4So I thought I would tell you of it and say: Buy it in the presence of those sitting here and in the presence of the elders of my people. If you will redeem it, redeem it; but if you will not, tell me, so that I may know; for there is no one prior to you to redeem it, and I come after you.” So he said, “I will redeem it.”
The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that is typically translated as “elders” in English is translated in the DanishBibelen 2020 as folkets ledere or “leaders of the people.”
Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators, explains: “The term ‘elder’ turned out to pose a particularly thorny problem. In traditional bibles, you can find elders all of over the place and they never pose a problem for a translator, they are just always elders. But how to find a contemporary term for this semi-official, complex position? This may have been our longest-standing problem. A couple of times we thought we had the solution, and then implemented it throughout the texts, only to find out that it didn’t work. Like when we used city council or village council, depending on the context. In the end we felt that the texts didn’t work with such official terms, and throughout the years in the desert, these terms didn’t make much sense. Other suggestions were ‘the eldest and wisest’, ‘the respected citizens’, ‘the Israelites with a certain position in society’, ‘the elder council’ –- and let me point out that these terms sound better in Danish than in English (‘de fremtrædende borgere,’ ‘de mest fremtrædende israelitter,’ ‘alle israelitter med en vis position,’ ‘de ældste og de klogeste,’ ‘ældsterådet’). In the end we just said ‘leaders of the people.’ After a lot of hand-wringing, it turned out that we actually found a term that worked well. So, we had to give up conveying the fact that they were old, but the most important point is that they were community leaders.” (Source: Ehrensvärd in HIPHIL Novum 8/2023, p. 81ff. )
The Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022) translates likewise as “leader of the people” (Anführer des Volkes).
The Greek and Hebrew terms that are translated as “redeem” or “redemption” in most English translations (see more on that below) are translated in Kissi as “buying back.” “Ownership of some object may be forfeited or lost, but the original owner may redeem his possession by buying it back. So God, who made us for Himself, permitted us to accept or reject Him. In order to reconcile rebellious mankind He demonstrated His redemptive love in the death of His Son on our behalf.
“The San Blas Kuna describe redemption in a more spiritual sense. They say that it consists of ‘recapturing the spirit.’ A sinful person is one in rebellion against God, and he must be recaptured by God or he will destroy himself. The need of the spirit is to be captured by God. The tragedy is that too many people find their greatest pleasure in secretly trying to elude God, as though they could find some place in the universe where He could not find them. They regard life as a purely private affair, and they object to the claims of God as presented by the church. They accuse the pastor of interfering with the privacy of their own iniquity. Such souls, if they are to be redeemed, must be ‘recaptured.'” (Source: Nida 1952, p. 138)
Click or tap here for more translations or “redeem” / “redemption”
In Ajië a term is used, nawi, that refers to the “custom of planting a small tree on land cursed either by the blood of battle or some calamity.” Clifford (1992, p. 83ff.) retells the story: “Maurice Leenhardt tells how he finally arrived at a term that would express ‘redemption.’ Previous missionaries had interpreted it as an exchange — an exchange of life, that of Jesus for ours. But in Melanesian thinking more strict equivalents were demanded in the exchanges structuring social life. It remained unclear to them how Jesus’ sacrifice could possibly redeem mankind. So unclear was it that even the natas [Melanesians pastors] gave up trying to explain a concept they did not understand very well themselves and simply employed the term “release.” So the matter stood, with the missionary driven to the use of cumbersome circumlocutions, until one day during a conversation on 1 Corinthians 1:30, [Melanesian pastor and Leenhardt’s co-worker] Boesoou Erijisi used a surprising expression: nawi. The term referred to the custom of planting a small tree on land cursed either by the blood of battle or some calamity. ‘Jesus was thus the one who has accomplished the sacrifice and has planted himself like a tree, as though to absorb all the misfortunes of men and to free the world from its taboos.’ Here at last was a concept that seemed to render the principle of ‘redemption’ and could reach deeply enough into living modes of thought. ‘The idea was a rich one, but how could I be sure I understood it right?’ The key test was in the reaction of students and natas to his provisional version. They were, he reports, overjoyed with the ‘deep’ translation.”
