God then asks Jonah the same question as in verse 4, but with the addition of about the plant, that is, on account of the disappearance of the plant. On that occasion Jonah was indeed angry, as is clear from 4.1. but here he is not so much angry as miserable, or bad tempered.

To be angry about the plant must be expanded somewhat as “to be angry because of what happened to the plant.” It is important not to imply that Jonah was angry at the plant itself but because the plant had withered and died.

Jonah did not reply to the question that was put to him in verse 4, but here he replies by asserting emphatically that he had every justification for being angry. Jonah’s response should be parallel to 4.4, but it may be very difficult to speak of “every right.” One may, for example, say “I’m completely justified in being angry,” or “I have a good reason to be angry,” or “my anger is completely reasonable.”

The words angry enough to die can be taken with a double meaning. One is the surface meaning, that his anger is sufficient to justify his request for death. The other meaning takes the words “even unto death” (King James Version) as an expression denoting the superlative (compare Moffatt and New English Bible, “mortally angry,” and Knox, “deadly angry”). The same expression as occurs here in Jonah is also found in a medieval letter written in Hebrew, also with the meaning “I was extremely angry.” It is difficult to do justice to both these senses in one translation, since by emphasizing the idiom expressing the superlative, the literal sense, angry enough to die, is likely to be concealed. The use of hyperbole by Jonah on this occasion is the more absurd when one takes into account the reasons for Jonah’s anger on both occasions: in verse 1, because he was humiliated by the sparing of Nineveh, and in verse 9, because he was inconvenienced by the withering of a plant.

It may be possible to combine the concepts of the intensity of anger together with Jonah’s suggestion of wanting to die (a reflection of verses 3 and 8) by translating “I am so angry that I want to die,” or “I am very, very angry and therefore prefer to die,” or “… want to die rather than live.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Jonah advises the sailors to lift him up and throw him into the sea. Only by this human sacrifice, as it were, could the sea be calmed down from its raging. Luther 1984, New American Bible, Revised Standard Version add “that it may quiet down for you,” since the expression is the same as in verse 11, with “for you” replacing “for us.” The drawing of lots has only confirmed for Jonah what he knew all along, that his own actions had caused the storm that was so dangerous for those who traveled with him. There was still the faint possibility that the loss of his life might save the lives of the innocent people on the ship with him. If he were no longer on the ship, then the lives of all the others on board would be safe.

The pronoun it in Good News Translation it will calm down is ambiguous, because it could refer to either the storm or the sea. The result would be essentially the same, whatever the reference is, but the expression that follows needs to be appropriate to the storm or to the sea, depending upon the grammatical reference. If, for example, it refers to the sea, some languages require a rendering such as “it will become smooth again” or “the waves will cease.” If, however, the reference is to the storm, a translation such as “it will not blow any more” or “the wind will stop” may be more appropriate.

It is my fault may be expressed as “I am to blame” or “it is because of me.”

Though it is quite appropriate in English to speak of “being caught in a storm,” this may seem quite strange in some languages, since “being caught” would refer only to a person being caught by another individual or by an animal. Accordingly it may be important to say “this violent storm has surrounded you” or “this great storm has come upon you.” So New American Bible has “that this violent storm has come upon you.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The book of Jonah, like the other prophetical books of the Old Testament, begins with an introduction or subtitle indicating the circumstances in which God’s message came to the prophet: One day the LORD spoke to Jonah son of Amittai.

The title “prophet” and the verb “prophesy” do not, however, occur in this verse, nor in the whole of the book. The introductory verse is, in spite of this, intended to indicate that Jonah was a prophet, since it states that the LORD spoke to Jonah, or as in Revised Standard Version (Revised Standard Version), “the word of the LORD came to Jonah.” There is no one standard form to introduce all the fifteen prophetical books, but they all have in common a reference either to “the word of the LORD” (Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc.) or to “the vision … that he saw” (Isaiah, Amos, Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk). As a rule a date is given that either relates the activity of the prophet to some period in Israel’s history (Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Zephaniah) or states more precisely the exact date at which God’s message was entrusted to the prophet (Ezekiel, Haggai, Zechariah). In Jonah alone does the introduction take the form of a plain statement that, at some unspecified time (One day), the word of the Lord was addressed to the prophet. In this way the reader is indirectly informed that this is no ordinary collection of prophecies, such as those of Amos or Micah, but is a narrative about a prophet.

