dual vs. plural (Acts 7:16)

In this episode in Acts it is ambiguous whether only Jacob and Joseph or Jacob and all of the other patriarchs were were taken back to Shechem. In languages that distinguish between a dual and a plural this ambiguity has to be resolved. In the translation into Kahua only two bodies were taken back because Joseph’s body is specifically mentioned in Exod 13:19 and Josh 24:32.

Joseph

The term that is transliterated as “Joseph” in English is translated in American Sign Language with a sign that relates to a) the coat he wore (see Gen 37:3), b) the holding of his clothes by Potiphar’s wife (see Gen 39:12), and c) the many times Joseph experienced grief. (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Joseph” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

In Spanish Sign Language it is translated with a sign that signifies “dream,” referring to Jacob’s dream at Bethel (see Genesis 28:10 and the following verses). (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Joseph” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Joseph .

Jacob

The Hebrew, Latin, and Greek that is transliterated as “Jacob” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with a sign that signifies “lentil,” referring to the soup he gave his brother in exchange for his birthright (see Genesis 25:34). Note that another Spanish Sign Language sign for Jacob also users the sign for Jewish. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Jacob” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

In German Sign Language it is a sign that shows the touching of the hip, described in Genesis 32:25:


“Jacob” in German Sign Language (source: Taub und katholisch )

In Finnish Sign Language it is translated with the signs signifying “smooth arm” (referring to the story starting at Genesis 27:11). (Source: Tarja Sandholm)


“Jacob” in Finnish Sign Language (source )

See also Esau.

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Jacob .

Translation commentary on Joshua 24:32

Finally the body of Joseph (Hebrew “bones of Joseph”) is given permanent burial (see Gen 50.25-26; Exo 13.19). For the purchase of the field of Jacob, see Genesis 33.18-20. The sons of Hamor should probably be “the descendant of Hamor,” as in Genesis 33.19. It is not known exactly how much the hundred pieces of silver would be worth in modern currency.

Which the people of Israel had brought from Egypt is chronologically prior to The body of Joseph … was buried at Shechem. Moreover, the piece of land that Jacob had bought comes first in the historical sequence of events. It is possible (1) to translate so that all three events fall in chronological sequence or (2) to place only the first two in chronological sequence with the mention of the purchase of the field as a flashback, as Good News Translation has done. If all three events are placed in chronological sequence, the following will serve as a pattern:

• Many years ago the Israelites’ ancestor Jacob had bought a piece of land from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem. He had paid them a hundred pieces of silver for this land. When the people of Israel left Egypt, they brought the body of their ancestor Joseph with them. They had carried it with them all this while, and now they buried it in that piece of land that Jacob had bought at Shechem.

The last part of the verse in the Masoretic text is “they were (or, became) for the sons (or, descendants) of Joseph an inheritance.” Most translations (An American Translation, Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Jerusalem Bible, Bible de Jérusalem, New American Bible) understand that the piece of land is being referred to; but New English Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project take the plural to refer to “the bones of Joseph” (New English Bible “and they passed into the patrimony of the house of Joseph”). This seems strange but appears to be what the Masoretic text says. The singular “it was (or, became)” should be considered a textual change, based on the Syriac andVulgate texts.

If the exegesis of Good News Translation is maintained, This land was inherited by Joseph’s descendants may be translated, “Joseph’s descendants received this land as their own.” If the alternative interpretation is accepted, “Joseph’s descendants received these bones as their possession.”

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 .