In Folopa, the translation team also found a deeply indigenous term. Neil Anderson (in Holzhausen 1991, p. 51) explains: “While I was explaining the meaning of the [concept] to the Folopa men, I could see their faces brighten. They said that this was a common thing among them: ‘If someone falls a tree and it tips to the wrong side, killing someone, the relatives of the injured party claim the life of the guilty party. But in order to save his life, his relatives make amends. Pigs, shells (which are still used as currency here) and other valuables are given to the relatives of the deceased as payment for the life of the guilty party. In this way he can live because others stand up for him.’ Full of joy, I began to utilize this thought to the difficult translation of the word ‘redemption.’ Mark 10:45 reads now, translated back from the Folopa: ‘Jesus came to make an atonement, by which he takes upon himself the punishment for the evil deeds of many. He came so that through his death many might be liberated.’ After working on this verse for half an hour, I read it to my friends. They became silent and moved their slightly bowed heads thoughtfully back and forth. Finally, one of them took the floor, ‘We give a lot to right a wrong. But we have never given a human being as a price of atonement. Jesus did a great work for us when he made restitution. Because he died, all of us now don’t have to bear the punishment we deserve. We are liberated.'”
In Samoan the translation is togiola which originally refers to a fine mat. John Bradshaw (in The Bible Translator 1967, p. 75ff. ) explains: “The rite of submission applies in cases of grave sin which demands an extreme punishment: offenses such as murder, adultery or disrespectful behavior towards a chief. Submission is made in expectation of forgiveness. The rite is normally enacted at dawn. The prisoner and his family, or even his whole village bow down in silence before the house of the chief or other offended party. The prisoner heads the group and is covered with a fine mat, offered as his ransom. In other words, he submits himself completely to the authority of those whom he has offended. Many such submissions have been successfully offered and received. Those inside the house will come out, and bring into it those offering submission. The priestly orators speak sweetly and all join in a meal. The fine mat is accepted, while the prisoner is set free and forgiven. He no longer goes in fear of retribution for his sin. (…) If now we turn to the relation between the believer and the Redeemer, we notice at once that the word togiola, literally the price of one’s life, was the word used to denote the fine mat with which the sinner covered himself in the rite of Submission. The acceptance of the togiola set free the prisoner. It was inevitable that togiola should render lutron, ransom, as in Matthew 20:28.”
“In Hebrew there are two terms, ga’al and padah, usually rendered ‘to redeem,’ which have likewise undergone significant changes in meaning with resulting obscurity and misunderstanding. Both terms are used in the Old Testament for a person being redeemed from slavery. In the case of padah, the primary emphasis is upon the redemption by means of payment, and in ga’al the redemption of an individual, usually by payment, is made by some relative or an individual of the same clan or society. These two words, however, are used in the Old Testament in circumstances in which there is no payment at all. For example, the redemption of Jews from Egypt is referred to by these two terms, but clearly there was no payment made to the Egyptians or to Pharaoh.
“In the New Testament a related problem occurs, for the words agorázō and exagorazó, meaning literally ‘to buy’ or ‘to buy back’ and ‘to buy out,’ were translated into Latin as redimo and into English normally as ‘redeem.’ The almost exclusive association of Latin redimo with payment became such a focal element of meaning that during the Middle Ages a theory developed that God had to pay the Devil in order to get believers out of hell and into heaven.
“As in the case of the Old Testament, New Testament contexts employing the Greek verb lutroó, literally ‘to redeem’ or ‘to ransom,’ do not refer primarily to payment but focus upon deliverance and being set free. But even today there is such a heavy tradition of the theological concept of payment that any attempt to translate lutroó as ‘to deliver’ or ‘to set free’ is misjudged by some as being heretical.” (Source: Nida 1984, p. 114f.)