In some languages one set expression or another is used to indicate the beginning of a story. “Once upon a time” (Judges 9.8 New English Bible [New English Bible]) suggests that what follows is a work of fiction. This is, in fact, how the Winding Quest translation introduces Jonah, “Once upon a time God spoke to Jonah,” but this is unsuitable in a translation. “Long ago” (Ruth 1.1 New English Bible) indicates that the story which follows was written down long after the events it describes.

A literal rendering of One day can be misleading because it might suggest a specific day when the Lord spoke. A more typical equivalent may be “On an occasion” or “On some day.” In this way the indefiniteness of the time is emphasized.

In a number of languages it is awkward to use a double expression of speaking; for example, “The Lord spoke … he said.” A much more natural form of expression may be “One day the Lord said to Jonah son of Amittai, ‘Go to Nineveh….’ ” Other languages, however, may employ a double expression of speaking in the form “The Lord spoke to Jonah son of Amittai. What he said was, ‘Go to Nineveh….’ ”

The first word of the book in Hebrew, wayyehi, often acts as nothing more than an introductory expression that need not be represented in translation. Several books begin with it, and in Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Esther, and Ezekiel its omission in translation would make no difference to the meaning. Here, however, it is the main verb in the sentence, as in New English Bible “The word of the LORD came….” The same verb occurs in a relative clause at the opening of Jeremiah, Hosea, Joel, Micah, and Zephaniah, but in the book of Jonah the prefix to the verb (King James Version [King James Version] “Now the word of the LORD…”) raises the question whether this is to be taken as a conjunction, and if so, with what it links the opening sentence. There is no force in any argument that would try to link Jonah with Obadiah (compare Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel as a linked succession of narratives).

It has been suggested that this book is pictured as the continuation of the section relating to Jonah in 2 Kings 14.25-27. In other words, Jonah, having been assured of God’s gracious attitude to Israel, is entrusted with a mission to condemn Nineveh (Rudolph, page 335).

Like the prophetical books mentioned in the preceding paragraph, this one introduces “the word of the LORD” in the very first verse and tells us that it “came” to Jonah (New English Bible). The word used for “came” is not the usual verb of motion but is used many times to describe the action of the word of God, or even of a human message (1 Sam 3.21 [Good News Translation]; 4.1 [Revised Standard Version]). The individual messages of the prophets often begin with the formula “The word of the LORD came to…” (nearly 40 times in Jeremiah and over 50 times in Ezekiel). This kind of formula became the standard form of introduction to the prophetical books when the individual messages were collected.

“The word of the LORD came” can be translated as the LORD spoke as in Today’s English Version (Good News Translation), or even “Jonah heard the Lord saying to him.” Knox renders “The Lord’s voice came to Jonah,” and the Modern Language Bible leads into the next verse by saying “with this message:….” In the Hebrew expression used here, God’s “word” is described as something with an almost independent existence, in the same way as his spirit “comes upon” Othniel (Judges 3.10), Jephthah (Judges 11.29), Saul (1 Sam 19.23), Azariah (2 Chr 15.1), and Jahaziel (2 Chr 20.14). Similarly, in Ezekiel the hand of the Lord “comes upon” the prophet (1.3, where the word of the Lord is also said to come to him: 3.22; 33.22; 37.1; 40.1).

Some translators have felt that an expression such as “the Lord spoke to Jonah” is not really adequate to render the implications of the expression “the word of the Lord came to Jonah.” In order to suggest something of the role of the prophet receiving a special message from the Lord, these translators have preferred an expression such as “the Lord uttered a special message to Jonah” or “the Lord revealed to Jonah what he should do.” In this way something of the emphasis of “the word of the Lord coming” can be communicated, thus suggesting the prophetic role that Jonah was to have.

