Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Kings 14:5:
Kupsabiny: “When the rulership of Amaziah was secure in the country, he killed his servants who had killed his father.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “After the control of the land was firm in his hand, he killed the officials who had killed his father.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “When the reign of Amazia was already firm/strong, he had- the officers -killed who killed his father who was king.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “As soon as he was completely in control of his kingdom, he caused to be executed the officials who had murdered his father.” (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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”
And as soon as: The Hebrew text of this verse begins with the verbal transition that is sometimes rendered “And it came to pass” (Jewish Publication Version). If the words as soon as are translated literally, they may invoke an idea of immediacy that is not essential to the meaning here. Another way of beginning this verse is with a time clause, such as “When…” (New American Bible) or “After…” (New International Version).
The royal power was firmly in his hand: This expression refers to power or control by Amaziah. In many languages it will be helpful to introduce the name “Amaziah” at this point as in Good News Translation and New American Bible. The wording of the text seems to suggest that there may have been some sort of brief power struggle from which Amaziah emerged the unquestionable ruler. While the wording is not the same, the situation here seems comparable to the struggle for power following the death of David (see 1 Kgs 2.46). Some other ways of translating this expression are “the kingdom was firmly under his control” (New Jerusalem Bible), “Amaziah had the kingdom firmly in hand” (New American Bible), and “the kingdom was firmly in his grasp” (New International Version).
His servants refers to Jozacar and Jehozabad (12.20-21). As is often the case in the Old Testament, the term servants refers to high-level officials of the king’s court rather than to domestic household servants (see the comments at 1 Kgs 1.2). A literal rendering is therefore likely to be misunderstood in many languages. These officials had been involved in a plot to assassinate Joash, the father of Amaziah, and therefore had to be executed.
The king his father: It will be more natural in certain languages to reverse the order of the words in this phrase and say something like “his father who was the king.” It will also be important in some cases to make it clear that Amaziah’s father was no longer considered king. Some may therefore prefer to say that they murdered “his father when he was king.”
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 2. (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.