Translation commentary on Genesis 36:20 - 21

These are the sons of Seir the Horite: These points ahead. Seir, which has until now been the name of the mountainous region in Edom, is here personalized. Horite appears to refer to Hurrians who migrated from Mesopotamia into Syria and Canaan. In the second millennium the Egyptians used the term Horite to refer to the populations of that region. It is not known why the Israelites used Horite for the people of the ancient area of Edom.

Inhabitants of the land means they were already in the region of Edom when Esau’s sons settled there. Note Good News Translation “original inhabitants,” which may need to be rendered, for example, “The first people to live in the region of Edom….” A fuller rendering of this whole statement is “Before Esau went to that country of Edom, the Horite people were there, and that was their country. All the Horite tribes were descended from one old man whose name was Seir.”

In translation we may combine verses 20-21 for the same reason as in verses 15-16. We may restructure verses 20-21 to say, for example, “The first people who lived in Edom were the descendants of Seir, who was of the tribe called Horite. The ancestors of the clans of the Horite tribe were Lotan, Sobal, Zibeon, Anah, Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan. All of these were the descendants of Seir.” For another model see Good News Translation.

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, William D. and Fry, Euan McG. A Handbook on Genesis. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Genesis 5:18 - 5:20

The report of Jared.

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, William D. and Fry, Euan McG. A Handbook on Genesis. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Genesis 5:15 - 5:17

The report of Mahalalel, a name that means “praise of God.”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, William D. and Fry, Euan McG. A Handbook on Genesis. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Exod 8:16

Then is the usual conjunction waw in the Hebrew, but here it functions as an important transition marker introducing the third plague account. The text does not indicate how much time elapsed between the second and third plagues. The LORD said to Moses, “Say to Aaron…”: this is a common narrative device that introduces a quote with a quote, with Yahweh (the LORD) speaking to Moses, who in turn is to speak to Aaron. As usual, Today’s English Version changes the second quote to indirect discourse: “Tell Aaron to strike the ground.” Say to Aaron may also be expressed as “Command Aaron to strike….”

Stretch out your rod and strike the dust are two commands indicating only one action. Aaron is simply to “strike the ground with his stick” (Today’s English Version). One should avoid the possible suggestion that he is to hold out his rod in one hand and hit the ground with the other. Your rod must be understood as Aaron’s rod. (See the comments on rod at 4.2 and at 7.9.) The dust of the earth probably refers to the loose soil on the ground as well as the dry, fine particles of dirt.

That it may become gnats means that “the dust will change into gnats” (Today’s English Version). This is to be another miracle of transformation (as in 7.10 and 20). The word that interprets the conjunction waw, for it is clear that the transformation will not occur until the instructions are carried out. Throughout all the land of Egypt indicates the extent of this plague; there will be gnats in all parts of the country where there is dust.

The word translated as gnats is found only here and in Psa 105.31, which refers to this same plague. (Isa 51.6 may use a different form of this word.) Its precise meaning therefore is uncertain. It probably refers to a tiny flying insect that can sting.

Quoted with permission from Osborn, Noel D. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Exodus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1999. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Chronicles 6:1

Then Solomon said: Verse 1b may be understood as words that Solomon spoke to himself. If so, then Solomon’s prayer to God begins in verse 2 (so NET Bible). Other translations understand verse 1b as the beginning of Solomon’s prayer. Since verse 2 makes clear that Solomon is talking to God and not to human beings, some of these translations introduce the direct quotation of verses 1b-2 with the verb “prayed” instead of said (so Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation).

The LORD has said that he would dwell in thick darkness: This line refers to Lev 16.2. In the Masoretic Text the parallel text in 1 Kgs 8.12 agrees with the wording here. However, the Septuagint text of 1 Kgs 8.12 has a longer reading (beginning with the words “The LORD has set the sun in the heavens”), which is followed by Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Revised English Bible, and several other translations of 1 Kgs 8.12. Some versions harmonize the text here in 2 Chronicles with that of the Septuagint in 1 Kings by following the longer text (so Revised English Bible, Moffatt). Revised English Bible, for example, says “The LORD has caused the sun to shine in the heavens; but he has said he would dwell in thick darkness.”

The Most Holy Place had no windows; no natural light penetrated it except when the curtain was drawn back. While darkness may be said to be thick in English, the term used in other languages may be quite different. In fact, the Hebrew has a single word for thick darkness, which refers to “obscurity” (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). The idea is “an obscure place” (La Bible du Semeur) or simply “a very dark place.” The same expression is found in Exo 20.21. It may be translated “a/the dark cloud” (New International Version, New Century Version, New American Bible).