The expression “the word of the Lord came” also occurs in the New Testament in Luke 3.2, where the use of these words suggests to the reader that John the Baptist is indeed a prophet.

In the Good News Translation text the Hebrew proper name, generally transliterated as “Yahweh” but traditionally pronounced as “Jehovah,” is here indicated by capital letters LORD, following the widespread usage in English. By the use of capital letters the Hebrew name may be distinguished orthographically from the Hebrew title ʾadonay, rendered as LORD in Good News Translation. The rendering of “Yahweh” as LORD goes back to ancient tradition among Jews, who regularly marked the four-consonant Hebrew name with the vowels of ʾadonay, and in reading substituted ʾadonay for “Yahweh.” The proper name for God was regarded as so holy that it was only very rarely pronounced. Since an orthographic distinction between the rendering of “Yahweh” and ʾadonay is not necessarily recommended in other languages, no attempt is made to maintain this distinction in the discussions in this volume.

The only other place in the Old Testament where Jonah is mentioned is in 2 Kgs 14.25, where he is described both as a prophet and as the Lord’s “servant.” Nothing else is known about that prophet, but the author of the book of Jonah wishes his readers to understand that Jonah and the prophet were one and the same person, since the name of his father is identical. The Jonah of 2 Kings lived in the eighth century B.C., so it is implied that that is the period of the events in this book. There is nothing to indicate who wrote the book, and no suggestion that the author was Jonah himself.

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

This verse summarizes God’s instructions to Jonah. It begins with a word that is translated in older versions as “arise” (Revised Standard Version). But the Hebrew verb qum is frequently used with a so-called “inceptive” force to mark the beginning of an enterprise or to indicate that the action required is to take place immediately; for example, Gen 19.14, 15; Judges 4.14; Exo 32.1, in all of which Revised Standard Version has “Up!” or “Arise!” In these places the person addressed is not necessarily lying down but is being urged to act immediately (see Isa 52.2 King James Version). So here one could say “Go at once to the great city called Nineveh”—a conventional formula going back to Gen 10.12. As suggested in the phrase “to the great city called Nineveh,” it may be necessary to reverse the order of Good News Translation‘s Nineveh, that great city. The more usual order in languages is to have the generic expression that great city occur first, followed by the more specific name Nineveh; for example, “to the great city which is Nineveh,” or simply “to that great city, Nineveh.” If the phrase “great city” is placed after the term Nineveh, it may be necessary to employ a relative clause; for example, “to Nineveh, which is a great city.”

On reaching Nineveh, Jonah is to “denounce it” (New English Bible) or speak out against it. That is to say, he is to proclaim God’s message of judgment against Nineveh. He is to do so because the evil of the city is staring God in the face (compare New English Bible). The nature of Nineveh’s evil is not disclosed. The language here is similar to that of Gen 18.20, 21 with regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, which were noted for their wickedness.

Speak out against it may be difficult to render satisfactorily in some languages. It may even be necessary to use a form of direct discourse; for example, “say to them, ‘You are guilty’ ” or “declare, ‘You have sinned very much.’ ” In some cases an idiomatic expression may be employed; for example, “hang great blame upon it” or “declare that the people there are covered with guilt.”

The word ki in the Hebrew is open to more than one interpretation. It can mean “that,” introducing a noun clause, or it can mean “for, because.” At first sight it would appear that Good News Translation follows neither of these courses, but the second is in fact implied by the punctuation. Most translators render the Hebrew in the same way as Good News Translation (compare Revised Standard Version, New English Bible), but Jerusalem Bible (so also Moffatt Moffatt) renders the word as “that”: “inform them that their wickedness has become known to me,” though “inform” weakens the element of proclamation in the original. Living Bible has “It smells to highest heaven,” which is vivid but hardly justified as a translation. The Hebrew changes from third singular against it to third plural “their wickedness,” as expressed in New American Bible (New American Bible) and Revised Standard Version, but this does not need to be brought out in a translation. New English Bible avoids this by using “its” with reference to Nineveh, and Good News Translation makes explicit the fact that “their” refers to its people. The literal rendering in Revised Standard Version suggests, as does the Hebrew, that God is watching from up in heaven what takes place down on earth.

