In Malay, the pronoun beta for the royal “I” (or “my” or “me”) that is used by royals when speaking to people of lower rank, subordinates or commoners to refer to themselves in these verses. This reflects the “language of the court because the monarchy and sultanate in Malaysia are still alive and well. All oral and printed literature (including newspapers and magazines) preserve and glorify the language of the court. Considering that the language of the court is part of the Malaysian language, court language is used sparingly where appropriate, specifically with texts relating to palace life.” (Source: Daud Soesilo in The Bible Translator 2025, p. 263ff.)
complete verse (Esther 8:8)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Esther 8:8:
- Kupsabiny: “I hope/think you (plur.) know that what has been written in the king’s name and stamped with the ring which is on his finger cannot be changed. But concerning those letters that Haman wrote, I give you (plur.) also the authority to write and send letters using my name. Tell out/Announce how you (plur.) want (it to be) and stamp using my ring.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
- Newari: “Now you, having taken sides with the Jews, what[ever] seems reasonable in your opinion, write another letter according to my command, and put my ring seal on it, for no one can revoke a document which has been written in the king’s name and sealed with the king’s ring.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
- Hiligaynon: “Now, [you (plur.)] write a decree in my name for the Jews. [You (plur.)] write what is good for you (plur.), and you (sing.) then sign/mark (it) with my ring. For whatever agreement that has-been-written in the name of the king and has-been-signed/marked with his ring will- never -be-changed.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
- Eastern Bru: “But according to the laws of this country, whatever paper is written in the name of the king and sealed with the king’s ring, cannot be changed. So now I allow the queen to write a new law following what she want and send it to the Jewish group. Write it in my name and seal with my ring."” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
- English: “So now I am also permitting you to write other letters, to save your people. You may put my name on the letters, and use my ring to seal them because no letter that has my name on it and which is sealed with my ring can ever be changed.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
formal 2nd person plural pronoun (Japanese)
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 Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).
(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 Esther 8:8
You may write: in Hebrew the plural pronoun you stands at the beginning of verse 8. Since Hebrew does not require the use of pronouns with verbs, the presence of the word you and its position at the beginning of the verse indicate that emphasis is intended. This adds to the emphasis expressed in the preceding verse by “Behold.” Anchor Bible brings out the force of the pronoun as follows: “But you yourselves write in the king’s name” (see also New Jerusalem Bible, “You, for your part, write”). Some languages will be able to use an emphatic pronoun, a full form pronoun, or an emphatic marker to achieve the same effect. If the emphasis on you is retained in the translation, it may be preferable not to restructure the verse as Good News Translation has done.
As you please: many languages have idioms similar to the Hebrew, “as is good in your eyes.”
With regard to the Jews: though Good News Translation says “to the Jews,” with regard to seems to be the more natural translation of the Hebrew preposition. Either is possible, however, and translators must choose according to which seems to be the more likely meaning here. See also verse 9, where a different Hebrew preposition is translated as “concerning [the Jews]” in Revised Standard Version and “to [the Jews]” in Good News Translation.
Edict: the Hebrew is literally “a writing, document.” Here it refers to what has been written in the name of the king (see comments on “in the name of” in 2.22) and sealed with the ring (see comments on “signet ring” in 3.10). Such a “writing” cannot be “taken back” (see verse 5 above).
Notice the shift from the informality of the king’s use of the first person pronoun in verse 7 to the formality of the third person pronoun in this verse.
It is not clear whether the second half of verse 8, introduced with the word for, refers to the edict written earlier by Haman (3.12-14) or to the edict being written by Esther and Mordecai (8.8-14). If the former, the meaning is that Esther and Mordecai may write what they want, but they must remember that the edict written by Haman and sealed with the king’s ring still stands as law. By reversing the two parts of verse 8, Good News Translation follows this first interpretation (also Bible en français courant). Yes, Haman is now dead (8.7), “but a proclamation issued in the king’s name and stamped with the royal seal cannot be revoked.” New Jerusalem Bible, by using only a comma before the word “for” follows the second interpretation, that is, the words refer to the edict written by Esther and Mordecai: “Write it in the king’s name and seal it with the king’s signet, for an edict that has been written in the king’s name and sealed with the king’s signet may not be revoked.”
New International Version separates this part of the verse from the first part by a dash, suggesting that these words refer to both edicts: “—for no document written in the king’s name and sealed with his ring can be revoked.” Traduction œcuménique de la Bible makes this part of the verse a separate sentence, stating in a note (édition intégrale) that any of the three interpretations is possible. It may be best to do as either New International Version or Traduction œcuménique de la Bible has done (also Segond), leaving the interpretation open to the reader.
On the closing of the quotation that began in verse 7 above, see the comments on that verse.
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 .
SIL Translator’s Notes on Esther 8:8
8:8a
write in the king’s name: See note on 3:12d.
8:8b
seal it with the royal signet ring: See note on 3:12e.
8:8c
For a decree that is written in the name of the king and sealed with the royal signet ring cannot be revoked: The commentators and English versions do not agree on which document the king is referring to here. There are two possibilities:
(1) It is a general statement, referring to any order made in the king’s name. In this verse it therefore refers to the order Esther and Mordecai were about to make. Because the king authorized it to be issued, no one would be able to cancel it. This is the best interpretation of this sentence based on its position in the Hebrew text, and it is the one followed by nearly every English version.
(2) It refers specifically to the order Haman had issued. The king was saying that he could not cancel it, but he permitted Esther and Mordecai to write something of their own. This interpretation is followed by Good News Translation, which reverses the order of the verse to express this:
But a proclamation issued in the king’s name and stamped with the royal seal cannot be revoked. You may, however, write to the Jews whatever you like; and you may write it in my name and stamp it with the royal seal. (Good News Translation)
It is recommended that you follow the first option like the majority of the translations.
a decree: See note on 1:19a.
© 2000 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.