13would you then wait until they were grown? Would you then refrain from marrying? No, my daughters, it has been far more bitter for me than for you, because the hand of the Lord has turned against me.”
Following is a back-translation of Ruth 1 from a song presented in the traditional Fang troubadour style (mvét oyeng) as part of a project by Bethany and Andrew Case. (For more information about this, see Case / Case 2019)
Verse 1 – It happened that, in the time of the chiefs, they were governing Israel, and hunger came there to the regions of those lands.
2 – It came about that a man of the town that they call Bethlehem, the clans of the lands of Ephrata, they called him Elimelek.
Then he moved from there, he moved, saying, “I will try to go and live in the regions of the lands of Moab.”
When he went there, he went with [his] wife, [his] wife Naomi, and his two sons, his grown sons.
One was named Mahlon, and the other was Kilion.
All those were people of Ephrata.
After they arrived in Moab there, then they lived there, living.
3 – It came about that Elimelek, Naomi’s husband, died, and Naomi was left a widow. (Click or tap here to see the rest.
4/5 – Left like that, [with] only just one thing her two sons, when they were left, then these two sons also married two girls, young Moabite women.
One of them was named Orpah, and the other was named Ruth.
And it came about that after ten years passed, ten years, then these two sons of hers also died there, beginning with Malon and Kilion.
Then Naomi was left only all alone [lit. point and point: a bird’s beak from which its worm has fallen] with nothing.
6 – Then it came about that Naomi, living in Moab [unclear].
There she found out that Yahweh had had compassion on her town’s/people’s pain, the famine had ended, ending.
7 – Then Naomi said there that, “right now, I’m going back to Judah.”
When she was returning, then she went together with her two daughter-in-laws.
They left the place where they were and at that time they went.
8 – When they were walking on the road, then she said to them, “Oh my daughters-in-law, go back to your houses, to the houses of your mothers, please go back.”
9 – “I ask Yahweh that he treat you well at all times just like you also treated me and my sons.”
“I continually repeatedly again and again ask that Yahweh give you a place that is just and solid/secure, that he give you homes and also give you new husbands.”
Then Naomi kissed them on the cheeks, a goodbye kiss.
10 – Then the girls wept and they said “We will not go back, oh Naomi, we will go with you to your land.”
11 – Then Naomi insisted again, and said to them, “O my daughters, please go back.”
“Do you really wish to return with me, to go and do what?”
I can no longer again have other children for them to again marry you, please go back to your homes.
12 – I am too old, I cannot again go into marriage.
Even if I did also go into it, and bear two sons this night, oh my daughters, would you begin to wait again for these sons, for them to be your husbands?
13 – In this time you are without husbands, and for how long?
No no, oh my daughters, my evil is too great, and surpasses yours [lit. my evil it exaggerates with bigness to pass this with yours].
The hand of Yahweh has struck me, striking.”
14 – Then they opened their mouths (wept), they were crying.
After they finished crying, then Orpha afterward went to kiss [her] mother-in-law, kissing goodbye.
Then Ruth, she insisted to her that she would not go.
15 – Then Naomi said to her, “Look, the other has gone to her people.
Go youuuu too with her to the place where your gods are, go with her.”
Ñeŋǃ
16 – Then Ruth answered her, “Don’t you ask me that I separate from you.
Don’t you ask me that I separate from you.”
Because the place where you go, to it also I will go.
The place where you’re going to live, there also I am going to live.
Your people this also will be my people.
Your god this too will be my god.
17 – The place where you will die, in this also I will die, I tell you truly (lit. truth and truth).
I say that may Yahweh strike me, may he punish me severely (lit. [punish me with real punishment]) if I separate from you except only that death do it.”
18 – Then it happened that, when Naomi saw that Ruth insisted [with] real insistence [firmness], she didn’t insist anymore, then she said, “Let’s go”.
They began to walk, they’re going, they’re going.
19 – When it happened that they have already entered Bethlehem, that they have already arrived.
Then there in the town people began going and looking, [saying], “wow, but who is this?
Who is this?
Is it not Naomi who’s coming over there?
Yes, wow, it is Naomi.