I am aware may be rendered merely as “I have seen” or “I know.” Somewhat greater force may be expressed in some languages by inverting the subject and object, for example, “the wickedness of its people has struck my eyes.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Unlike Moses and Jeremiah, who protest against the mission with which they are entrusted, Jonah simply indicates, by his actions rather than his words, his refusal to obey. Amos claimed that when the prophets were commissioned with God’s message, they could not but proclaim it (3.8), but Jonah attempts to escape, like a deserter.

The conjunction however is particularly important at this point, since it marks the contrast between God’s command and Jonah’s decision to do something quite different. Sometimes this adversative emphasis can be indicated simply by an introductory conjunction such as “but.” In other instances it may be necessary to reinforce this contrast by saying “but in contrast with this” or “but on the contrary.”

According to King James Version Jonah “rose up to flee,” since the verb used here is the same as in verse 2; so here set out is mentioned, and Good News Translation arrives at the sense by translating the first occurrence as set out in the opposite direction. He had been told to go east, so instead he tries to go as far as possible in a westerly direction, in order to avoid carrying out God’s command. Tarshish is rendered as Spain in the other two occurrences in this verse in Good News Translation. The reader is likely to have a clearer idea of where Spain is rather than to be able to identify Tarshish. Just where Tarshish was located is not known, but it is generally identified with a place on the coast of Spain. By introducing the verse with the words “But Jonah was afraid to go,” Living Bible misrepresents the thought of the writer. The Hebrew does not indicate this, and it contradicts 4.2.

It may not always be easy to render the expression the opposite direction, for the term opposite involves rather complex relationships. Therefore one may need to translate “he did not set out toward Nineveh, but he went in a direction away from Nineveh” or “rather than going toward Nineveh, he went away from Nineveh.”

To get away from the LORD may be rendered simply as “to escape from the Lord,” but it may also be necessary in certain instances to describe Jonah’s intent as “to go to a place where the Lord would not be.” Such an expression highlights the futility of what Jonah was attempting to do, since he later declares that the Lord is the God of heaven, who made both the land and the sea. It is this very contradictory situation that the author of the book of Jonah apparently wished to emphasize.

He “went down to Joppa” (New English Bible) because that town, the modern Jaffa, was a port on the coast of the Mediterranean (see Acts 9.36). If the difference in elevation between central Palestine and the seacoast is not thought to be worth emphasizing, some such rendering as Good News Translation is sufficient. At Joppa he found a ship, but the verb masa here, as often, does not indicate the conclusion of a search for something lost, but simply coming across something by chance—as in the Chinese Union Version here (as also in Gen 4.14; 1 Sam 9.11).

The ship was about to go, in the sense indicated by the Hebrew participle denoting future action shortly to take place. The verb used here in Hebrew generally indicates motion towards the speaker or writer, but here in a direction away from the writer (compare Isa 47.5). There is no clear indication of the size of the ship in modern terms, but since its destination was Tarshish, it would have been large by the standards of those days. In fact, the expression “ships of Tarshish” was sometimes used to indicate large “ocean-going” vessels (Isa 2.16; 23.1, 14; 60.9; and elsewhere). As is clear later in the chapter, the ship was propelled by rowing, though it may well have had sails in addition.

In a number of languages it may be necessary to be specific with verbs of “going,” since the means of travel may have obligatory features. Therefore He went to Joppa may be best rendered as “he walked to Joppa,” for this was probably his means of travel. But in speaking about a ship about to go to Spain, it may be necessary to use a term applicable only to ships, for example, “to sail” or “to be rowed.”

