Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the inclusive pronoun, including everyone.
The Greek, Latin, Ge’ez, and Hebrew that is translated as “shepherd” in English is translated in Kouya as Bhlabhlɛɛ ‘yliyɔzʋnyɔ — ” tender of sheep.”
Philip Saunders (p. 231) explains:
“Then one day they tackled the thorny problem of ‘shepherd’. It was problematic because Kouyas don’t have herdsmen who stay with the sheep all the time. Sheep wander freely round the village and its outskirts, and often a young lad will be detailed to drive sheep to another feeding spot. So the usual Kouya expression meant a ‘driver of sheep’, which would miss the idea of a ‘nurturing’ shepherd. ‘A sheep nurturer’ was possible to say, but it was unnatural in most contexts. The group came up with Bhlabhlɛɛ ‘yliyɔzʋnyɔ which meant ‘a tender of sheep’, that is one who keeps an eye on the sheep to make sure they are all right. All, including the translators, agreed that this was a most satisfactory solution.”
Other translations include:
Chuj: “carer” (there was no single word for “shepherd”) (source: Ronald Ross)
Muna: “sheep guard” (dhagano dhumba) (there was no immediate lexical equivalent) (source: René van den Berg),
Mairasi: “people who took care of domesticated animals” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Micah 5:5:
Kupsabiny: “He is the one who brings peace. When the people of Assyria attack our land and try to break through our guarded cities, we shall send sufficient leaders to go and fight those people.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “From him only, peace will be theirs. When the Assyrians invade our country, and are attacking our fortresses, then we will send seven shepherds or eight leaders to fight against them.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “He will-give his people a good-situation. When those (who) come-from-Asiria attack our (incl.) nation and they enter the very firm/strong/sturdy parts of our (incl.) city, let- us (incl.) -fight against them being-led well by our (incl.) leaders/[lit. heads].” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
The opening part of this verse contains a metaphor that is translated literally in Revised Standard Version as “he shall stand and feed his flock.” “He” refers to the coming king, yet the words speak of the activity of a shepherd. The reason for this is that shepherds and sheep were a very important part of life in the Ancient Near East, and a king was regarded as having the same sort of relationship with his people that a shepherd had with his flock of sheep. So when language that described a shepherd was used when speaking about a king, the meaning was quite clear to the original hearers or readers. Such language includes a further allusion to David, who was a shepherd before God chose him to be king, and who, as king, looked after his people like a shepherd. See Psa 78.70-72 and also Micah 5.5 and 7.14. Because the meaning of this metaphor would not be clear to most modern readers of English, Good News Translation has expressed it in plain language as he will rule his people. The word rule here is an obvious link with the ruler mentioned in verse 2. Some translators may prefer to give both the figure and its meaning, as “he shall lead his people and care for them, as a shepherd takes care of his sheep.” If a language has no special word for shepherd, “man” would be enough in this sentence.
The Revised Standard Version expression “in the strength of the LORD” is expanded slightly in Good News Translation to explain the relationship between “strength” and “LORD” as the strength that comes from the LORD. This can also be expressed as “the Lord will give him the power to do this” or “the Lord will make him strong so that he will be able to rule well.”
In the expression “the majesty of the name of the LORD” (Revised Standard Version), the “name” stands for the personality. Good News Translation expresses this as the majesty of the LORD God himself. Majesty refers to the qualities that make a king great, powerful, and impressive. It can be translated as “excellence,” “power,” or “greatness.”
When the people have this ideal ruler, they will live in safety. They will not suffer any more defeats by their enemies because people all over the earth will acknowledge his greatness and will not dare or even wish to attack his people. Some languages may have a single term or an expression that gives the meaning of live in safety or “live securely.” This can also be expressed as “live without danger (or, fear).” Acknowledge his greatness means “recognize that he is great” or “know how great he is.” All over the earth can be translated as “in every country.”
In common with most modern English versions, Good News Translation takes the first clause of verse 5 as going with verses 2-4. This completes the sense of the paragraph, which ends with he will bring peace. With this paragraph division, the Hebrew word translated “this” in Revised Standard Version is understood as being masculine and personal (he in Good News Translation) and as referring to the future ruler. The clause is literally “he will be peace,” which means that his rule will bring about true peace in the sense of a full, good life. New English Bible‘s translation, “he shall be a man of peace,” may be a helpful suggestion for some languages.
The ideas mentioned in the last part of verse 4 are closely related to the beginning of verse 5. Some translators may find that it is helpful to combine these two verses so that peace can be mentioned first. One might say something like “He will bring peace and prosperity. People all over the earth will acknowledge how great he is, and his people will live in safety.”
The way that Good News Translation understands the first clause of verse 5 has been dealt with in the previous section. In Revised Standard Version the first clause is understood as introducing this new section. By this view, the thing that will mean peace for the people is the victory over Assyria described in verses 5 and 6.
In Revised Standard Version “the Assyrian” is singular, as in the Hebrew. However, the singular noun stands for the whole nation, and in English, statements of this kind about nations are normally made in the plural. Therefore Good News Translation uses the plural the Assyrians. The translator may use singular or plural according to the custom of the receptor language.
The people who speak of our country are the people of Israel. This may be clear enough in many languages, but if it is confusing, a translator may need to make it clearer. One possible way is to say “we, the people of Israel, will send our strongest leaders” in the second part of this verse.
Revised Standard Version “treads upon our soil” is based on a small change in one word of the Hebrew text. This word as it stands in Hebrew is the one that Good News Translation translates defenses. The change accepted by Revised Standard Version (also by Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible) improves the parallelism between this line and the previous one (“comes into our land”), but it is not essential in order to make sense of the Hebrew. Good News Translationbreak through our defenses gives a meaning that is perfectly intelligible and fits the context very well (compare New English Bible and New International Version).
Defenses refers literally to the large fortified homes of the wealthy people, and the Hebrew refers to the enemy soldiers walking through these buildings. Good News Translation understands the argument here to be as follows: the people of Israel thought that their buildings were strong enough to keep the enemy out, but in fact the enemy was able to break through. This idea can be expressed as “the Assyrians break into the strong buildings where we defend ourselves.”
In the second part of the verse, Revised Standard Version follows the Hebrew literally with its “seven shepherds and eight princes of men.” The word “shepherds” implies “rulers” as in verse 4, and “princes of men” is simply a repetition of the same idea for the sake of parallelism. Good News Translation drops the parallelism and uses the single term leaders. The numbers “seven” and “eight” are of no special significance in themselves and simply mean a number fully adequate to meet the needs of the situation. Moffatt translates “ample leaders.” This use of a number followed by another number that is greater by one occurs elsewhere in Scripture (Prov 6.16; 30.15, 18, 21, 29; compare 2 Kgs 6.10 and Eccl 11.2). In particular Amos uses the numbers three and four in this way in the repeated expression “For three transgressions … and for four” (Amos 1.3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2.1, 4, 6, Revised Standard Version). The meaning there is conveyed well by New English Bible “For crime after crime,” and Good News Translation “The people … have sinned again and again.” In a similar manner here, Good News Translation avoids mention of a specific number and simply says our strongest leaders. The purpose of these leaders is left rather vague in Revised Standard Version “we will raise against him,” but it is made explicit in Good News Translationto fight them.
Some translators may feel reluctant to leave out all reference to numbers when mentioning the leaders. They may prefer to say something like “many strong leaders” or “plenty of strong leaders.” However, in this context the Hebrew did not attach any special importance to the numbers seven and eight, and so to put these numbers in a translation would give modern readers the wrong idea. If a translator wishes, he may give the literal words in a footnote.
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on Micah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.