Aáaáaáa
Aaáǃ
20 – After Naomi knew that she was the one they were talking about, then she said, “Don’t call me again Naomi.
Naomi means I have a glad heart, I am well.
And now that I’m here, please call me Mara because God Almighty has given me bitter and bitter, bitter and bitter, this has filled my body.
21 – When I left here to go, I left here [with] my hands full.
When I was returning now, I was coming [with] my hands now emptied, because thus Yahweh has wanted it, so why do you again call me Naomi?
When Yahweh, he who is all-powerful has lowered me to the ground, this kind of punishment that I have here.”
22 – In that way, Naomi returned to Moab with her daughter-in-law Ruth, she who is a young Moabite woman.
In that way, they arrived in Bethlehem, finding that the time of harvesting food had arrived.
The translation of the tetragrammaton (YHWH or יהוה) is easily the most often discussed issue in Bible translation. This is exemplified by the fact that there is virtually no translation of the Bible — regardless of language — where the position of the respective translator or translation team on how to translate the name of God into the respective language is not clearly stated in the preface or introduction.
Click or tap here to read about the different ways the tetragrammaton is and has been translated
The literature on this topic is overwhelming, both as far as the meaning of YHWH and the translation of it by itself and in combination with other terms (including Elohim and Adonai). There is no reason or room to rehash those discussions. Aside from various insightful translations of YHWH into various languages (see below), what’s of interest in the context of this tool are official and semi-official statements regarding the translation by Bible translation agencies and churches. These include the 1992 statement by United Bible Societies’ “Names of God” Study Group (see The Bible Translator 1992, p. 403-407 ) or the “Letter to the Bishops’ Conference on ‘The Name of God'” by the Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Discriplina Sacramentorum of 2008 (see here et al.).
In summary, the UBS study group gives six different options on how to translate YHWH: 1) transliterate (some form of “Yahweh” or “Jehovah” if this is an already established term); 2) translate (along the lines of kurios — κύριος in the Septuagint); 3) translate the meaning of YHWH; 4) use a culture-specific name; 5) translate Elohim and YHWH in the same way; or 6) use a combination of any of these options.
The official Catholic directive states that for liturgical purposes YHWH is to be translated as an equivalent of Kurios (“Lord”) unless when appearing in combination with Elohim (“God”) or Adonai (“lord”), in which case it’s to be translated with “God.”
In the following collection of examples, any of the above-mentioned strategies are used.
Use of Typographical Means to Offset the Name of God
A large number of Bible translations in many Western European languages have used a similar strategy to translate YHWH as an equivalent of Kurios or Adonai (“lord” in Greek in Hebrew) but have used either small caps or all caps to denote these occurrences as an equivalent to a proper name. Here are some examples:
None of the European languages have found a “cultural-linguistic equivalent” with the possible exception of Eternal or l’Éternel (see below).
The rendering of the translation of YHWH in bold (and uppercase) characters is for instance used in Guhu-Samane: QOBEROBA (a term of address for a respected person and also connotes “forever”) (for “forever”, see below under Translations of the Name of God) and the upper-casing in Bible translations in several other languages in Papua New Guinea:
In Cebuano (Ang Pulong sa Dios edition, 2010) and Hiligaynon (all versions), Ginoo, a typographical variant of Ginoo (“Lord”) is used. Bible translation consultant Kermit Titrud (SIL): “‘Yahweh’ is too close to Yahwa, their word for ‘Satan.’ We were afraid that in the pulpits readers might misread ‘Yahweh’ and say ‘Yahwa.’ So we went with the tradition found in most English translations. Ginoo for ‘Yahweh’ and Ginoo for ‘adonai.'”
In languages where capitalization is not a typographical option, other options are available and used, such as in Japanese, where the generic term shu 主 for “Lord” is bolded in some translations to offset its meaning (Source: Omanson, p. 17).