About to go to Spain must be expressed in some languages as “which the sailors were preparing for sailing to Spain” or “on which people would soon be leaving for Spain.” It may be quite wrong to speak simply of “a ship about to go to Spain,” since the implication might be that the ship went to Spain on its own rather than under the direction of a helmsman and with the help of a crew.

He paid his fare. This is a more likely meaning than “he paid for the ship,” as claimed by some Jewish and a few modern commentators. Living Bible‘s “he bought a ticket” is unnecessarily anachronistic. The Hebrew word elsewhere always has the meaning of “wages” or “reward.”

And went aboard conveys the sense rather more naturally than King James Version “went down into it,” with its literal correspondence with the Hebrew verb “to go down.” Here again Living Bible brings additional factors into the translation that are not justified by the Hebrew, “and climbed down into the dark hold of the ship to hide there from the Lord.” For, after all, this verse states clearly that Jonah’s purpose in fleeing to Tarshish was to avoid the Lord’s presence there, and not simply in the ship.

With the crew is required to make clear the meaning of the Hebrew “with them” (so King James Version). New English Bible leaves this to be understood, and substitutes “to travel by it.”

A literal rendering of went aboard with the crew might suggest that he became a part of the crew. It may be necessary, therefore, to change the order somewhat and say “went aboard to sail to Spain with the crew.”

The Hebrew repeats “to Tarshish from the presence of the LORD,” and Good News Translation achieves this emphasis, but by varying the wording. At the beginning of the verse the purpose of Jonah’s journey to the west is emphasized, whereas at the end of the verse the expected consequence of this move is emphasized. So Jerusalem Bible: “decided to run away from Yahweh, … to get away from Yahweh.” The repetition may be intended by the writer to emphasize the irony of imagining that one could escape from God by any journey, however long. The New Jewish Version (New Jerusalem Bible) brings out the thought of Jonah’s prophetic commission by “from the LORD’s service … away from the service of the LORD.”

A literal translation of where he would be away from the LORD can be misleading, since it might suggest that Spain was a place where the Lord’s presence would not be felt or where the Lord would not be present. This final clause of verse 3 indicates the intent of Jonah and not an actual fact of the absence of the Lord, and accordingly it may be necessary to render the clause as “where he thought he would be away from the Lord” or “where he thought the Lord would not be.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Hebrew sentences generally begin with the verb and then state the subject. Sometimes the subject precedes the verb for emphasis, but in this sentence But the LORD sent…, the change in order is due to a so-called circumstantial clause.

This is marked by But in Good News Translation and some other translations. The verb translated sent (Good News Translation), “let loose” (New English Bible), “flung” (Modern Language Bible), “unleashed” (Jerusalem Bible), implies a degree of violence and suddenness or unexpectedness. It is only used fourteen times in the Old Testament, and four of these are in this chapter (verses 4, 5, 12, 15). It is wrong to avoid the mention of God’s agency in sending the storm, as in Winding Quest: “out at sea they ran into a hurricane.”

It is sometimes quite impossible to speak of “the Lord sending a strong wind.” A verb such as “send” can be used in speaking of persons but not of physical events. Therefore it may be necessary to render the first part of verse 4 as “the Lord caused a strong wind to blow so that there was a storm.” In many languages there are relatively technical terms for a “strong wind,” but in some cases the equivalent is simply “violent storm.” In other instances it may be “a fast wind” or “a whipping wind.”

The phrase on the sea must sometimes be rendered as “against the sea” or “across the waves.”

The verb translated was in danger of normally has the meaning “think, plan,” and nowhere else in the Old Testament is it used, as here, with an inanimate subject. Moffatt, in fact, goes so far as to say “the ship thought she would be broken,” but such personification misrepresents the mind of the author. The personification of trees in Judges 9.8-15 and 2 Kgs 14.9 occurs in contexts where the allegorical nature of the material is clearly evident, but that is certainly not true here. Luther 1984 and An American Translation, by use of impersonal or passive forms, succeed in retaining the verb used in the Hebrew, but with no overt admission of a change in vowel points.

