The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that are typically translated as “priest” in English (itself deriving from Latin “presbyter” — “elder”) is often translated with a consideration of existing religious traditions. (Click or tap for details)
Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this:
“However, rather than borrow local names for priests, some of which have unwanted connotations, a number of translations have employed descriptive phrases based on certain functions: (1) those describing a ceremonial activity: Pamona uses tadu, the priestess who recites the litanies in which she describes her journey to the upper or under-world to fetch life-spirit for sick people, animals or plants; Batak Toba uses the Arabic malim, ‘Muslim religious teacher;’ ‘one who presents man’s sacrifice to God’ (Bambara, Eastern Maninkakan), ‘one who presents sacrifices’ (Baoulé, Navajo), ‘one who takes the name of the sacrifice’ (Kpelle, and ‘to make a sacrifice go out’ (Hausa); (2) those describing an intermediary function: ‘one who speaks to God’ (Shipibo-Conibo) and ‘spokesman of the people before God’ (Tabasco Chontal).”
In Obolo it is translated as ogwu ngwugwa or “the one who offers sacrifice” (source: Enene Enene), in Mairasi as agam aevar nevwerai: “religious leader” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Ignaciano as “blesser, one who does ritual as a practice” (using a generic term rather than the otherwise common Spanish loan word sacerdote) (source: Willis Ott in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.), and in Noongar as yakin-kooranyi or “holy worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
“The [local] cult of Poro used to be an all-encompassing religious system that essentially governed all areas of life. (…) For ‘priest’ the term ‘poro father’ would at first seem to be a natural choice. However, several priests of the old cult are still living. Although they no longer function primarily as priests of the old system they still have a substantial influence on the community, and there would be more than a chance that the unqualified term would (in some contexts particularly) be equated with the priest of the poro cult. We learned, then, that the poro fathers would sometimes be called ‘knife men’ in relation to their sacrificial work. The panel was pleased to apply this term to the Jewish priest, and the Christian community has adopted it fully. [Mark 1:44, for instance, now] reads: ‘You must definitely not tell any man of this. But you go show your body to the knife man and do what Moses said about a sacrifice concerning your being healed, and the cause (base of this) will be apparent.'”
For a revision of the 1968 version of the Bible in Khmer Joseph Hong (in: The Bible Translator 1996, 233ff. ) talks about a change in wording for this term:
Bau cha r (បូជាចារ្យ) — The use of this new construction meaning “priest” is maintained to translate the Greek word hiereus. The term “mean sang (មាន សង្ឃ)” used in the old version actually means a “Buddhist monk,” and is felt to be theologically misleading. The Khmer considers the Buddhist monk as a “paddy field of merits,” a reserve of merits to be shared with other people. So a Khmer reader would find unthinkable that the mean sang in the Bible killed animals, the gravest sin for a Buddhist; and what a scandal it would be to say that a mean sang was married, had children, and drank wine.
The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Benjamin” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign for “wolf,” referring to Genesis 49:27. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
The words of Jeremiah, a literal rendering of the Hebrew, represents what is found in most other translations (for example, New Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, New International Version, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, La Bible Pléiade, Zürcher Bibel. However, in Hebrew words may also mean “deeds” or “history,” as the footnote of Traduction œcuménique de la Bible indicates. Therefore Moffatt has “The story of Jeremiah” and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch renders “In this book is written what Jeremiah said and did.” The problem of interpretation (whether words has the extended meaning of “words and deeds”) is made more difficult by the nature of the construction of the book of Jeremiah. As is well known, the book of Jeremiah is not put together according to a chronological arrangement, and it is only with difficulty that we can uncover even a topical arrangement of the sayings and deeds recorded in the book.
Since 25.13a indicates the closing of a “book” within the larger framework of the whole book of Jeremiah, some scholars believe that The words of Jeremiah must be taken only with 1.1–25.13. In fact the Septuagint deletes 25.14 and places chapters 46–51 immediately following 25.13, thereby suggesting that the first part of Jeremiah is looked upon as a sayings source. We would then have here the words spoken by Jeremiah between the time of his call (627 B.C.) and the fourth year of Jehoiakim’s reign (605 B.C.). In this regard it is interesting to note that this time span coincides precisely with that indicated in the scroll that Jeremiah dictated in 605 B.C. (chapter 36).
