Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Samuel 8:3:
Kupsabiny: “Then the king of Zobah who was called Hadadezer son of Rehob wanted to bring back the province/area which was near the river of Euphrates. But, David fought him and defeated (him).” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Again Near Hamath David defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah who went to conquer the area near the Euphrates River.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “David also fought-against King Hadadezer of Zoba, the child of Rehob, when Hadadezer went-out to take-control again the lands near the Eufrates River.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “David’s army also defeated the army of Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, who ruled the state of Zobah in Syria. That happened when David went to rule again over the area at the upper part of the Euphrates River.” (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.”
The order of the elements describing who Hadadezer was may be restructured in a variety of ways according to the natural order in the receptor language. The Hebrew text has (a) the name, (b) family background, and (c) the title and place name. Good News Translation has changed the order to c-a-b, but other languages may prefer a-c-b or some other arrangement. What is important is that the structure should be natural in the receptor language.
Hadadezer: the name means “Hadad is help.” Hadad, the storm god, was the name of the chief deity among the Syrians. Various kings had names composed of this god’s name: Hadadezer, Hadoram (see verse 10 below), and Ben-hadad (meaning “son of Hadad,” 1 Kgs 15.18).
Zobah: it will probably be a good idea to expand the translation here to include information that was known by the original readers or hearers of this text. Zobah was one of the independent city-states of Aram (Syria). For this reason Good News Translation adds “the Syrian state of….” This also ties in with verse 5 and helps the reader to understand why the Syrians of Damascus came to the aid of the people of Zobah. See also comments on 10.6.
He went to restore his power: grammatically the pronouns may refer either to Hadadezer or to David. Good News Translation takes them as referring to Hadadezer and makes this explicit in translation. Anchor Bible, however, argues that they refer to David, since, if they are to be understood as referring to Hadadezer, it was unlikely that the two would have met. Israel was to the south of Zobah, while the Euphrates River was to the north. Most English versions reproduce the pronouns and leave the meaning of the text ambiguous. If translators are convinced that the pronouns refer to David, this should be made clear in translation, as is done in New Century Version and Contemporary English Version. Contemporary English Version, for example, says “David set out for the Euphrates River to build a monument there. On his way, he defeated the king of Zobah, whose name was Hadadezer the son of Rehob.” New Century Version reads “As David went to take control again at the Euphrates River, he defeated Hadadezer….” If, however, the pronouns stand for Hadadezer, the Good News Translation model using the name Hadadezer should be followed. The wording of New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh agrees with the Good News Translation interpretation but without using the name: “Hadadezer … who was then on his way to restore….”
The meaning of the verb phrase in this clause is also debatable. While many versions take it as involving the restoration of power (Revised Standard Version, New International Version, and New American Bible), others translate “to restore his monument” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible). Anchor Bible, following the monument idea, has “to leave his stela.” The crucial word in the Hebrew text is literally “his hand,” which is often used for power but sometimes refers to a physical monument that is symbolic of power, as in 18.18 and 1 Sam 15.12. Given the symbolism of the act of setting up a monument, it is probably best to translate the idea of power in any case.
At the river Euphrates: many Hebrew manuscripts omit the name Euphrates, although it is included in the Septuagint. This is obviously the intended meaning, even if it was not clearly stated in the original. The preposition in this expression will probably have to be clarified in most languages. The reference is to a location or a stretch of land along the upper part of the Euphrates River.
The meaning of this verse may be more easily understood if the structure is changed as follows:
• David was on his way to restore his control over the territory near the Euphrates River. Along the way, he defeated King Hadadezer, the son of Rehob and king of the Syrian state named Zobah.
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 2. (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.