לָ֣מָּה יִגָּרַ֤ע שֵׁם־אָבִ֨ינוּ֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ מִשְׁפַּחְתּ֔וֹ כִּ֛י אֵ֥ין ל֖וֹ בֵּ֑ן תְּנָה־לָּ֣נוּ אֲחֻזָּ֔ה בְּת֖וֹךְ אֲחֵ֥י אָבִֽינוּ׃
4Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father’s brothers.”
The Hebrew terms that are translated as “family” or “clan” or “house” or similar in English are all translated in Kwere as ng’holo or “clan.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
In the English translation by Goldingay (2018) it is translated as “kin-group.”
See also tribe.
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 exclusive pronoun, excluding Moses, Eleazar the Priest, the leaders, and all the congregation.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Numbers 27:4:
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 important aspect of addressing someone else in one’s or someone else’s family is by selecting the correct word when referring to them. One way to do this is through the usage of an appropriate title within a conversation as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
When the speaker humbly refers to his or her father in the presence of respected interlocutor(s), chichi (父) is often used as in the case of Jacob’s sons referring to their father before Joseph (in Genesis 43:28). This form is very appropriately chosen as they refer to their father as “your servant” and bowed down before Joseph the prime minister.
In some conversations, archaic honorific forms for “father” are chosen that also contain chichi (父) and typically indicate a greater level of respect. These are o-chichi-ue (お父上) (only in Genesis 48:1), and chichi-gimi (父君) in few occasions (2 Samuel 10:3, 2 Samuel 13:5, and 1 Chronicles 19:3).
Yet another, ore often-used term is chichi-ue (父上) (see addressing one’s or someone else’s father respectfully in Japanese (父上)). An interesting contrast can be found in the message sent from Asa the king of Judah to Ben-hadad the king of Aram (1 Kings 15:19). In this utterance, commonly translated as “my father and your father” in English, Asa humbly refers to his father as chichi (父) but respectfully refers to Ben-hadad’s father as chichi-ue (父上). Similar contrasts can be found in 1 Kings 20:34 and 2 Chronicles 16:3 as well.
While chichi can carry this humbling effect in reference to the speaker’s father, in some types of dialogues/utterances such as in poetry, including prayers (e.g. Jesus teaching how to pray in Matthew 6:9) and proverbial teachings (e.g. “honor your father and mother” in Exodus 20:12, Deuteronomy 5:16 et al.), chichi is used without the humbling effect. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
See also my / our Father and Father (address for God).
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 shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. Here, ataete (与えて) or “give” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).”
(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
The established practice in Israel was that only males could inherit property. It is against this background that the daughters make their appeal for land.
Why should the name of our father be taken away from his family, because he had no son?: The continued existence of a man’s family name was important to the Israelites. With this rhetorical question the daughters are implying that it could be preserved only in connection with the inheritance of his land by his descendants. Many languages will have an idiomatic equivalent here; for example, New Living Translation says “Why should the name of our father disappear from his clan just because he had no sons?” and New Century Version has “Our father’s name will die out [from his clan] because he had no sons.” The Hebrew word for family (mishpachah) is better rendered “clan” again (see 1.2). Since the inheritance issue affects the clan and its property first and foremost, from his family should not be rendered “from Israel” (Good News Bible).
Give to us a possession among our father’s brethren: The Hebrew imperative verb rendered Give is singular, since the daughters are addressing Moses as the key person. In languages that have honorific forms of address and register, a polite verb form may be necessary here for naturalness (for example, a plural imperative in Chewa). Translators should avoid the impression that the daughters are making a demand here. The Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Samaritan Pentateuch have a plural verb, probably because verse 2 mentions that the daughters not only approach Moses, but also Eleazar, the chiefs, and the rest of the Israelites. The Hebrew word for possession (ʾachuzzah) refers to property, particularly in the form of land, which is held in possession. It is close in meaning to the Hebrew word nachalah, which is rendered “inheritance” in 16.14 (see the comments there). The Hebrew word for brethren can be interpreted more loosely as fellow members of the clan, so it may be rendered “relatives” (Good News Bible, NET) or “kinsmen” (New Jewish Publication Society Version). Contemporary English Version renders our father’s brethren as “the rest of his relatives in our clan,” which is a good model. However, it seems quite natural for Zelophehad’s daughters to refer to their “father’s brothers” (New Revised Standard Version, Herziene Statenvertaling; similarly Dutch Common Language Version with “uncles”) in this context of inheritance (see also the LORD’s ruling in verses 8-11).
Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.