In Pattani Malay, the word for “Lord” is underlined: ربي. (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
A graphical way of representation beyond typography was used by André Chouraqui in his French La Bible hebraique et le Nouveau Testament (publ. 1974-1977) for which he superimposed adonai and Elohim over (the French rendition) of the tetragrammaton:
(Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff.; see also tempt God / put God to the test)
Translations of the Name of God
A translation of YHWH with a rendering of the meaning of “Eternal” was done in English by James Moffatt (between 1926 and 1935) with Eternal, The Voice translation with Eternal One (2012), in French versions as L’ÉTERNEL by J. F. Ostervald in 1904 or l’Éternel by L. Segond (1910-1938, not in more recent revisions) and Zadoc Kahn (1964) (for the French translation, see also LORD of hosts), in Esperanto as “la Eternulo,” and in Obolo as Okumugwem: “The Ever-Living” (source: Enene Enene). In francophone Africa, translations of l’Éternel are widely used, due to the wide use of Segond’s early editions (see above). Examples include Nancere (Nandjéré) with Kumuekerteri, Ngambay (Ngambaï) with Njesigənea̰, Sar with Kɔ́ɔ̄ɓē, Mbay (Mbaï) with Bïraþe, Kim with Bage ɗiŋnedin, or Lélé uses Gojɛnɛkirɛkindiy (verbatim: “who remains for his eyes”). (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Similarly and at the same time expanding its meaning, the Nzima translation of 1998 translated YHWH as Ɛdεnkεma, the “Eternal All-Powerful Creator and Sustainer” (Source: David Ekem in The Bible Translator 2005, p. 72ff. ).
“Creator” is also used in Kazakh (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан]), Karakalpak (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан], sometimes in combination with Iyeg [Ийег] — “Master”), and Kirghiz (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан], likewise in combination with “Master” or Ege [Эге]). (Source: David Gray).
Nepali, Bengali, and Hindi are all derived from Sanskrit and have (eventually) all found similar translations of YHWH. In Bengali “God” is translated as Ishwar (ঈশ্বর) (widely used in Hindu scriptures, where it’s used as a title, usually associated with “Siva”) and YHWH as Shodaphrobhu (সদাপ্রভু) — “Eternal Lord”; in Nepali and NewariYHWH is translated as Paramaprabhu (परमप्रभु)– “Supreme Lord”; and Hindi translates YHWH as Phrabu (प्रभु) — “Lord.” In earlier translations all three languages used transliterations of Jehovah or Yahweh. (Source: B. Rai in The Bible Translator 1992, p. 443ff. and Barrick, p. 124).
The influential German Jewish translation of Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig (between 1925 and 1961) translates YHWH in Exodus 3:15 with “Ich bin da” (“I exist” or “I am”) and in all other instances with pronouns in small caps (Er, Ihm, Ihn, Ich — “he,” “him,” “his,” “I”).
The Jewish orthodox English ArtScroll Tanach translation (publ. 2011) uses Hashem or “The Name”
In the Bavarian translation by Sturmibund (publ. 1998), it is translated as Trechtein or “Sovereign, Lord.” “Trechtein” is related to the obsolete English “drighten.” (Source: Zetzsche)
In Ge’ez, Tigrinya, and Amharic it is translated with Igziabeher (እግዚአብሔር) or “Ruler/Lord of the Nations/Peoples.” In Ge’ez Igziabeher is used for “God” as well, whereas in Tigrinya and Amharic it is often, but not always used for “God.” In a recent revision by Biblica (see here ), an attempt was made to use Igziabeher exclusively for occurrences of the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Bible, but after strong responses by the Christian community, a compromise was found by using Igziabeher in the first chapter of Genesis and changing it according to the Hebrew text elsewhere. (Source: Zetseat Fekadu)
Warlpiri uses Kaatu Jukurrarnu (Kaatu is a transcription of “God” and Jukurrarnu means “timelessness” and shares a root with jukurrpa — dreamings) (Source: Stephen Swartz, The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. ).
The translation of YHWH into Weri with Aniak Tupup or “man of the holy house” intends “to maintain the Jewish practice of not uttering God’s name [with] the use of another vernacular phrase that signals that a ‘taboo’ name is being referred [which] could give a cue that would be recognizable in written or oral communication” (Source: P. King, The Bible Translator 2014, p. 195ff. ).