New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, Revised Standard Version, by using the verb “threatened,” are able to retain the ship as the subject of an active verb, but the Hebrew verb in question does not normally bear this meaning. In English it can be used metaphorically without the reader being under the impression that the ship used threats to intimidate its passengers, but this may not be possible in other languages. Another possibility, close to Good News Translation, is New American Bible‘s “was on the point of….”

It is also possible to render in danger of as “was about to” or “might soon.”

Breaking up must be described more specifically in some languages; for example, “would break into many pieces” or “would be beaten by the waves into many pieces.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The sailors are represented as foreigners of various nationalities (compare Ezek 27.8, 9), each with its own god, or gods, to whom the sailors pray or cry out (compare Psa 107.23-28). The English language is able to distinguish false objects of worship from the one true God by using lower case letters for the former and capitals for the latter, but this distinction is not evident when a passage is read aloud. The use of his own helps to make it clear that various gods are being referred to. Although this means of distinguishing them may not be possible in all languages, it is advisable to use the same word for both (see next verse and 2.1). As an Israelite, Jonah is represented as escaping from the LORD, the personal name of Israel’s God.

The sailors were terrified should be rendered in such a way as to indicate extreme fear. Such expressions of fear are often expressed as idioms; for example, “their stomachs were in their mouths” or “their hearts had dropped within them.”

Rather than use an elliptical expression, each one to his own god, following the phrase cried out for help, it may be preferable to combine the two into a single expression; for example, “each of the sailors cried out to his own god for help.” In some instances “to cry out for help” must be expressed as direct discourse; for example, “each one of the sailors said to his own god, ‘Help me’ ” or “… ‘Help us.’ ” In order to express the urgency of the prayer, especially in view of the tumult of the storm, it may be appropriate to translate “each of the sailors shouted to his own god in prayer, ‘Help us.’ ”

The objects thrown overboard are simply “things” in New English Bible or “goods” in the Bible in Basic English, but cargo in Bible de Jérusalem, Jerusalem Bible, and New Jerusalem Bible. The word used is a very general one, so a general expression is suitable in translation (compare Acts 27.19).

The Hebrew does not actually speak of lightening the ship (King James Version, Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible), but literally of “making (something) light from upon them,” that is, those on board the ship. Hence Good News Translation in order to lessen the danger, or perhaps “to relieve their anxiety”; so Goldman: “make matters easier for them.”

To lessen the danger may be rendered as “so that they would not be in so much danger,” but in certain instances this must be expressed positively, “so that they would be safer.”

They threw the cargo overboard may be expressed as “they threw the cargo into the sea” or “what was in the boat they threw into the water.”

Another circumstantial clause brings Jonah back on the scene once more: Meanwhile, Jonah had gone below…. Some translators may prefer introducing this statement earlier, and so follow the chronological order of events. It would be possible to put the last sentence of this paragraph after verse 4, as for example, “So Jonah went below and was lying in the ship’s hold, sound asleep.” But where it now stands, the sentence serves as a link with the next verse. Stylistically, too, the present position has the advantage of raising the question in the mind of the reader, “But where was Jonah all this time?” Knox brings this out by “and what of Jonah?”

A literal rendering of Jonah had gone below can be misleading, since the term below may require the designation of what remains above. It may be necessary, therefore, to say “had gone below the deck.” In other languages it may be more appropriate to say “had gone down into the boat” or “had gone down near the bottom of the boat.”

Although there is no formal difference in Hebrew between the type of sentence in verse 4, “But the Lord sent…,” and Meanwhile, Jonah had gone below in this verse, the structure of the total context indicates that here we are dealing with a pluperfect (King James Version “was gone down”), one of several instances in Jonah of a “flashback.”

