like” 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. )
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 show different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, no-rare-ru (乗られる) or “ride” is used.
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 show different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, kiteo-rare-ru (着ておられる) or “wearing” is used.
The Hebrew phrase For the man whom the king delights to honor does not contain a main verb, and for that reason most translations treat it as part of the sentence that continues in verse 8. It is possible, though, to punctuate verse 7 as a question (so La Bible Pléiade, “Is there a man whom the king would like to honor?”; also Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). In either case, repeating these words of the king from verse 6 highlights the unknown identity of the person whom the king wishes to honor.
The horse which the king has ridden: Hebrew does not have a definite article before the word “horse.” Probably no specific horse was intended as the Revised Standard Version translation the horse seems to suggest. Better is the rendering “and a horse which the king has ridden” (so New Revised Standard Version). Where horses are not known, it may be necessary to borrow a term for “horse,” or one may use a descriptive phrase; for example, “an animal ridden by the king.” To substitute the name of another animal such as a mule or an elephant would be to distort the historical context of the story of Esther.
On whose head a royal crown is set may be thought to refer to the head of the person whom the king is to honor, especially since the same word is used for the crown or diadem worn by Vashti and by Esther (see 1.11; 2.17). Since the royal robes are for the man to wear, then one would also expect that the crown is for the person. However, the Hebrew most naturally refers to the head of the horse; and archeological evidence confirms that Persian horses did wear a kind of crown on their heads. Translators should make clear that the “royal crown” is set on the horse’s head. English translations such as Revised English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible use the pronoun “its” to show that the crown is not on the man’s head: “and a horse on which the king rides, with a royal diadem on its head” (Revised English Bible). Royal in this context means clothing and adornments that are symbols of the king’s rank as ruler of the kingdom.
These two verses may be restructured if necessary, as Good News Translation has done, but the formal style of court language should be retained (see comments on 1.15). Bible en français courant uses the title “Majesty” as a formal term addressing the king.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
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 show different degree of politeness is through the choice of an imperative construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
In these verses, the honorific form kudasai (ください) reflects that the action is called for as a favor for the sake of the beneficiary. This polite kudasai imperative form is often translated as “please” in English. While English employs pure imperatives in most imperative constructions (“Do this!”), Japanese chooses the polite kudasai (“Do this, please.”). (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
a royal robe that the king himself has worn: Choose a word for a long outer garment, like a long coat. This was not just a special garment, but one which the king himself had worn.
6:8b
a royal crest placed on its head: This is the same word in Hebrew as was used for the queen’s crown in 1:11a and 2:17c. See note on 1:11a. Here the crown was attached to the horse’s head to show that the horse belonged to the king.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.