Aruamu translates it as Ikiavɨra Itir God or “Ever Present God” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Idakho-Isukha-Tiriki: Nyasaye Wuvunyali Muno or “God powerful great” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Ruund uses Chinawej, a term that is otherwise used as a response of approval. Anna Lerbak (in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 84ff. ) tells the genesis of this term (click or tap to see an explanation):
“The name ‘Jehovah’ had been used in some contexts, but I had the feeling that it did not mean much to the people, and when I asked the pastors they all said it didn’t, and worse, it very often confused people, especially in the villages. During the conversation it was suggested that the name Chinawej be used in the place of ‘Jehovah’, and this met with immediate approval. A few days later I was working on a Psalm in which ‘Jehovah’ was used frequently, so I wrote Chinawej in its place and then read the Psalm to them. The response was about like this: “That is it, now people will understand, that is how Chinawej is. The Jews call God ‘Jehovah’, we call Him Chinawej, it is the same God. but we know Him as Chinawej as the Jews know Him as ‘Jehovah’ “. They often call God Chinawej in prayer, it seems to indicate warmth and intimacy.
The same word is used in two other ways. It is the name of a snake which never attacks human beings. And it is used as a response of approval. When told of something they are pleased to hear, something they find good, just, helpful, generous, they often respond by saying, Chinawej. When they call God Chinawej, it indicates that they think of Him as One Who is good and just and generous towards them. When it was suggested at the committee that we use Chinawej in place of ‘Jehovah’ it was accepted immediately and unanimously.
Ebira has Eneyimavara. Eneyimavara was created by merging a praise phrase that was only used for the traditional deity Ohomorihi (see here), that had become the word for the Christian God: ene e yi ma vara or “the one that never changes.” “The translators came to the agreement that this praise name that describes the unchangeableness of God is very close in meaning to the probable meaning of YHWH.” (Source: David O Moomo in Scriptura 88 (2005), p. 151ff. )
The Uzbek Bible uses the term Ega (Эга) — “master, owner” in various forms (including Egam / Эгам for “my Owner” or Egamiz / Эгамиз for “our Owner.” (Click or tap to see an explanation):
Jim Zvara (2019, p. 6) explains: “The Uzbek term ega means owner or master (‘master,’ in the historical context of an owner-slave relationship). By extension, it is natural for an Uzbek to speak to or refer to God as Egam (‘my owner’/’master’). In the Uzbek context to be God’s slave is a positive way of understanding one’s relation to him. It suggests that one is in a dependent and obedient relationship to God. The team felt that this relational connection and what it implies fits well with the concept of YHWH as the God who is in a covenant relationship with his people. In the Uzbek context, the choice of Ega was deemed to be the best balance of natural language with meaningful translation.”
The Seediq Bible translation team chose Utux Tmninun (“the weaving god”) for their translation of YHWH. (Click or tap to see a retelling of the process of how that decision was reached):
“(…) The Seediq team requested that we spend time with them on key terms. They had compiled a list of key terms that they wanted input on, and we went through the list item by item. The most important item was how to deal with the divine name. They had tentatively translated it as Yehoba, transliterated from Jehovah, but they were also aware that this transliteration may not be accurate, and they were keen to explore other options.
“We explored various alternatives. Were they interested in following the ancient Jewish practice of substituting ‘Lord’ for the divine name? Would capitalising the letters help? Would they be bold enough to use ‘Yahweh,’ following the opinion of most Old Testament scholars who regard this as the correct pronunciation? Was it feasible to adopt a mixed approach in dealing with the divine name (…)? Each option had its advantages as well as disadvantages.
“In the midst of the discussion, a participant said, ‘Our ancestors, as well as we today, always call God by the term Utux Tmninun. I suggest we use this term.’ The term Utux Tmninun in the Seediq culture means ‘the weaving God.’ In their culture, God is the weaver, the one who weaves life together. All the participants were excited about this proposal. They tried this term with all the composite terms that involve the divine name, and it seemed to work well, so they decided tentatively to adopt this term. After the workshop, the participants went back to their villages and sought feedback from the wider community, and eventually they confirmed the use of the term Utux Tmninun as the rendering of the divine name.
Translating the divine name as Utux Tmninun, the weaving God, is a creative solution. This term is viewed very positively in the Seediq community. It also correlates well with the concept of God as the creator (Gen. 1-2) and as the weaver who formed our inward parts and knit us together in our mothers’ wombs (Ps. 139:13). It also has the advantage of portraying God beyond the traditional masculine form.
“Some may argue that since names are usually transliterated, we should do the same with YHWH, most likely pronounced ‘Yahweh.’ Unfortunately, due to the influence of Chinese Union Version for almost one hundred years now, Chinese Christians only know God as Yehehua. Attempts to change the term Yehehua to Yahweh have not been successful. This is a reality that the Seediq Christians have to live with.
“Others may argue on theological grounds that YHWH is not only the creator, but also the God of the covenant, hence any attempt to substitute another term for YHWH will not do justice to the Hebrew text. In the case of the Seediq translation, there are significant similarities between Utux Tmninun and YHWH, though the terms are not identical. This is a reality translators often have to struggle with. Exact correspondence is hard to come by. Often it is a matter of approximation, give and take. Besides theological considerations, one has to deal with the constraints of past traditions (‘Jehovah,’ in this instance), the biblical cultures and one’s own culture, and audience acceptance. Hopefully, by using Utux Tmninun for YHWH, the Seediq term will be transformed and take on the aspect of the covenant God as well.” (Source: Yu Suee Yan, The Bible Translator 2015, p. 316ff. )
Nyankore: Nyakubaho or “the one who is from within itself” (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 146)
For the interconessional translation into Chichewa (publ. 1999) the term Chauta (“Great-One-of-the-Bow”) was chosen for YHWH (Click or tap to see the detailed story):
“The name Chauta, literally ‘Great-One-of-the-Bow’, i.e. [is] either the rainbow (descriptively termed uta-wa-Leza ‘the-bow-of-God’) or, less likely, the hunter’s bow. And yet Chauta was also distinct from Mulungu [“God”] in that it has reference to the specific tribal deity of the Chewa people — the God who ‘owns’ yet also ‘belongs to’ them — and hence it carries additional positive emotive overtones. Although research indicated that in an ancient traditional setting, Chauta too was probably associated with the indigenous ancestral rain cult, in the Christian era it has been progressively generalized to encompass virtually all religious contexts in which God may be either appealed to, proclaimed, or praised. After prolonged deliberation, therefore, the translation committee determined Chauta to be the closest functional equivalent to YHWH of the Hebrew Scriptures. The choice of this name is not without its difficulties, however, and these were carefully considered by the Chewa committee. For example, the use of a more specific local term, as opposed to the generic Mulungu, carries a greater likelihood of bringing along with it certain senses, connotations, and situations that were (and no doubt still are) associated with the indigenous, pre-Christian system of worship. If these happened to remain strong in any contemporary sacred setting, then of course the dangers connected with conceptual syncretism might well arise. In the case of Chauta, however, it appeared that the process of positive Christian contextualization had already reached an advanced stage, that is, judging from the widespread use of this name in all aspects of religious life and practice. A more scholarly argument against Chauta takes the position that there is too great a female component associated with this term because it was traditionally applied (by figurative metonymy) to refer also to the ritual ‘wife of God’, i.e. the chief officiant at a traditional rain shrine and worship sanctuary. However, this usage seems to be quite remote, and most people questioned do not even recognize the connection anymore. Besides, in a matrilineal society such as the Chewa, it does not seem inappropriate to have this aspect of meaning lying in the background, particularly since it is not completely foreign to the notion of God in the Bible (cf. Ps. 36:7; 73:15; Isa. 49:14-15; Mt. 23:37). In terms of ‘connotative fit’ or emotive identification and appeal, there can be little doubt that the name Chauta is by far the closest natural equivalent to YHWH in the contemporary Chewa cultural and religious environment. This aspect of meaning was probably also utmost from the ancient Jewish perspective as well; in other words, “for them the associated meaning of this special name [YHWH], in terms of their history and culture, far outweighed any meaning it may have suggested because of its form or derivation”. To be sure, this ‘new’ divine name — that is, new as far as the Scriptures are concerned — may take some getting used to, especially in the formal setting of public worship. But this is not a foreign god whom we are talking about; rather, he is certainly by now regarded as the national deity of the Chewa nation. Chauta is the great God who for one reason or another ‘did not make himself known to them by his holy name, the LORD’ (Exod. 6:3), that is, in the prior translations of his Word into Chewa. He is, however, and always has been “a God who saves … the LORD (Chauta), our Lord, who rescues us from death” (Ps. 68:20, Good News Bible)!” (Source: Wendland 1998, 120f.; see also The Bible Translator 1992, 430ff. )
Transliteration of YHWH
A 12th century reading of the Masoretic vowel points around יהוה (יְהֹוָה) was interpreted to be pronounced as Yehowah from which Iehouah and Jehovah were derived. This was reflected in the English versions of Tyndale (publ. 1530) and the Geneva Bible (significantly based on Tyndale and publ. in 1560) and again the King James Version (Authorized Version) (publ. 1611) which all used Iehouah or Jehovah in 7 different verses in the Old Testament. The translators and editors of the American Standard Version (publ. 1901), a review of the King James Version used Jehovah for all appearances of the tetragrammaton something that the Spanish Reina-Valera (publ. 1602) had already done as well.
In English versions, Yahweh as a transliteration of the tetragrammaton is used by the Catholic Jerusalem Bible (publ. 1966), the Protestant Holman Christian Standard Bible (publ. 2004) and the Legacy Standard Bible (publ. 2021). The Catholic translation by Knox (publ. 1949) occasionally uses Javé, “to make it a Latin name, to match all the other names in the Old Testament.” (Source Knox 1949, p. 80)
Mandinka for instance uses Yawe for YHWH. “The use of Yawe for YHWH is good and may be a trendsetter in this part of Africa.” (Source: Rob Koops)
In a group of related languages in another part of Africa an interesting development from a transliteration to a indigenous translation can be shown: In the Nandi Bible (1938) Jehovah was used as a translation for YHWH. Kamuktaindet (“The Powerful One”) was used as a translation for Elohim (“God”). This was taken over by a translation into the macrolanguage Kalenjin (1969) (intended to include the closely related Keiyo, Kipsigis, Markweeta, Nandi, Okiek, Sabaot, Terik, and Tugen). Sabaot, Markweeta, Tugen and Okiek later wanted there own translations. Both Sabaot and Markweeta use the indigenous word for “Creator” (Yēyiin in Sabaot and Iriin in Markweeta) to translate Elohim and YHWH of the Old Testament and Theos of the New Testament. The Kalenjin Bible has recently been revised to cater to Keiyo, Kipsigis, Nandi and Terik, and this revision has completely dropped Jehovah in favour of Kamuktaindet. (Source: Iver Larsen)
Early translations into Gilbertese faced a problem when transliterating “Jehovah” (a form of “Jehovah” was first used in Spanish Bible translations in 1569 and 1602): “There are only thirteen letters in the Kiribati alphabet: A, E, I, O, U, M, N, NG, B, K, R, T (pronounced [s] when followed by ‘i’), W For instance, ‘Jehovah’ is rendered Iehova, but Kiribati speakers can only pronounce it as ‘Iowa,’ since the phonemes [h] and [v] do not exist in Kiribati.” (source: Joseph Hong, The Bible Translator 1994, p. 329ff. .)
In a recent edition of a Thai translation (Thai Standard Version, publ. 2011) a combination of translation and transliteration is used: phra’ ya(h)we (h) (พระยาห์เวห์) (“Divine Yawe”). (Source: Stephen Pattemore)
In Nyarafolo Senoufo the transliteration is Yewe which also means “the being one” or “he that is.” David DeGraaf (in: Notes on Translation 3/1999, p. 34ff.) explains: “Since it is widely recognized that the vowels of the name are uncertain, another possible transliteration is Yewe. This proposal is in accord with the Nyarafolo rules of vowel harmony and is thus open to being understood as a normal nominalization in the language. Second, Yewe is exactly the word that would be formed by nominalizing the verb ‘to be’ in the class that includes sentient beings. Thus, Yewe can be understood as ‘the being one’ or ‘he that is’. This solution accords well with YHWH’s self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3:14, ‘I am who I am.'”
