Boaz’s statement to Ruth that she should stay there the rest of the night would imply that he wanted to protect Ruth from the dangers of the night, possibly an encounter with thieves or men who were drunk at the harvest season. Threshing and winnowing were not women’s work, See Dalman, op. cit., III, page 127. and Ruth’s presence at the threshing floor could certainly lead to a misinterpretation of her motives. Had she been detected, people would have probably thought that she was present as a prostitute.
In the morning … I will take the responsibility is in Hebrew literally, “in the morning, if he will do for you the kinsman’s part, well and good; but if he is not pleased to do for you the kinsman’s part, then I will do for you the kinsman’s part, as the LORD lives.” Some restructuring of this Hebrew sentence is almost imperative if the results are to be clear and stylistically acceptable. For one thing, it is not always necessary to repeat “to do for you the kinsman’s part.” This is generally better translated as “be responsible for you” or “have the duty of helping you.”
Part of the confusion and obscurity in Boaz’s statement results from the fact that he anticipated some type of legal action, but this is not specifically stated. Good News Translation makes reference to this by translating in the morning we will find out. It might even be possible to employ “we will find out before the tribunal” or “we will find out when this case is judged.”
It may seem rather strange that the closer relative is not specifically named. It is somewhat difficult to refer clearly to that person repeatedly without having a proper name with which to identify him. It is all the more necessary, therefore, that phrases such as “that man,” “that person,” or “that closer relative” be clearly marked.
For comments on the meaning of “to do the kinsman’s part,” see 2.20 and 3.9.
The idiomatic expression well and good (Good News Translation and New English Bible) is quite close to the Hebrew phrase. In the Haggada, the Hebrew tob (“good”), which is found in the normal subject position, is taken as the proper name of the closer relative, and this “Tob” has been made an elder brother of Boaz! This interpretation presupposes an ellipsis of the apodosis (compare Joüon, par. 167). In other languages it may be necessary to use an expression such as “let him do so,” “that will be fine,” or “that is all that I can do.”
Boaz’s assurance to Ruth that he will help in every possible way is concluded by an oath in which he uses the divine name, Yahweh, the … LORD. This may be introduced in a number of ways in different languages; for example, “I promise before the LORD,” “I make a strong promise, calling the LORD to listen,” “I promise, and the LORD will remember,” or “I promise, using the LORD’s name.”
The Hebrew oath formula, literally, “on the life of the LORD,” occurs frequently in the Old Testament. The formula in this particular form occurs 43 times in the Old Testament, 31 of which are in the books of Judges to 2 Kings. It is already found in the Lachish ostraca. See H. Donner and W. Röllig, Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften, I, Texte, 1966, nr. 193, line 9 and nr. 196, line 12. For the ancient Jewish people, an oath “on the life of the LORD” was the strongest possible statement of intent in which “he who swears puts the whole substance and strength of his soul into the words he speaks,” J. Pedersen, Israel, Its Life and Culture, I-II, page 407. since the oath was pronounced on the basis of God’s strength and with him as a participant. J. Pedersen, idem, III-IV, page 450.
In many languages, however, it would be quite meaningless to say “on the life of the LORD.” One must often employ a somewhat different expression; for example, “I swear it by the LORD” (New English Bible). The New English Bible phrase, however, does not communicate the sense of “life,” and for that reason Good News Translation employs a somewhat altered formula: I swear by the living LORD. In many languages it is quite impossible to speak of swearing by the life of someone. A more appropriate formula may be “I swear by the name of….” Therefore one could employ “I swear by the name of the living LORD.” According to Wendland, the Chewa equivalent is “It is on God,” the implication being that if the speaker proves to be lying, he will be punished by some extraordinary punishment sent by God, such as lightning. Wendland, The Cultural Factor, page 180.
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 .