The Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Latin that is translated as “justice” in English is translated in American Sign Language with a sign that describes the quality or principle of fairness, righteousness, and impartiality in treating other people. A literal back-translation of the signs are “FOLLOW(God is implied) ACTIONS, DECISIONS JUST-RIGHT”. A more idiomatic back-translation would be: “actions and decisions are right/fitting/just in accordance to God’s will.” The movement in the signs itself helps to indicate that this is a noun, not a verb. (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Justice” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
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, the Adamawa Fulfulde translation uses the exclusive pronoun.
Eugene Nida wrote the following about the translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek terms that are typically translated with “prophet” in English:
“The tendency in many translations is to use ‘to foretell the future’ for ‘prophesy,’ and ‘one who foretells the future’ for ‘prophet.’ This is not always a recommended usage, particularly if such expressions denote certain special native practices of spirit contact and control. It is true, of course, that prophets of the Bible did foretell the future, but this was not always their principal function. One essential significance of the Greek word prophētēs is ‘one who speaks forth,’ principally, of course, as a forth-teller of the Divine will. A translation such as ‘spokesman for God’ may often be employed profitably.” (1947, p. 234f.)
Following is a list of (back-) translations from other languages (click or tap for details):
Ayutla Mixtec: “one who talks as God’s representative”
Isthmus Mixe: “speaker for God” (source for this and two above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Mezquital Otomi / Paasaal: “God’s messenger” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff. and Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)
Noongar: Warda Marridjiny or “News Traveling” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Kutu: mtula ndagu or “one who gives the prediction of the past and the future” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ebira: ọnịsẹ, a neologism that combines the prefix ọn for “a person” with ịsẹ for “prediction” (source: Scholz /Scholz 2015, p. 49)
French 1985 translation by Chouraqui: inspiré or “inspired one” (“someone in whom God has breathed [Latin: in + spiro]) (source: Watson 2023, p. 45)
In Ixcatlán Mazatec a term is used that specifically includes women. (Source: Robert Bascom)
“In some instances these spiritual terms result from adaptations reflecting the native life and culture. Among the Northern Grebo people of Liberia, a missionary wanted some adequate term for ‘prophet,’ and she was fully aware that the native word for ‘soothsayer’ or ‘diviner’ was no equivalent for the Biblical prophet who spoke forth for God. Of course, much of what the prophets said referred to the future, and though this was an essential part of much of their ministry, it was by no means all. The right word for the Gbeapo people would have to include something which would not only mean the foretelling of important events but the proclamation of truth as God’s representative among the people. At last the right word came; it was ‘God’s town-crier.’ Every morning and evening the official representative of the chief goes through the village crying out the news, delivering the orders of the chief, and announcing important coming events. ‘God’s town-crier’ would be the official representative of God, announcing to the people God’s doings, His commands, and His pronouncements for their salvation and well-being. For the Northern Grebo people the prophet is no weird person from forgotten times; he is as real as the human, moving message of the plowman Amos, who became God’s town-crier to a calloused people.” (source: Nida 1952, p. 20)
In British Sign Language it is is translated with a sign that depicts a message coming from God to a person (the upright finger) and then being passed on to others. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Prophet” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Micah 3:1:
Kupsabiny: “Leaders of the house of Jacob, you who should know the truth, listen to what I am telling you!” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “And I said, "Oh you leaders of Jacob, Oh you rulers of the House of Israel, Pay attention! Is it not your job to know about fairness?” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “Micas said, ‘You (plur.) leaders/[lit. heads] of Israel and Juda, [you (plur.)] listen! (Is it) not (so) that you (plur.) should have-been the-ones to cause-to-spread justice?” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Then I said, ‘You Israeli leaders, listen to what I say! You should certainly know what things are right to do and what things are wrong,” (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 formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).
The opening words “And I said” (Revised Standard Version) indicate that this section was probably delivered originally as a sermon. Since it is aimed at the leaders of the nation, it seems likely that it was delivered in Jerusalem, the capital. There it would easily have come to the attention of the king, as Jer 26.18-19 states. Since the prophet is the speaker in Micah 2.13, and the section heading makes it clear that he is still speaking in chapter 3, the words “And I said” are left implicit in Good News Translation. If this makes the opening of the section sound too abrupt in other languages, the words may be retained, and the prophet may be identified by name if necessary.
For Listen, compare 1.2; 6.1.
The Good News Translation expression you rulers of Israel translates two Hebrew phrases that are parallel with each other and synonymous in meaning. Their literal form is seen in Revised Standard Version “you heads of Jacob and rulers of the house of Israel.” These are the people to whom Micah is speaking these words. This comprehensive expression probably includes both judicial and government leaders. Unless some similar double expression is common in the receptor language, it will probably be more natural to follow Good News Translation and combine the two phrases into one. The use of the terms “Jacob” and “Israel” when referring to the leaders of Judah lends support to the dating of this passage after the end of the northern kingdom.
As leaders of God’s people, these rulers of Israel were supposed to be concerned about justice. That is, they were supposed to be familiar with the instructions of the Mosaic Law, and they were responsible for administering them in a way that would encourage people to treat each other fairly. But instead these rulers used their privileged position to advance their own interests. You are supposed to be concerned about justice may be translated as “It is your duty to know what people ought to do” or “It is your responsibility to see that people act justly.” This last line of verse 1 is literally a rhetorical question (see Revised Standard Version), but it carries the same meaning as the strong statement in Good News Translation.
The behavior of these rulers was so different from what God expected that Micah goes so far as to say in verse 2 you hate what is good and you love what is evil. The leaders were thus the exact opposite of what they should have been. In some languages it may be difficult to translate what is good and what is evil. These may be translated as “you hate to do good things (or, to act in a good way) and you love to do evil things (or, to act in evil ways).”
In the rest of verses 2 and 3, Micah strengthens his words with a string of pictures. The pictures are short and quick, like a series of snapshot photographs. It is not certain whether there is one comparison or two at the base of this picture language. There is certainly a picture of a butcher at work on a carcass of meat, skinning it and cutting it up into pieces to be cooked. Some scholars think that the last clause of verse 2, You … tear the flesh off their bones, and the first clause of verse 3, You eat my people up, make more sense as a picture of a wild animal devouring its prey. If this is the case, this second picture comes in the middle of the first one about the butcher. The first picture begins in verse 2 with the words You skin my people alive and continues in verse 3 with You strip off their skin, break their bones, and chop them up like meat for the pot. This apparent awkwardness has led some scholars to change the Hebrew text, either by omitting some phrases or by putting them in a different order. It seems possible, however, to regard this passage as another example of what is called a chiasmus (see the discussion of Micah 1.4). This means that each picture, the butcher and the wild animal, consists of two parts ordered as follows:
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on Micah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.