The Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Latin that is transliterated “Levites” in English (only the Contemporary English Version translates it as “temple helpers”) is translated in Ojitlán Chinantec as “temple caretakers,” Yatzachi Zapotec as “people born in the family line of Levi, people whose responsibility it was to do the work in the important church of the Israelites,” in Alekano as “servants in the sacrifice house from Jerusalem place,” and in Tenango Otomi as “helpers of priests.” (Source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
In American Sign Language with a sign that combines “temple” + “servant.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Levite” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Ezra 10:15:
Kupsabiny: “Only Jonathan son of Asahel and Jahzeiah son of Tikvah opposed these words, and Meshullam and Shabbethai who were Levites supported (them).” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Only Jonathan, son of Asahel, and Jahazeiah, son of Tikvah, opposed this, supported by Meshullam and Shabbethai the Levite.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “No one had-opposed this plan aside from Jonatan the child of Asahel and Jazea the child of Tikva. They were also supported by Meshulam and Shabetai the Levite.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Jonathan the son of Asahel, Jahzeiah the son of Tikvah, Meshullam, and Shabbethai, a descendant of Levi, were the only ones who objected to this.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Only … opposed this … supported them: According to Revised Standard Version and most modern translations of this verse, two men were named who opposed the proposal and they were supported by two other men. The Hebrew text is ambiguous and can be interpreted to indicate either that they supported the proposal or that they opposed it. Likewise it is not certain whether all four men had the same position or the last two took a different position. Revised Standard Version represents what is considered by commentators to be the most likely meaning of the text. The sentence begins with an adversative adverb in Hebrew indicating opposition (Only) and this interpretation is supported by the Septuagint. But it is not clear what this was that the men were opposed to. Good News Translation makes it explicit that this is “the plan” that was proposed in the preceding verses. The next question is about the basis of their opposition. Did they not want any action to be taken at all or did they want immediate action rather than going through the proposed procedure?
Jonathan son of Asahel and Jahzeiah son of Tikvah are not mentioned elsewhere in the Old Testament. A Meshullam was mentioned in Ezra 8.16 as a leader who accompanied Ezra to Jerusalem. Since the name of his father is not mentioned here, he is probably the same person. In that case he was not a Levite, contrary to what New Revised Standard Version indicates. A Shabbethai is listed as a leader of the Levites in Neh 11.16. These two persons probably would have supported the proposals of Ezra to take action to send away foreign wives. Their opposition, then, would have been against delay in its being done. However, the translation should leave open the nature of their opposition.
The translation must make sense to the reader or listener, but the translator should not supply more information than is provided in the text. Here is one possible rendering of this verse:
• It was only Jonathan the son of Asahel and Jahzeiah the son of Tikvah who did not accept this, and Meshullam and Shabbethai the Levite agreed with them [or, stood behind them].
Quoted with permission from Noss, Philip A. and Thomas, Kenneth J. A Handbook on Ezra. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2005. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.