אַךְ־אֱוִלִים֙ שָׂ֣רֵי צֹ֔עַן חַכְמֵי֙ יֹעֲצֵ֣י פַרְעֹ֔ה עֵצָ֖ה נִבְעָרָ֑ה אֵ֚יךְ תֹּאמְר֣וּ אֶל־פַּרְעֹ֔ה בֶּן־חֲכָמִ֥ים אֲנִ֖י בֶּן־מַלְכֵי־קֶֽדֶם׃
11Clearly the princes of Zoan are foolish;
the wise counselors of Pharaoh give stupid counsel.
How can you say to Pharaoh,
“I am one of the sages,
a descendant of ancient kings”?
The term that is used for monarchs in ancient Egypt and is transliterated as “Pharaoh” in English is translated in Finnish Sign Language with the sign signifying the “fake metal beard (postiche)” that was word by Pharaohs during official functions. (Source: Tarja Sandholm)
“Pharaoh” in Finnish Sign Language (source )
Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Pharaoh .
(Click or tap here to see details)
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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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).
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. )
The princes of Zoan are utterly foolish: Zoan was a town in the northeastern part of the Nile Delta region, close to Judah’s border. It was a major city during the first millennium B.C. and down into Roman times (see Num 13.22; Psa 78.12, 43). It was also known by the name “Tanis” (so New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Its princes were its court officials, not necessarily the sons of kings, so Good News Translation says “leaders” (see the comments on 1.23). They are described as utterly foolish. The Hebrew text of this line is literally “Surely fools the princes of Zoan” (similarly New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). “Surely” highlights the truth of this statement. Good News Translation expresses the emphasis well with an exclamation mark.
The wise counselors of Pharaoh give stupid counsel: Pharaoh is the title of the Egyptian king. Translators can borrow this term if it is well known (so Revised Standard Version, New International Version, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), or they may say “the Egyptian king” (similarly Good News Translation, New Century Version). Since this line is parallel with the previous line, the wise counselors of Pharaoh are probably the same as The princes of Zoan. They gave practical advice to the king on all matters, including national policy. In this context the adjective wise is ironic, since the text says that they give stupid counsel. If it is not clear that this is irony, the line may be rendered “The counselors of Pharaoh think they are wise, but [in fact] they give stupid counsel.”
How can you say to Pharaoh, “I am a son of the wise, a son of ancient kings”?: The pronoun you is masculine plural in Hebrew, so the prophet is addressing Pharaoh’s advisers here. The sense of this rhetorical question is that their claim to be wise people is completely unjustified. If necessary, the question can be made into a strong statement: “You should not say…” or “You have no grounds for saying….” The direct quote here can also be made indirect, as Good News Translation does. The requirements of style and naturalness in a language will determine this.
Each counselor claims that he is a son of the wise. (In Hebrew the word for wise is plural.) This could mean their fathers are wise, but it more likely means they are students or disciples of wise teachers. In the book of Proverbs the word son often means “student” (see, for example, Pro 2.1; 3.1). However, Revised English Bible says “I am descended from wise men” (similarly New Jerusalem Bible, Bible en français courant), which gives the impression that this is a father-son relationship. New American Bible is better with “I am a disciple of wise men.” Another possible model is “I am a member of the guild of wise men.”
A son of ancient kings is parallel to the previous line, so son probably has the same sense here. New International Version says “a disciple of the ancient kings.” However, it could mean “descendant” here, which Contemporary English Version expresses with “our families go back to kings of long ago.” The Hebrew word rendered ancient (qedem) is ambiguous here. It could mean “east” or “before,” in the sense of “in previous times.” The wisdom of kings from the East was well known (see the comments on 2.6), but so was the wisdom of the Egyptian kings. In fact, most kings were considered to be wise (for Israel, King Solomon was the greatest example). Wise people learned from the wisdom of past kings. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh prefers “Kedemite kings,” which means “kings from the East,” but most other versions prefer a translation in the sense of ancient kings. Since the meaning of this phrase is uncertain, translators have a choice.
Translation examples for this verse are:
• Utter fools are the princes of the city of Zoan,
Pharaoh’s [so-called] wise counselors offer stupid advice.
How dare you say to Pharaoh,
“I am a disciple of the wise men,
a descendant of the ancient kings?”
• The officials in the city of Zoan are utter fools,
the Egyptian king’s wise advisers offer stupid advice.
Yet they dare to say to him that they are disciples of the sages,
and of the kings of the East!
Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Sterk, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.