The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated “boat” or “ship” in English is translated in Chichimeca-Jonaz as “that with which we can walk on water” (source: Ronald D. Olson in Notes on Translation January, 1968, p. 15ff.), in Chitonga as a term in combination with bwato or “dugout canoe” (source: Wendland 1987, p. 72), and in Tangale as inj am or “canoe-of water” (inj — “canoe” — on its own typically refers to a traditional type of carved-out log for sleeping) (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).
In Kouya it is translated as ‘glʋ ‘kadʋ — “big canoe.”
Philip Saunders (p. 231) explains how the Kouya team arrived at that conclusion:
“Acts chapter 27 was a challenge! It describes Paul’s sea voyage to Italy, and finally Rome. There is a storm at sea and a shipwreck on Malta, and the chapter includes much detailed nautical vocabulary. How do you translate this for a landlocked people group, most of whom have never seen the ocean? All they know are small rivers and dugout canoes.
“We knew that we could later insert some illustrations during the final paging process which would help the Kouya readers to picture what was happening, but meanwhile we struggled to find or invent meaningful terms. The ‘ship’ was a ‘big canoe’ and the ‘passengers’ were ‘the people in the big canoe’; the ‘crew’ were the ‘workers in the big canoe’; the ‘pilot’ was the ‘driver of the big canoe’; the ‘big canoe stopping place’ was the ‘harbour’, and the ‘big canoe stopping metal’ was the ‘anchor’!”
In Lokạạ it is translated as ukalangkwaa, lit. “English canoe.” “The term was not coined for the Bible translation, but rather originated in colonial times when the English arrived in Nigeria on ships. The indigenous term for a canoe was modified to represent the large, ocean-going ship of the English.” (Source: J.A. Naudé, C.L. Miller Naudé, J.O. Obono in Acta Theologica 43/2, 2023, p. 129ff. )
The Hebrew that is transliterated as “Dan” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with a sign that signifies “snake,” referring to Genesis 49:17. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Asher” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with a sign for “(oak) tree” that signifies fruitfulness (referring to Genesis 49:20). (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
The Hebrew, Greek and Ge’ez that is translated as “Jordan” means “descending (rapidly),” “flowing down.” (Source: Cornwall / Smith 1997 )
In Hungarian Sign Language it is translated with the sign for the river bordering Jordan and Israel, along with the general sign for river. (Source: Jenjelvi Biblia and HSL Bible Translation Group)
“Jordan river” in Hungarian Sign Language (source )
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Judges 5:17:
Kupsabiny: “One part of the house of Gilead stayed behind, on the other side of the river Jordan. And the people of the clan of Dan, why did you remain in your homes? The people of the clan of Asher stayed/sat, at the shore of the ocean.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Gilead stayed on the other side of the Jordan. And why was Dan waiting near the ships? Asher was being delayed at the ocean shore, and staying in their caves.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “The tribe of Gad also stayed/remained in the east of Jordan, and the tribe of Dan also remained in their work on the ships. The tribe of Asher on-the-other-hand remained in their dwelling-place near the sea.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Similarly, the men living in the Gilead area stayed at home, east of the Jordan River. And the men from the tribe descended from Dan, why did they stay home? The tribe descended from Asher sat by the seashore. They stayed in their coves.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Following are two English oral translations of Judges 5. The first is by Janet Stahl and the second by Bronven Cleaver. Both were produced as part of Cleaver’s PhD dissertation .
The various Greek, Aramaic, Ge’ez, and Latin and Hebrew terms that are translated as “sea,” “ocean,” or “lake” in English are all translated in Chichewa with one term: nyanja. Malawi, where Chichewa is spoken, has a lot of lakes but does not share a border with the ocean. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
The response of three more Israelite tribes is described here, first Gilead, then Dan, then Asher. The Hebrew verb meaning “dwell” or “settle down” (shakan) occurs twice and forms an inclusio around this verse (rendered stayed and settling down). The poet is obviously using the same verb deliberately. There is also a close link to 5.16, since the Hebrew verb rendered sat still is the same one translated “tarry” there. The message of these repetitive verbs is clear. These tribes were not willing to budge to help their brothers.