Good News Translation, which takes this line as part of Solomon’s prayer, has changed the third person references to the LORD to second person by saying “LORD, you have chosen to live in clouds and darkness” (similarly Parole de Vie). Good News Bible does this because the Hebrew uses the second person for the LORD in the rest of the prayer in the following verse. Translators must decide whether it will be confusing to readers in the receptor language to shift from third person to second person in speaking to God. In addition to the question about shifting pronouns, translators must also ask themselves whether it is natural in their language to use the third person in prayers to God.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 1 Chronicles 20:4

And after this …: The Hebrew text begins with the verbal transition (King James Version “And it came to pass”) followed by an adverb of time showing that the events here took place some time after the ones previously reported. Receptor languages may have a variety of ways of indicating this. New International Version does so by beginning with “In the course of time …,” and Contemporary English Version says “Some time later….”

There arose war with the Philistines at Gezer: The text does not say who went to war against the Philistines. International Children’s Bible makes it clear by saying “war broke out between Israel and the Philistines at Gezer.” Regarding the location and importance of the town of Gezer, see the comments on 1 Chr 6.67. In the parallel text of 2 Sam 21.18 this same town is called “Gob.”

Then Sibbecai the Hushathite slew Sippai: Sibbecai the Hushathite was from the town of Hushah, located in the hills of the territory of Judah, a few kilometers southwest of Bethlehem. Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje says “Sibbecai, from the town of Hushah.” He is mentioned also in 1 Chr 11.29, where he is included among the mighty men of David’s army, and possibly also in 2 Sam 23.27. According to 1 Chr 27.11, he was the commander of David’s army who served in the eighth month each year. Instead of Sippai, the parallel passage in , 2 Sam 21.18 has “Saph,” which is actually a variant of the name Sippai. New Living Translation reads “Saph” here. Translators may use the same spelling of the name in both cases.

Who was one of the descendants of the giants is literally “from the sons of the giants.” This expression has been traditionally understood to mean that the men described in this way here and in the following verses were physical descendants of people of unusually large stature, the Rephaim, who are described in Gen 14.5; 15.20; Deut 2.10-11; Josh 12.4; 13.12; 17.15, and elsewhere. However, in his commentary on 2 Samuel, McCarter indicates that the Hebrew word translated descendants may be understood to imply membership in a group in the same way that “sons of the prophets” refers to members of a prophetic guild (see 1 Kgs 20.35; Amos 7.14). It was used especially to refer to people of low estate who were dedicated to military service of a master (see Gen 14.14, where it is rendered “born”).

The meaning of the Hebrew word translated the giants (harephaʾim) is not entirely certain either. This Hebrew word is plural and has the prefixed letter for “h,” which is usually understood to be the Hebrew definite article. But in , verses 6 and 8 the Hebrew word is singular, haraphaʾ. These Hebrew words are sometimes transliterated “the Rephaim” (Contemporary English Version, , Revised English Bible), “the Rephaim/Rapha” ( NET Bible), “the Rephaites/Rapha” (New International Version), or “the Raphaim” (New American Bible). Some interpreters consider these words to be a woman’s name, in which case the initial letter for “h” is not the definite article but is part of the woman’s name (so Traduction œcuménique de la Bible with “Harafa” in verses 6 and 8). But the plural word in verse 4 almost certainly shows that the writer intended the reference here and in verses 6 and 8 to be the ancient giants. Translators are advised to render the meaning found in , Revised Standard Version (also New Revised Standard Version, Anchor Bible, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Nueva Versión Internacional, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), while adding an explanatory footnote if necessary.

And the Philistines were subdued is literally “and they were subdued.” Osty-Trinquet places the words “the Philistines” within square brackets. However, even though the Hebrew does not have the words “the Philistines,” such information may be made explicit here without the use of square brackets. This statement shows that God’s promise to David to “subdue all your enemies” (1 Chr 17.10) is being fulfilled.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on 2 Samuel 1:17

Lamented with this lamentation: a “lament” is a kind of funeral song sung in honor of a person who has recently died. Because it is usually sung, most modern versions use a verb like “chanted” (New American Bible), “intoned” (New Revised Standard Version), or, as in \jmp Today’s English Version, “sang” (New Jerusalem Bible, Anchor Bible, Moffatt, and An American Translation). In those languages that have a special noun for this kind of mourning song, it should probably be used here. Several English versions use the word “dirge” (An American Translation and Moffatt), while others have “sang this elegy” (Anchor Bible). While most versions indicate that David actually performed this lament, others seem to focus on the fact of its composition. La Bible du Semeur translates “David composed this complaint concerning Saul and his son Jonathan,” and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente says “For the death of Saul and Jonathan, David composed a funeral song.”

