Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 1 Samuel 27:2:
Kupsabiny: “David with his six hundred men/soldiers got up and went to Gath to be under the authority of king Achish.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “So David and his 600 men went to the place of Achish, the son of Maoch, king of Gath.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “So David and his 600 men went to Akish the king of Gat, the child/(son) of Maoc.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “So David and his 600 men left Israel and went to see Maoch’s son Achish, who was king of Gath city in the Philistia area.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))
Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:
“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”
Arose: see the comments on 9.3. The meaning of this verb in this context is better expressed in English with the verb “set out.” Compare New Revised Standard Version (“So David set out and went over”) and Revised English Bible (“So David and his six hundred men set out and crossed the frontier”). But Good News Translation reflects this first verb, which indicates immediate action, by adding the words “at once” to the second verb.
Went over: David crossed over the border that separated the Philistine territory from the Israelite territory. As noted in the paragraph above, Revised English Bible makes explicit that they went over “the frontier.” The subject of the verbs arose and went over is singular, referring specifically to David, but the verbs are followed by the mention of the six hundred men who were with him, who in fact also participated in the action of the verbs. This is a common occurrence in the Old Testament and serves to keep the focus on the main character in the story. But the same structure may not be natural in the receptor language. Translators should search for a natural equivalent in their own language that will keep the focus on David while at the same time showing that the other men went along with him. In some cases the following model may be helpful: “So David, along with his six hundred soldiers, crossed over….”
Achish the son of Maoch: see note on 21.10. It is Achish who is the king of Gath, not his father Maoch, which is how Revised Standard Version may be misunderstood.
Gath: see note on 5.8.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.