Gilead stayed beyond the Jordan: Gilead is the name of a territory, east of the Jordan River, extending south in a narrow strip from near the Lake of Galilee to near the northern end of the Dead Sea. Jacob went toward this place when he fled from Laban, his father-in-law (Gen 31.21). The tribe of Gad settled in much of this territory. Gilead is a place name, so many translators will prefer to say “The people of Gilead” (Contemporary English Version), while some will replace this name with “The tribe of Gad” (Good News Translation). Stayed beyond the Jordan means these people stayed on the east side of the Jordan River. They refused to come across the river to assist in the battle. Translators may catch the tone of this phrase by saying “stayed put on the other side of the Jordan River” or “would not budge from the region beyond the Jordan River.” Beyond the Jordan could be an ambiguous phrase since its meaning depends on where the speaker is standing. To be clearer translators might say “on the east side of the Jordan River.” If this information would disrupt the poetry, then they might include it in a footnote. A map in the text will also help the reader to understand what the actual situation was.
And Dan, why did he abide with the ships?: With this question the taunts are addressed to another tribe, that of Dan (see comments on verse 1.34). And renders the Hebrew waw conjunction. And Dan may be rendered “As for Dan,” “And as far as Dan is concerned,” or even “And what about the tribe of Dan?” Translators should always keep in mind, however, that this is a song, and not a narrative text.
Why did he abide with the ships? is a rhetorical question. This accusation against the tribe of Dan is expressed using the same question form as used against the tribe of Reuben in verse 5.16. However, this time the question is not directly addressed to the people concerned, but expressed in the third person. The singular pronoun he designates the group, so we might say “Why did the people of Dan remain on the coast?” However, if second person better conveys rebukes or criticisms, another possible model is “Dan, how could you just sit there next to your ships!”
The Hebrew verb rendered abide (gur) is different from the one translated stayed (shakan) in the previous line. This verb applies to living for a time as a stranger in a certain place. This is in keeping with what this book teaches about the Danites who made a major move from the Mediterranean coast in the south to the hill country in the far north (verse 1.34). New International Version says “linger,” while Revised English Bible has “tarry,” but in many languages it will be more natural to use “stay,” “remain,” or “find refuge.” In Hebrew the expression rendered with the ships does not have a preposition, but various versions try to render it in a natural way, saying the Danites remained “on their ships” (Contemporary English Version) or “by the ships” (Good News Translation, New International Version). This figure of speech certainly refers to a time when the Danites had not yet moved north, and were still living “on the coast.” Translators might use such expressions, but it is important to remember that in this poetic song these images are associated with each tribe: Reuben with his flocks of sheep and Dan with his ships. The reluctance of the Danites to help their brothers is just the beginning of their moral failure. Later in this book, they show themselves to be immoral and corrupt.
Asher sat still at the coast of the sea: Like Dan, the tribe of Asher does nothing to help their brothers. However, unlike Dan, Asher is introduced here without a conjunction. Translators should use natural forms in their language, for example, “And as for Asher….” The territory of Asher was much further north on the Mediterranean coast than the Danite territory (see comments on verse 1.31). Like the people of Reuben, Gad and Dan, the Asherites sat still where they were, refusing to respond to the call. The coast of the sea (that is, “the seashore”) was the dwelling place of this tribe. The word for sea is plural in Hebrew, and here refers to the Mediterranean Sea, a very large body of water that touches the coast of Palestine. Some languages do not have a word for sea, so they will have to say “big waters” or something similar. In many languages the word “coast” or “sea” alone is sufficient: “The tribe of Asher refused to leave their home by the coast” or “The Asherites remained at home by the sea.”
Settling down by his landings forms a chiasm with the preceding line: “he remained at the seacoast and on his landing places he stayed.” This structure draws attention to the Asherites’ obstinate behavior. Settling down renders the same Hebrew verb as stayed in the first line, describing the tribe of Gad, and if possible, the same verb can be used. In some languages it may be more effective to use a negative expression, such as “refused to move” or “would not budge.”
The meaning of the Hebrew noun rendered landings is uncertain. This word comes from a root meaning “burst” or “break through.” Contemporary English Version and Jerusalem Bible speak of “harbors,” and Good News Translation has “shore.” These renderings make sense, since they are parallel to coast of the sea in the previous line. New International Version‘s “coves” seems possible, but Revised English Bible‘s “creeks” does not seem correct in this context.
A possible model for the whole verse is:
• The tribe of Gad refused to budge, never crossing the river.
As for the tribe of Dan, they just sat there next to their ships!
The tribe of Asher too stayed down by the sea,
refusing to budge from their [lovely] seashore.
Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.