32But anyone with whom you find your gods shall not live. In the presence of our kinsfolk, point out what I have that is yours, and take it.” Now Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen the gods.
The Hebrew that is transliterated as “Rachel” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with a sign that signifies the eyelashes, referring to “beautiful eyes” as the opposite of Leah (see Genesis 29:17). (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, both the Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation use the inclusive pronoun, “since Jacob is clearly referring to people who are relatives of the two men.”
The Hebrew, Latin, and Greek that is transliterated as “Jacob” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with a sign that signifies “lentil,” referring to the soup he gave his brother in exchange for his birthright (see Genesis 25:34). Note that another Spanish Sign Language sign for Jacob also users the sign for Jewish. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
In Finnish Sign Language it is translated with the signs signifying “smooth arm” (referring to the story starting at Genesis 27:11). (Source: Tarja Sandholm)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Genesis 31:32:
Newari: “Whoever has your idols, that person will have to die. In the presence of our affinal kin, having searched, take anything that I have of yours.’ Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen the idols.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “But as about your (sing.) little-gods/false-gods which are-lost, if you (sing.) find them on anyone of us (excl.), he will-be-punished with death-(penalty). In-front-of our (incl.) relatives as witnesses, [you (sing.)] look if you have possession here with us (excl.) and if there are take-(it).’ Jacob did- not -know that in fact/[surprise particle] Raquel had-taken the little-gods/false-gods of Laban.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “But if you find anyone here who has your wooden idols, we will execute that person. While our relatives are watching, search for yourself to see if there is anything that belongs to you that is here with me. If you find anything, you can take it!’ When Jacob said that, he did not know that Rachel had stolen the wooden idols.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, shirabete (調べて) or “search” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, motteitte (持って行って) or “bring” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. Here, itte (行って) or “go” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).”
In verse 19 the reader was told that Rachel stole the gods. Consequently Jacob is innocent, and, from his action now, it is clear that he knows nothing of Rachel’s deceit. Jacob challenges Laban and goes so far as to say that he is ready to put the thief to death. Since the change of topic at this point may again be confusing for readers, it may be necessary in some languages to indicate it in Jacob’s speech by saying “But about your gods, ….” At least one translation also has Jacob express his innocence in this angry response: “We didn’t take your gods—if you find….”
Any one with whom you find your gods shall not live: this may need to be restructured to say, for example, “If you find your gods with anyone here, I will [or you can, or we will have to] kill that person,” or “… that person will die.”
In the presence of our kinsmen is literally “before our brothers.” See verse 25. This expression is sometimes rendered “With our relatives watching what you do” or “Take our kinsmen as witnesses.” In this context the pronoun our must be inclusive in those languages that make a distinction between inclusive and exclusive first person, since Jacob is clearly referring to people who are relatives of the two men. See also the comments on verse 37.
Point out what I have that is yours, and take it: the Hebrew of this sentence is not clear without some additional elements being supplied. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project suggests translating “(If you see) anything [belonging] to you with me, [then] take it.” See Good News Translation “look for anything that belongs to you and take….”
The final sentence of verse 32 is parenthetical. It is to remind the reader what was said in verse 19. It builds tension in the story, because Jacob may be faced with having to put to death his beloved wife Rachel.
Now Jacob did not know that Rachel had stolen them: Now translates the common Hebrew connective and is used by Revised Standard Version as a means of introducing this inserted reminder. The thought expressed is that Jacob did not know (at the time he swore to kill the thief) that Rachel had stolen Laban’s gods when they were still in Haran.
Quoted with permission from Reyburn, William D. and Fry, Euan McG. A Handbook on Genesis. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.