Woe to my worthless shepherd: The words Woe to … represent a statement that trouble will come to someone, rather than a wish that it may. Thus Good News Translation renders them as a statement: “That worthless shepherd is doomed!” Other ways to say this are “There is no hope for my worthless shepherd,” “My worthless shepherd will be punished,” or “I myself will punish my worthless shepherd.” For similar occurrences in prophetic writing, compare for instance Hab 2.6, 9, 12, 15, 19. My represents a Hebrew suffix attached to the word for shepherd. Among modern versions, only Moffatt, Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, and New American Bible translate it as my or “mine.” Many scholars interpret the suffix not as a possessive, but as an ancient genitive form, so that the whole phrase my worthless shepherd literally translated would be “shepherd-of worthlessness.” The main reason for taking it this way seems to be that the same construction occurs in the relative clause who deserts the flock, literally “deserter-of the-flock.” But it seems curious reasoning to suppose that because a rare form occurs once in a verse, it probably occurs twice. It seems far more likely that a very common suffix will have its common meaning as a possessive unless there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In the present case, the rendering my fits perfectly well with the structure of the traditional text, in which this verse is part of the direct speech of the LORD. It is possible that the interpretation without my appeals to those who wish to separate this verse more sharply from verses 15-16, but this seems like special pleading. Translators are therefore urged to follow Revised Standard Version at this point. In some languages my worthless shepherd might be understood to refer to a different shepherd from the one mentioned in verses 15-16. In such a case, a demonstrative phrase like “this my worthless shepherd” may be clearer.

The word translated worthless here is not the same Hebrew word as that translated “worthless” in verse 15, though the two words are quite similar in spelling. Many English versions use the same word in both places. This is worthless in Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, New English Bible/ Revised English Bible, Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, and New Living Translation (similarly Bible en français courant, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), and “foolish” in New American Bible. Others use different words. New International Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, for instance, use “foolish” in verse 15 and “worthless” in verse 17. Translators should make their decision not on the basis of verbal consistency, but on the basis of appropriate meaning. If the same term is appropriate in both contexts, there is no harm in using it in both. This also has the advantage of restoring something of the connection of sound between the two Hebrew words and thus tightening the links of the whole paragraph, that is verses 15-17.

Who deserts the flock: This means “leaves the sheep to be attacked by wild animals or robbers.” Compare Ezek 34.5-6, and contrast John 10.10-15. A possible alternative model is “who abandons the sheep to be killed.”

May the sword smite his arm and his right eye: Smite means “strike” (compare Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible, New International Version). This is symbolic language; Good News Translation drops the symbolism and translates the underlying meaning: “War will totally destroy his power.” The arm was a symbol of strength (compare for instance Exo 6.6; Isa 51.9; Ezek 30.21). The right eye was the eye with which the warrior peered around the side of the shield that he held on his left arm. A man who was blind in his right eye was unable to fight and so was useless as a soldier, unless of course he was left-handed like Ehud in Jdg 3.15-22. Translators will need to decide whether the symbolic language is meaningful to their own readers, or whether the meaning should be expressed directly. The symbolic language should be kept if possible, especially as it recurs in the last part of the verse, and has overtones of reference to earlier historical narratives. It may be helpful to follow the example of Bible en français courant and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, which keep the reference to the arm and the eye, but also explain them. A possible translation model is “May war destroy the strength of his arms, and the sharp sight of his eyes.”

Let his arm be wholly withered: Withered refers to the paralysis of the arm, and the consequent atrophy or wasting of its muscles. This happened to King Jeroboam 1 of Israel when he attempted to arrest an unnamed prophet (1 Kgs 13.1-6). The expression wholly withered (or, “completely paralyzed”) translates a Hebrew construction in which two forms of the same verb are used together to give added emphasis. English has no such construction, so Revised Standard Version adds the adverb wholly to provide the emphasis. Some languages may have a construction similar to the Hebrew, and in such cases the adverb will not be needed.

His right eye utterly blinded: Many languages, like Hebrew, will need to repeat the structure of the previous clause more fully than Revised Standard Version, and say, “Let his right eye be completely blinded.” Utterly blinded translates another Hebrew construction where the same verb is used twice in different forms for emphasis. Again Revised Standard Version adds an adverb, utterly, to catch the emphasis. In languages that have a repetitive construction like Hebrew, this may be another good place to use it. Many scholars think this clause refers to the fate of Zedekiah, the last king of Judah, who was blinded by order of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kgs 25.7; Jer 39.7).

Translators may notice that New English Bible transposes 13.7-9 to come after 11.17. Translators should not follow the example of New English Bible. The transposition has no support in the manuscript tradition, and Revised English Bible has rightly abandoned it.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .