Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Micah 4:9:
Kupsabiny: “Why are crying loudly oh, Jerusalem? Don’t you have a ruler? Where have those who advised you gone to so that you are in trouble/pain like a woman who is in labor ready to give birth?” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Oh, Jerusalem why do you now cry? Don’t you have your king? Has your counsellor perished? Do you have pain like a woman in labor?” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “‘Now, why do you (plur.) who (are) residence of Jerusalem groan like a woman about-to-give-birth being-in-pain(meaning: in-labor)? Your (plur.) king is- still -here and his advisers/counselors have- not -died either. Okay, [you (plur.)] twist-(like-rope) in pain like a woman who is-in-labor. For in not a-long-time you (plur.) will-leave your (plur.) city and will-stay/live in a field, and then you (plur.) will-be-brought to Babilonia. But I will-save you (plur.) there from your (plur.) enemies.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “So why are you wailing now? Is it because you have no king? Have all your wise people died? You are groaning loudly like a woman who is giving birth to a baby.” (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.”
Verses 9 and 10 turn away from the theme of future restoration and glory, and deal with the sadness and agony of the people at the time of their exile. Because this is a new subject, some translators may want to begin a new paragraph here, even though Good News Translation does not. However, the prophet here continues to address the city of Jerusalem, and this forms a link with verse 8.
In the Hebrew of verse 9, as reflected in Revised Standard Version, the first and last clauses of the verse speak of the agony of exile, using the picture of a woman in the pain of childbirth. (This image is frequent in Jeremiah; for instance, Jer 4.31; 6.24.) The second and third clauses ask whether the king and counselors of the nation have been removed. Good News Translation has reordered so as to bring together the two clauses that refer to pain, and has put them at the beginning of the verse. Then it joins the two questions in a single sentence to complete the verse. This has the advantage of putting the full figure of speech before its application, rather than moving back and forth from figure to application and then back to figure.
Since the image uses the language of childbirth, some care in the choice of vocabulary in the receptor language may be needed. There may be technical terms for the cry or the pains that are suffered by a woman in labor. If such terms are well known, their use here would add vividness to the translation. However, in some languages there are cultural restrictions on the use of terms related to childbirth, and the translators must be careful not to offend the reader by the terms they choose. The image of childbirth is expressed in question form (Why do you cry out…? Why are you suffering…?), but the questions are rhetorical, and in some languages it may be clearer to use statements here in place of questions. The purpose of these questions is to force the people to think about what is happening to them, so that they will begin to understand what God is really doing to them. By using questions Micah pretends to be surprised at the way they are acting. Translators should decide whether questions or statements here will be best for giving this effect in their languages.
The third question suggests an answer to the first two: Is it because you have no king, and your counselors are dead? But in Hebrew this question is framed so as to indicate that it expects the answer “No.” The prophet does not suppose that the king and counselors have actually been taken away or killed. Rather he is mocking them and implying that even though they are there, they are as useless and helpless as if they were gone. It may be necessary to change the wording in many translations in order to make this clear, but the translator should still try to keep the mocking tone of the original. For example, one might say “What is the matter with your king and your counselors? Can’t they help you?”
The Hebrew, like Revised Standard Version, has the singular noun “counselor” here. This can be understood in two ways. It may be used collectively and refer to the counselors or advisors of the king. If so, it should be translated as a plural noun, as in Good News Translation and Jerusalem Bible. Or it may refer to the king himself as the counselor of the people, in which case it may be translated, “Is it because your king who advises you is dead?” The first possibility seems more likely.
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.