On the other hand, it is quite possible that The words of Jeremiah was attached to the beginning of the book by the final editor, who used this as a designation for the whole of the book. No final decision is possible. However, regardless of what decision we come to, it is advisable to open the book with a complete sentence, rather than slavishly to follow the wording of the Hebrew text. Depending on which interpretation of words they follow, translators can say “Here are [or, These are] the words of Jeremiah,” “This is the story of Jeremiah,” or “This book is about what Jeremiah said and did.” Good News Translation has a passive construction, “what was said by Jeremiah,” but in many languages an active sentence, such as “what Jeremiah said,” will be more natural.
Jeremiah was obviously a frequently used name among the Hebrews, as is indicated by both the Old Testament itself and other sources of the same period. The meaning of the name is disputed, though it may possibly mean either “the LORD exalts” or “the LORD loosens [the womb].” In the book itself the name seems to hold no symbolic significance, and so the root meaning is of no consequence as far as translation is concerned. Therefore translators should transliterate the name, not translate it.
How to transliterate proper nouns is something that translators should agree on very early in any translation project. Some will follow some major language such as English, Spanish, or French, and write the names as they would be pronounced in their own languages. Others will transliterate the Hebrew (in the Old Testament) form. Lists of all proper nouns in the Bible are available from Bible Society consultants or offices, as well as some rules of thumb to follow to be sure that the problem is handled consistently.
Hilkiah was also the name of the High Priest who in the days of Josiah discovered “the book of the Law” in the Temple (2Kgs 22.8), though modern scholarship tends not to identify this Hilkiah with the father of Jeremiah. As with the name Jeremiah, so Hilkiah was also evidently in common use among the ancient Hebrews. Had Jeremiah been the son of a famous priest, it is not likely that he would have encountered as much rejection during the course of his ministry. Translators will render the son of Hilkiah in whatever way is natural. In some languages this would be “Hilkiah was his father.”
The phrase of the priests is difficult. Some scholars argue that it seems to make an intrusion into the text and must therefore not be considered an original part of the Hebrew manuscript. But there are no textual grounds for its omission, and so it must be dealt with in translation. The general consensus of scholars is that the reference is to Hilkiah rather than to Jeremiah; that is, although Jeremiah was the son of a priest, he himself was not a priest. Jeremiah’s outlook was primarily prophetic, and he often found himself in opposition to the priests (5.31; 6.13; 23.11; 26.8, 11; 29.26); so it may well be that he was not of their group. Good News Translation translates of the priests by “one of the priests.” The Bible en français courant has “Jeremiah was of a family of priests.”
Priests is a term that translators will normally have translated already in other books. Many translators use a term such as “sacrificers,” which emphasizes the main role of the priests, and works especially well if translators have rendered “temple” as “house [or, building] of sacrifice.” Other translators have used short phrases such as “those who go before God [for the people]” or “mediator between God and the people.”
Jeremiah’s home town was Anathoth (see 11.21, 23; 29.27; 32.7-9). The exact location of ancient Anathoth is uncertain, though biblical archaeologists tend nowadays to identify it with the modern Ras el-Kharrubeh, about 800 meters (a half mile) south of Anata, which was previously thought to be the site. If this identification is correct, then ancient Anathoth was about four or five kilometers (two-and-a-half or three miles) north of Jerusalem. In many languages it is helpful to identify Anathoth as “the town [or, village] of Anathoth,” although since the text goes on to say in the land of Benjamin, this may not be necessary. King Solomon banished Abiathar the High Priest to Anathoth (1Kgs 2.26) because of his part in the plot to have Adonijah succeed David as king. It is then likely that Jeremiah was a descendant of Abiathar, which would account for the reference to the priests who were in Anathoth. Some scholars, however, see no basis for the claim that Jeremiah was a descendant of Abiathar.
The land of Benjamin was the territory assigned the tribe of Benjamin in the division of the land under Joshua (Josh 18.11-28). Translators should be careful not to make the translation sound as if Benjamin were still alive. “The land of the tribe of Benjamin” or “the territory of Benjamin’s descendants” will avoid this.
In Revised Standard Version this verse is just part of a long sentence that extends to the end of verse 2. Good News Translation has made this verse one sentence. In other languages this verse can even be expressed more naturally as two sentences, as in:
• This is the story of Jeremiah. He was the son of Hilkiah who was one of the priests in Anathoth in the land of the tribe of Benjamin.
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.