Following are a number of back-translations of Ruth 4:1-6:
Noongar: “So Boaz went to the gate of Bethlehem and sat there. When the other right-way man was passing by, the one whom Boaz told Ruth, Boaz said to him, ‘Come here, brother, sit here.’ So this man came and sat. Then Boaz called ten men of Bethlehem, saying, ‘Sit here.’ So they sat. Then Boaz said to this other right-way man, ‘Naomi has returned from Moab. She wants to sell the land of our brother Elimelech. I know I must tell you, ‘Take this land yourself, in front of the men sitting here and in front of our elders’. If you want this land, buy it for yourself. But if you don’t want this land, tell me so I know. No man can take this land, only you, and I am after you.’ So the man said, ‘I will take this land.’ So Boaz said, ‘The day you take this land, you also take Ruth of Moab, widow of the dead man, so the name of the dead sits with his land.’ Quickly, the other right-way man said, ‘I cannot take this land for myself, because after I must divide all my land with Ruth. You buy this land for yourself, because I can’t!’” (Source: Bardip Ruth-Ang 2020)
Eastern Bru: “Boaz went to the place where discussions were held near the gate of the town. In that place he met his kinsman who was of Ruth’s clan but closer than he. He called his kinsman and said: ‘Older brother! Sit here a while. I want to discuss something with you for a bit.’ So they sat together.And Boaz asked ten leaders of the town to come and hear what the two of them were discussing. So the ten leaders came and sat there also. Boaz told his kinsman: ‘Naomi has left the country of Moab already. Now she is wanting to sell a piece of ground belonging to Elimelec, our older brother. So I want to discuss this with you now. If you want to buy this land, then you say so in front of these leaders and other people from the town so they can hear. If you want to buy the land, then you buy it, because you are of Naomi’s clan closer than I am. But if you do not want it, then tell me, so that I will know clearly, because only the two of us can buy this land.’ Then the kinsman said to Boaz: ‘Surely I will buy the land.’Then Boaz said: ‘But if you want do buy this land of Naomi’s, you must also take Ruth to be your wife. Ruth is a Moabite, the wife of our kinsman who has died. So you must take the place of our kinsman and raise up children who can carry on his name and take over his inheritance.’Then the kinsman of Boaz answered: ‘If it is like that, I don’t want to buy the land, because I am afraid I would have to divide my inheritance with her children also. So you can take my place and buy the land, because I do not want to take that woman.’” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “Now, Boaz went to the town’s gate and sat there. When the much closer relative of Elimelec that Boaz had-mentioned/had-referred-to passed-by, Boaz said to him, ‘Come-over-here for-a-while friend and sit-down.’ So the man came-over and sat-down. Then Boaz caused-to-gather the ten rulers of the town and had- them -sit there. And when they had-sat-down, Boaz said to his relative, ‘Noemi has- now -come-back from Moab, and she wants to sell the land of our(incl) relative Elimelec. I thought I should-tell this-(matter) to you(sg). So, if you(sg) want, buy it in the presence of the rulers of my fellow-countrymen and of others who-are-sitting here. But if you(sg) do- not -want, just say so, so-that I will-know. The truth is, you(sg) are the first-one that has the responsibility to buy it, and I am just next (in-line).’ The man said, ‘Okay, I will-buy it.’ But Boaz said, ‘On the day you(sg) buy the land from Noemi, you(sg) must also marry the Moabnon widow Ruth, so-that if you(pl) have now a child, the land will-remain in the family of our(incl) dead relative.’ When the man heard it, he said, ‘If that-is-the-case I will- no-longer -buy the land because I might have-problem with my own land because including our(excl) child to-be with Ruth (will)- now -have a share with my land. You(sg) just buy (it) because I can- not -do it.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Meanwhile, Boaz went up to the town gate and sat there. That was the place where people met together to decide important matters. When the man that Boaz had mentioned came there, the close relative of Ruth and Naomi’s dead husbands who had a responsibility to take care of Naomi and Ruth, Boaz said to him, ‘My friend, come over here and sit down.’ So the man went and sat down. Boaz then gathered ten of the elders of the town and asked them to sit down there also. After they sat down, he said to the man who had the responsibility to take care of Naomi, ‘Naomi has returned from Moab region. She wants to sell the field that belonged to our relative Elimelech. I thought that I should tell you about that, and suggest that you buy it, while these elders who are sitting here are listening. If you are willing to buy the property, do that. But if you do not want to buy it, tell me, so that I will know. I am suggesting this to you because you are the one who has the first right to buy it, and I am the one who has the second/next right to buy it.’ The man replied, ‘I will buy it!’ Then Boaz told him, ‘When you buy the land from Naomi, you will also be taking Ruth, the woman who is from Moab, to be your wife, in order that she may give birth to a son who will inherit the property of her dead husband.’ Then the close relative of Ruth’s dead husband said, ‘If that is so, I do not want to buy the field, because then my own children would not inherit the property; Ruth’s children would inherit it. You buy the property!’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) can be used, as in mi-kao (御顔) or “face (of God)” in the referenced verses.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
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, kaimodoshite (買い戻して) or “redeem” 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. )
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
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, katte (買って) or “buy” 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 clause and I think you ought to know about it is in Hebrew literally “and I thought I would uncover your ear.” The Hebrew verb often translated “thought” is in this context much better translated as “I have decided.” To “uncover the ear” is merely a figure of speech meaning “to inform.” See Baumgartner, s.v. galah. Compare also Accadian uznâ puttu and Dhorme, Emploi métaphorique, page 89. It would be interesting to retain this metaphor or to use a similar metaphor in a receptor language, but rarely can one do so. Septuagint seems to give a literal translation of the Hebrew: apokalupsō to ous sou. It is highly questionable, however, whether this is idiomatic Greek. Sometimes an approximate expression may be employed; for example, “to open your ears” or “to cause your ears to hear.”
Now then … then to me is a rather complex construction in Hebrew. It could be translated somewhat literally as “saying, buy (it) in the presence of those sitting (here) and in the presence of the elders of my people. If you will redeem (it), redeem (it); but if you will not redeem (it), With many Hebrew manuscripts, Targum, Syriac version, Septuagint, and Vulgate, one should read the second person singular instead of the third person singular. tell me, that I may know, for there is no one beside you to redeem (it), and I am after you.”
This structure can be followed somewhat literally by interpreting the first verb of “saying” as “suggesting,” that is, “suggesting that you buy it” (see Smith-Goodspeed). This type of rendering depends, however, to some extent upon the rendering of the verb “redeem.” If the verb which in Hebrew is often translated “redeem” is translated as “to help out as a relative” or “to do your duty as a relative,” one can translate “if you want to do your duty as a relative, then do so” (cf. New English Bible). In this particular context the specific duty of the relative was to buy the land, and therefore in many languages it is more satisfactory to follow Good News Translation and translate buy it in the presence of these men sitting here. It is also possible to combine the concept of being a relative with the buying of the land, by translating “if you want to do your duty as a relative in buying the land,” but this may turn out to be a rather heavy construction in some languages.
There may be confusion about the references of the word it in verse 4. In the first instance (to know about it), it may refer either to the field or to the fact that Naomi wanted to sell the field. In some languages one must make the reference specific, either as “I have decided to tell you about the field” or “… that Naomi wants to sell the field.” The second it (if you want it) is best rendered as “the field”; for example, “if you want the field.” The third and following uses of it are all reference to the field. In some languages “the field” must be used in all instances, but in most cases some kind of pronominal reference to the field is more natural.
Say so is better translated in some languages as “tell me” or even “tell us,” since the elders who were present served as witnesses to this agreement or transaction.
The right to buy it belongs first to you may need to be somewhat restructured as “you are the first one to have the right to buy it” or “you come ahead of me in being able to buy it.”
The man said is more appropriately translated in some languages as “the man responded,” since his statement is in response to the offer of Boaz.