Over Saul and Jonathan: a literal translation of the preposition over might be misunderstood to suggest that the bodies of Saul and Jonathan were present when David sang the funeral song. But this was not the case. The meaning of the preposition here is rather “concerning” or “for.” In some languages this idea will be included by using a benefactive form of the verb, that is, a form of the verb which indicates that the action was done for someone’s benefit.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

new interpretation of Job 42:6

The Hebrew in Job 42:6 is translated in the English translation by E.L. Greenstein (2019) as:

That is why I am fed up;
I take pity of “dust and ashes!”

Greenstein explains this unconventional choice (p. XIXff.):

“Job’s response to the deity’s lengthy lecture on his prowess as creator and sustainer of the world — and on Job’s total lack of power and esoteric knowledge — is routinely interpreted as surrender. The verse (Job 42:6) has always stymied translators. The earliest translation, an Aramaic version found among the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, interprets: ‘Therefore I am poured out and boiled up, and I will become dust.’ The two verbs are parsed entirely differently from the way they are most often understood today. A typical modern translation of Job 42:6 is: ‘Therefore I despise myself (or: recant), and repent in dust and ashes.’

“The first part of this translation is a stretch, and the second part turns out, after advanced investigation, to be highly improbable. The verb in the first clause (mans’) is assumed to be transitive, in need of an object, and the translators supply that object, either explicitly or by implication. Concerning the widespread interpretation as ‘recant,’ it is an invention of the translator — no such usage is attested in ancient Hebrew. It assumes an implicit object, ‘words’ or the like, but no such expression occurs with this sense. Concerning the rendering ‘despise (myself),’ the closest phrase one can find occurs in Job 9:21: ‘I’m fed up with (despise) my life.’ However, the verb in question does not need an object. It occurs intransitively in the sense of ‘I am fed up’ in Job 7:16, where it is often rendered correctly. In other words, there is a very weak foundation in biblical parlance for the common rendering. It stems from the presumption of the translator that Job is repentant.

“The second verb phrase, ordinarily rendered ‘I repent,’ has other well-known usages. An often overlooked one is ‘to take pity, have compassion’ (for example, in Psalm 90:13). Those who translate ‘I repent’ tend to render the following words literally: ‘on dust and ashes.’ They assume that in Biblical Hebrew one can say, ‘I am doing such and such (in the present case, repenting) in / on dust and ashes.’ The assumption is false. An extensive examination of all phrases relating to performing an act in the dust, on the earth, and the like shows that another verb is required: if Job were ‘repenting’ or ‘regretting,’ he would have to be ‘sitting in / standing on / lying in / being in (and so forth) dust and ashes.’ No such complementary verb is found here. We ought therefore to adopt the same meaning for the phrase ‘dust and ashes’ here that we find in its two other occurrences, one in the haggling between Abraham and God concerning the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:27), where the patriarch humbly presents himself as no more than ‘dust and ashes,’ and the other in Job’s characterization of his abasement: ‘making me seem like dust and ashes’ (Job 30:19). The phrase is used figuratively of the wretched human condition.

“In this light, Job, in 42:6, is expressing defiance, not capitulation: ‘That is why I am fed up; I take pity on ‘dust and ashes!’ (= humanity).’ I note as well that in the preceding verses Job is mimicking the deity’s addresses to him from the storm (see there). Mimicry is the quintessence of parody. Parodic as well is Job’s assertion in 42:2: ‘you cannot be blocked from any scheme.’ Job is unmistakably alluding to the disdainful remark the deity makes about the builders of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11:7: ‘they will not be blocked from anything they scheme to do.’ Consequently, Job is parodying God, not showing him respect. If God is all about power and not morality and justice, Job will not condone it through acceptance. This response may not accord with the image of a pious, Bontshe the Silent -type Job that most interpreters have wanted to find in this biblical book. However, Job’s defiance, a product of his absolute integrity, is not the only radical or surprising feature of the book in the reading presented and defended here.”