In the Literary and Mandarin Chinese (Protestant) tradition the transliteration of “Jehovah” is historically deeply rooted, even though there are also some historical burdens (Click or tap to see more details):
“YHWH” is rendered in the Chinese Union Version — the most widely used Bible translation in China—as well as most other Chinese Bible translations as yehehua 耶和華. According to Chinese naming conventions, yehehua could be interpreted as Ye Hehua, in which Ye would be the family name and Hehua — “harmonic and radiant” — the given name. In the same manner, Ye would be the family name of Jesus (transliterated as yesu 耶穌) and Su would be the given name. Because in China the children inherit the family name from the father, the sonship of Jesus to God the Father, yehehua, would be illustrated through this. Though this line of argumentation sounds theologically unsound, it is indeed used effectively in the Chinese church.” (see Wright 1953, p. 298, see also Jesus).
“Ye 耶, an interrogative particle in classical Chinese, is part of the same phonetic series as ye 爺, which gives it a certain exchangeability. Ye 爺 carries the meaning “father” or is used as an honorable form of address. The choice of the first Bible translators to use the transliteration yehehua 爺火華 for Jehovah had a remarkable and sobering influence on the history of the 19th century in China by possibly helping to shape the fatal Taiping ideology, a rebellion that ended up costing an estimated 20 million lives.
“The founder of the Taiping rebellion, Hong Xiuquan, was given a tract (…) [that he used to] interpret a nervous breakdown he had had in 1837 as his “call” to be the “Messiah.” This “vision” that Hong experienced is likely to have had a direct correlation with the name of “God” in that tract. Shen yehuohua 神爺火華 (directly translated: ‘God (or: spirit); old man (or: father); fire; bright)” was the term that was used in that tract for ‘God Jehovah,’ but this was not indicated as a (in its second part) transliteration of a proper name. In his vision, Hong saw ‘a man venerable in years (corresponding with ye), with golden (corresponding with huo and hua) beard and dressed in a black robe,’ an image likely to have been inspired by a direct translation from that name for ‘God,’ especially as it appeared at the beginning of the tract. That this term was considered to be a term of some relevance to the Taiping ideology is demonstrated by the fact that both yehuohua 爺火華 as the personal name of God and ye 爺 as “God the Father” later appeared in Taiping writings.” (Source: Zetzsche in Malek 2002, p. 141ff.)
In American Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines the letter Y and a sign that points up and is similar to the sign for “God.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“YHWH” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
In British Sign Language is is translated with a sign that combines the signs for “God” and “name” and the finger-spelling of Y-H-W-H. (Source: Anna Smith)
“YHWH” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
For further reading on the translation of YHWH, see Rosin 1956, p. 89-125 and Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff.
Naomi’s complaint that God was afflicting her is typical enough, but that would be understood only in a very general sense. If she were an African, she would be likely to press this further to find out why all this trouble had befallen her. A more crucial question, however, would be to ascertain who was the underlying cause. In this situation one might expect that a diviner would be consulted in order to determine either in what way she had offended her ancestral spirits that they should allow this to happen, or who was the “witch” that was bent upon destroying her family, and thus also herself.