I will buy it involves a form of the Hebrew verb which indicates a rather weak answer, not a particularly firm or definite one. See Joüon, par. 112-113. A firm, definite answer should be expressed by the qatal form. Compare Haller’s translation: “Ich will es schon lösen,” or BJ: “Oui, je veux bien racheter.” This subtly suggests that he may want to back out of the arrangement, even as he does in verse 6.
Quoted with permission from de Waard, Jan and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Ruth. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
I thought: The Hebrew word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as I thought is literally “I said.” Boaz apparently said this to himself, thought it, or “decided.”
I should inform you: The Hebrew clause is literally “I will uncover your ear.” This is an idiom that means “give information to someone” or “cause someone to know the facts.”
Here are some other ways to translate this verse part:
I promised to open the matter with you (Revised English Bible) -or-
I thought I should tell you about this (New Jerusalem Bible) -or-
So I decided to tell you about it (New Century Version)
4:4b
that you may buy it back: The Berean Standard Bible uses an indirect quotation here. The Hebrew uses a direct quotation. In some languages, it may be more natural to use a direct quotation. For example:
4a I thought I should tell you about it 4b and say, “Acquire it…” (New Jerusalem Bible)
4:4c
in the presence of: This means “in front of.” Boaz was saying that the other man should decide if he wanted to buy the land from Naomi, while the people Boaz had selected were there and could be witnesses.
those seated here and in the presence of the elders of my people: There are two ways to interpret these two phrases:
(1) They refer to two groups of people. For example:
in the presence of these men sitting here and in the presence of the leaders of our people (God’s Word)
(2) They refer to the same group of people that Boaz selected in 4:2a. For example:
in the presence of these men sitting here (Good News Translation)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1) along with most versions.
The Berean Standard Bible and the Hebrew mention the elders last. In many languages, it will better to mention the more important group, the elders, before mentioning the other people seated there. For example:
These ten men and the others standing here can be witnesses. (Contemporary English Version)
4:4d
If you want to redeem it, do so: In 4:4b Boaz used the general verb “buy.” But here he uses the term redeem that refers to the action of a kinsman-redeemer.
In this context, the verb includes the idea that a man buys back property to help a poor relative. So if possible you should keep the distinction here by using a different verb or verb phrase. For example:
If you wish to buy back the property, you can buy back the property. (God’s Word) -or-
If you are going to do your duty as next-of-kin, then do so (Revised English Bible)
4:4e
But if you will not redeem it, tell me so I may know: Boaz told the man to redeem the land if he wished to do so, but asked the man to inform him if he did not want to do it. When Boaz heard the man’s answer, he would know what he himself could do.
tell me: These two wealthy men were having a formal, legal discussion. In many languages, a direct command would be inappropriate in such a situation. Translate this direct command in a way that shows that Boaz was speaking politely to the other relative.
Here are some other ways to translate this verse part:
But if you don’t want it, let me know right away (New Living Translation (2004)) -or-
But if you decide not to buy it back, please tell me so that I will know what to do
4:4f
because there is no one but you to redeem it: The Hebrew conjunction that the Berean Standard Bible translates as because introduces the reason that Boaz wanted to know the man’s decision. Boaz wanted to buy back the property himself, but this man had the right to choose first.
and I am next after you: The Hebrew clause that the Berean Standard Bible translates as I am next after you is literally “I am after you.” Boaz was the next relative to have the right to buy back the property.
Here are some other ways to translate this verse part:
for I am the only person to redeem it besides yourself, and I myself come after you (New Jerusalem Bible) -or-
because the right to buy it belongs first to you and then to me (Good News Translation)
4:4g
“I will redeem it,” he replied: The nearer relative made his decision and gave a positive response. For example:
He replied, “I will redeem it.” (NET Bible) -or-
The close relative answered, “I will buy back the land.” (New Century Version)
Notice that the Berean Standard Bible placed he replied after the quote. In some languages, it is more natural to put the quote after the introductory words, as in the examples above.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.