The word for “ship” in the last sentence occurs only here in the Old Testament and appears to imply a vessel that had a top deck. To speak of the hold (Chinese Union Version: “cabin”) may suggest a more elaborate vessel than this one would be; the word is used of any recess or corner, as of a cave (1 Sam 24.4) or a house (Amos 6.10; Ezek 32.23). Jonah was simply finding the most remote and comfortable place for going quietly to sleep, where he would not be disturbed (contrast the action of Jesus in Mark 4.38). The word for “sleep” used here is not the usual word, but signifies deep sleep, often brought on supernaturally (see Gen 15.12; 1 Sam 26.12). The Septuagint translates the verb as “snore” here and in verse 6—the only two occurrences of the word in the Bible.

Sound asleep may be rendered as “slept hard,” but it also may be expressed in terms of the difficulty involved in waking such a person; for example, “he slept so that no one could easily wake him” or “he slept so it was difficult to cause him to awaken.” The same concept may also be expressed somewhat idiomatically: “he was so much asleep his mind had left him” or “even his spirit was sleeping.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The expression used for captain, literally “chief of the sailors,” does not occur anywhere else, but the word for “sailors” occurs also in Ezek 27.8, 27-29, where New English Bible has “helmsmen.”

The use of the verb “came upon” (New English Bible) suggests an element of chance in the encounter between the captain and Jonah. The verb for found is not the same as in verse 3 but may equally well imply that the discovery was not the result of a search for the one member of the ship’s company who was absent from the “prayer meeting,” but simply that the captain went down to fetch something he needed.

The Hebrew idiom that introduces the question here is also found in Psa 50.16, “What right have you to recite my laws?” (New English Bible). New Jerusalem Bible renders What are you doing asleep? somewhat differently, “How can you be sleeping so sound!” In any case, the participle is not to be understood as a vocative, “you sleeper” as in King James Version, Revised Standard Version. The others on board ship were all busy praying, and that was what Jonah should have been doing.

In some languages What are you doing asleep? can be understood as a relatively senseless question, for obviously Jonah was asleep. The implication is “What business have you to be falling asleep like this when there is something more urgent that you should be doing?” This meaning is sometimes communicated by a question such as “Why are you sleeping?” but this question may not carry the connotation of rebuke implied in the Hebrew text.

Here once again there is the problem of the word for “God” (compare verse 5). The implication underlying your god is that each nationality has its own particular deity. By praying to as many as possible, it might be (Maybe) that one of them (compare Revised Standard Version “the god”) would take effective action and save the ship. The verb feel sorry for us or “spare us a thought” (New English Bible) occurs only here in the Hebrew Old Testament, but it is also found in the Aramaic of Dan 6.4. Prayer would draw God’s attention to the situation, provided, of course, that the God who was responsible for the storm were addressed by name. But the last thing Jonah wanted at this point was that God’s attention should be drawn to him (compare Amos 6.10). As so often in the Old Testament, the narrator does not indicate whether the captain’s orders were carried out. The reader is left to infer that commands are obeyed, without being specifically told what happens (as in 3.9, 10 and 1 Kgs 22.27). But we may assume, in view of the following verses, that Jonah at least joined the others on deck. But there is no indication that he obeyed the order to pray; after all, Jonah’s sole purpose for being where he was, far out at sea, was to avoid God and have nothing to do with him.

In a number of languages one cannot speak of “your god,” since one cannot possess God. In such instances it may be necessary to employ some such expression as “the god whom you worship.” As in verse 5, it may also be important to introduce direct discourse at this point, for example, “Get up and pray to your god, ‘Help us!’ ”

The possibility expressed by the adverb Maybe is rendered in a number of languages by a particular mode of the verb; for example, “He may possibly feel sorry for us.” Expressions of sorrow or pity are frequently rendered by idioms; for example, “His heart may go out to us” or “We may cause pain in his heart.”

Spare our lives must frequently be expressed in terms of “not causing our deaths”; for example, “he may then not cause us to die.”

Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on the Book of Jonah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .