Ixcatlán Mazatec: “with your best/biggest thinking” (source: Robert Bascom)
Noongar: dwangka-boola, lit. “ear much” (source: Portions of the Holy Bible in the Nyunga language of Australia, 2018 — see also remember)
Kwere “to know how to live well” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Dobel: “their ear holes are long-lasting” (in Acts 6:3) (source: Jock Hughes)
Gbaya: iŋa-mgbara-mɔ or “knowing-about-things” (note that in comparison to that, “knowledge” is translated as iŋa-mɔ or “knowing things”) (source: Philip Noss in The Bible Translator 2001, p. 114ff. )
Chichewa: nzeru, meaning both “knowledge” and “wisdom” (source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Natügu: nzesz’tikr drtwr: “oneness of mind” (source: Brenda Boerger in Beerle-Moor / Voinov, p. 164)
Tagalog: tipan: mutual promising on the part of two persons agreeing to do something (also has a romantic touch and denotes something secretive) (source: G. Henry Waterman in The Bible Translator 1960, p. 24ff. )
Tagbanwa: “initiated-agreement” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Guhu-Samane: “The concept [in Mark 14:24 and Matthew 16:28] is not easy, but the ritual freeing of a fruit and nut preserve does afford some reference. Thus, ‘As they were drinking he said to them, ‘On behalf of many this poro provision [poro is the traditional religion] of my blood is released.’ (…) God is here seen as the great benefactor and man the grateful recipient.” (Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. )
Chichewa: pangano. This word can also be translated as a contract, agreement, or a treaty between two parties. In Chewa culture, two people or groups enter into an agreement to help each other in times of need. When entering into an agreement, parties look at the mutual benefits which will be gained. The agreement terms are mostly kept as a secret between the parties and the witnesses involved. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Law (2013, p. 95) writes about how the Ancient GreekSeptuagint‘s translation of the Hebrew berith was used by the New Testament writers as a bridge between the Old and New Testaments (click or tap here to read more):
“Right from the start we witness the influence of the Septuagint on the earliest expressions of the Christian faith. In the New Testament, Jesus speaks of his blood being a kaine diatheke, a ‘new covenant.’ The covenant is elucidated in Hebrews 8:8-12 and other texts, but it was preserved in the words of Jesus with this language in Luke 22:20 when at the Last Supper Jesus said, ‘This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. Jesus’s blood was to provide the grounds for the ‘new covenant,’ in contrast to the old one his disciples knew from the Jewish scriptures (e.g., Jeremiah 31:31-34). Thus, the earliest Christians accepted the Jewish Scriptures as prophecies about Jesus and in time began to call the collection the ‘Old Testament’ and the writings about Jesus and early Christianity the ‘New Testament,’ since ‘testament’ was another word for ‘covenant.’ The covenant promises of God (berith in Hebrew) were translated in the Septuagint with the word diatheke. In classical Greek diatheke had meant ‘last will, testament,’ but in the Septuagint it is the chosen equivalent for God’s covenant with his people. The author of Hebrews plays on the double meaning, and when Luke records Jesus’ announcement at the Last Supper that his blood was instituting a ‘new covenant,’ or a ‘new testament,’ he is using the language in an explicit contrast with the old covenant, found in the Jewish scriptures. Soon, the writings that would eventually be chosen to make up the texts about the life and teachings of Jesus and the earliest expression of the Christian faith would be called the New Testament. This very distinction between the Old and New Testaments is based on the Septuagint’s language.”
The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is transliterated as “Solomon” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign for “wise” referring to 1 Kings 3:12. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 1 Kings 5:12:
Kupsabiny: “God gave Solomon knowledge/wisdom the way he had promised. Then, Solomon and Hiram lived in peace and made a peace agreement.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “The LORD gave wisdom to Solomon in accordance with His promise. Hiram and Solomon continued to be on good terms. They also made a treaty.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “The LORD gave Solomon wisdom just as he had-promised. Solomon and Hiram had a good relationship, and they made a covenant that they would- never -fight-with-one-another.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Yahweh enabled Solomon to be wise, just like he had promised. Solomon and Hiram made a treaty/agreement that there would be peace between their two governments/countries.” (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 Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme rare (られ) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, sazuke-rare-ru (授けられる) or “bestow” is used.
And the LORD gave Solomon wisdom: Walsh suggests that the author may be making a sarcastic comment about Solomon here since Solomon appears to have acted unwisely in making such huge payments to Hiram. Walsh, therefore, says that the beginning of this verse should be understood to mean “And Yahweh had given Solomon wisdom [but he certainly didn’t use it]!” Such an interpretation is certainly possible, but most interpreters and translations understand the author’s words here to be a simple statement of fact. Translators will, nevertheless, have to pay careful attention to the verb form chosen here. The translation should not give the impression that this was the first time that the LORD had given wisdom to Solomon since the context shows earlier that he made very wise decisions and 1 Kgs 3.12 states specifically that God gave him wisdom (see also 1 Kgs 4.29). So if Walsh’s interpretation is not accepted, then some translators will have to render the clause as “The LORD gave Solomon more wisdom” or “… kept on giving Solomon wisdom.”
As he promised him: See 1 Kgs 3.12.
For the Hebrew word translated peace, see the comments on 1 Kgs 2.13 and 33.
Made a treaty is literally “cut a covenant.” The same Hebrew expression occurs often in 1-2 Samuel. A treaty or a “covenant” is an agreement that two persons or groups of persons make in which both promise either to do or not to do certain things. In the ancient Near Eastern world of the Old Testament, animals were sacrificed and cut up as part of the covenant-making ceremony. From this comes the technical phrase “to cut a covenant.”
What is the relationship between the first part of this verse (And the LORD gave Solomon wisdom) and the rest of this verse (and there was peace between Hiram and Solomon …)? In Hebrew the two parts of this verse are connected by the simple conjunction, which is translated and in Revised Standard Version and left untranslated in Good News Translation and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh. The rendering in Bible en français courant seems to connect these two parts of the sentence more closely, indicating that it was because God gave Solomon wisdom that Solomon was able to have peace with Hiram. Bible en français courant reads:
• The Lord had given wisdom to Solomon, as he had promised him. Solomon was thus able to live in good relationship with Hiram and conclude an alliance with him.
The question may also be asked about the relationship between the final two clauses in this verse. The fact that there was peace between the two kings and that the two of them made a treaty are joined only by the conjunction and. However, it seems likely that the intent of the author was not to link two unrelated facts, but to state that the peace was maintained because of the treaty. For this reason it will probably be better to translate these clauses as “there was peace between Hiram and Solomon because they made a treaty together” or perhaps better “Hiram and Solomon made a peace treaty with each other because they were good friends.”
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.