complete verse (2 Chronicles 18:25)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Chronicles 18:25:

  • Kupsabiny: “Then Ahab said, ‘Catch Micaiah and take him to my son Joash and Amon who is in charge of the city.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “Then the King of Israel said, "Seize Micaiah and take him to the place of Amon the city ruler and Prince Joash.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Then King Ahab commanded, ‘[You (plur.)] arrest/seize Micaya and bring (him) back to Amon the leader/[lit. head] of the town and to Joash [linker]my child.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “King Ahab commanded his soldiers, ‘Seize Micaiah and take him to Amon, the governor of this city, and to my son Joash.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

king

Click here to view graphically

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:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • 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.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on 2 Chronicles 18:25

And the king of Israel said: Good News Translation renders the king of Israel as “King Ahab” for clarity. Contemporary English Version uses only the proper name.

Seize Micaiah and take him back to Amon … and to Joash …: Seize Micaiah is literally “Take Micaiah.” Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation have translated this clause according to the context. The Hebrew verbs rendered Seize and take … back are second person plural here but they are singular in the parallel text of 1 Kgs 22.26 (see also the comments on the next verse). The Good News Translation rendering here seems to follow the text in 1 Kings by saying Ahab gave this order to “one of his officers.” According to the context, Micaiah had just finished speaking and was standing in front of Ahab. So in some languages it may be more natural to render Seize Micaiah as “Arrest this man” instead of using the proper name Micaiah as in the Hebrew text.

The Hebrew expression rendered take him back suggests that Micaiah had previously been with Amon and Joash. New Revised Standard Version says “return him.” The renderings “take him” (Good News Translation) and “hand him over” (New Jerusalem Bible) fail to express this sense.

Amon the governor of the city: This is the only mention of Amon (other than in 1 Kgs 22.26, the parallel text), who was the ruler of the city of Samaria. The Hebrew noun rendered governor has a wide range of meanings depending on the context. It may refer, for example, to a representative of a king, an important person, a military commander, or a civilian administrator (see the comments on 1 Chr 21.2, where it is rendered “commanders”). The context here seems to suggest a city official. For the governor of the city, a general translation, such as “the city official” ( NET Bible) or “the city leader,” is recommended. Since Samaria has not been mentioned since verse 9, the city may be explicitly identified in translation as “Samaria” (so Parole de Vie).

Ahab refers to his own son as Joash the king’s son. A number of translations say “Prince Joash” (Good News Translation, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Moffatt, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Peregrino. However, it is possible to understand the reference to the king’s son in a different way. There is some archaeological evidence that the expression the king’s son was an official title given to one of the king’s officials, perhaps the person in charge of prisoners and state security (as in Jer 36.26; 38.6). Therefore it may be that Joash was not the king’s biological son, but was rather an official in the royal court. Even if he was a biological son, it may be his function that is in focus here rather than his biological relationship to the king. In a footnote Revised English Bible gives “deputy” as an alternative translation of the Hebrew word for son. In light of the difficulties in knowing for certain the identity of Joash, the best solution may be to translate the text literally and then indicate in a footnote that the king’s son may be a title of a royal official rather than a reference to one of the king’s own sons.

According to Revised Standard Version, the sentence begun in this verse continues in verse 26. But it may be wise to bring the sentence to an end here and begin a new one in the following verse.

If indirect discourse is preferred at this point, the model of Revised English Bible may prove to be helpful. It reads:

• The king of Israel ordered Micaiah to be arrested and committed to the custody of Amon the governor of the city and Joash the king’s son.

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 .