וָאֶשְׁלַ֤ח לִפְנֵיכֶם֙ אֶת־הַצִּרְעָ֔ה וַתְּגָ֤רֶשׁ אוֹתָם֙ מִפְּנֵיכֶ֔ם שְׁנֵ֖י מַלְכֵ֣י הָאֱמֹרִ֑י לֹ֥א בְחַרְבְּךָ֖ וְלֹ֥א בְקַשְׁתֶּֽךָ׃
12I sent swarms of hornets ahead of you that drove out before you the two kings of the Amorites; it was not by your sword or by your bow.
the Hebrew and Greek that is translated with “sword” in English is translated in Tepeuxila Cuicatec as “machete that is sharp on two sides,” in Lalana Chinantec as “machete” and in San Mateo del Mar Huave as “knife.” (Source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
See also two-edged sword.
(Click or tap here to see details)
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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”
(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )
See also king (Japanese honorifics).
As you advanced again represents the Hebrew “from your faces” (Revised Standard Version “before you”). It will not be necessary to express this in translation, if this meaning is clearly enough understood apart from an explicit statement of it.
Panic translates a Hebrew word which some have understood to mean “hornet” (see Revised Standard Version), used figuratively. As Soggin explains, it “is not the ‘wasp’ or ‘hornet’ … but ‘dismay,’ a typical consequence of divine intervention in the course of holy war” (see 2.11; and see the use of the word in Exo 23.28; Deut 7.20). I threw them into panic may be translated either “I caused them to panic” or “I caused them to fear and tremble.” It is highly probable that an acceptable idiomatic expression of the proper level may be found in many languages.
The two Amorite kings are Sihon king of Heshbon and Og king of Bashan (see 2.26–3.11), whose territory was on the east side of the Jordan, not on the west side, in Canaan proper. This phrase seems misplaced (see Bright), and New American Bible shifts it back to verse 8, where it is more fitting; but there is no manuscript evidence to support this.
The last part of verse 12 and verse 13 emphasize again that the victories won by the Israelites were not the result of their skill and valor as fighters, but were due to the Lord’s power. Your swords and bows had nothing to do with it may be translated without naming the specific weapons: “Your weapons and strength had nothing to do with it.” It is possible also to translate by both a positive and negative statement: “I defeated them for you. It was not your own strength and weapons that did it.”
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. 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 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. )