Following are a number of back-translations of Ruth 1:8-1:14:
Noongar: “But Naomi said to the two women, ‘You two, return to the houses of your mothers. May God bless you as you have blessed me and your dead husbands. May God bless and give you safety in the houses of your new husbands.’ She kissed them and they wept. They both said to her, ‘No, we will go with you to your people’. But Naomi said, ‘Go back to your homes, my daughters. Why will you come with me? I can have other sons in my womb, can I? They can become your husband, can they? Return, my daughters. I am an old woman. I am too old to marry another man. If I married today, and bore sons, you would wait for them to grow up, would you? And will you not marry other men? No, my daughters. This is more bitter for me, much more than for you, because the hand of God is hurting me.’ So they wept again. Orpah kissed her mother-in-law, but Ruth clung to her.” (Source: Bardip Ruth-Ang 2020)
Eastern Bru: “While they were beginning to go on the way there, Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law: ‘Now you go back to your original homes. I will pray to God to give you blessings, because you have loved me and you have loved your deceased husbands. Surely God will give you both to live in peace and have new husbands and families.’ When she had finished saying that, Naomi kissed her two daughters-in-law. Then they all cried together. But the two daughters-in-law said: ‘Not that, Mother! We want to go together with you, and go to your family.’ But Naomi answered them: ‘Why do you want to follow me? Do you think I can have other sons who could become your husbands? So, daughters-in-law, you both go back to your original families, because I am already old. I can not have another husband. If I had a husband this afternoon, and if I could bear more sons, do you want to wait for those sons to become adults? Could you wait that long? And would you not seek other husbands until my children were big enough for you to take them as your husbands? No, daughters-in-law. In my heart I feel sad for you, because God has done this to me.’ After that they wept together again. And Orpha kissed her mother-in-law and left her. But Ruth did not leave her mother-in-law.” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “’And may the LORD grant that you(pl) could-marry again so-that you(pl) could-settle in your(pl) new home.’ Then Noemi kissed them. They wept aloud and said to Noemi, ‘We(excl) will-go with you(sg) when you(sg) return to your(sg) fellow-countrymen.’ But Noemi said, ‘You(pl) return-home to your-(own place), children. Why would- you(pl) still -come-with me? Do- you(pl) -think I can-marry again and can-give-birth to males whom you(pl) could-marry? That would/could- not -happen because I am old now. But for instance I could-marry tonight and some-time-later can- still -give-birth, then-what, are you(pl) going-to-wait until they had-grown-up? You(pl) would not marry yet just because of them? (It is) not possible, children. The truth (is), my life is more bitter than yours(pl), because the LORD causes- me -to-suffer.’ They wept aloud again. Then Orpah kissed her mother-in-law and went-back-home,b but Ruth on-the-other-hand remained with Noemi.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Then as the three of them were walking, Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, ‘Each of you should turn around and go back to your mother’s home. You treated your husbands kindly before they died, and you have treated me kindly. Now I desire that Yahweh will enable each of you to have another husband in whose home you will feel secure.’ Then she kissed both of them, and they cried aloud. They each said, ‘No, we want to go with you as you return to your relatives.’ But Naomi said, ‘No, my daughters, return home. [It will not do any good for you to come with me!/What good will it do for you to come with me?] Do you think I will get married again and have more sons who could become your husbands? Even if I thought I could have another husband, and even if I got married today and became pregnant tonight and later gave birth to sons, would you remain single/unmarried until they grew up and became old enough for you to marry? No, my daughters, you would not do that. Your situations are bad because your husbands have died, but it is possible that you will each marry again. My situation is much worse, because Yahweh has opposed me, and now I am too old to get married again.’ Then Ruth and Orpah cried again because of what Naomi said. Then Orpah kissed her mother-in-law goodbye, and left, but Ruth clung to Naomi.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) is used here in mi-te (御手) or “hand (of God).”
The expression Go back home represents the combination of two Hebrew verbs often translated “turn back … go your way.” These verbs do not represent two different movements, See Brockelmann, Grundriß II, par. 294. but simply emphasize the meaning of returning. Tamisier translates correctly “retournez.”
In the Hebrew text of verse 12 there is no indication of a goal of hope (cf. New American Bible “and even if I could offer any hopes”). There are, of course, two different possibilities for a goal of hope, either the hope of marrying (Moffatt) or the hope of having a child (New English Bible). The more immediate element in the context would seem to be marrying or having a husband, but since the focus is not on the husband but on having sons, it is also possible to speak of “hope of having sons.”
In the Hebrew text the expression rendered got married tonight is a more or less direct reference to the act of sexual intercourse, but it is euphemistically stated. Some ancient translators, however, felt that it was not euphemistic enough, and so they omitted tonight. So Septuagint and Syriac version. Others, however, translated quite realistically. So in some Greek manuscripts: kai egenomēn lelakkōmenē andri. This is even true when their translation was based on a misreading chalilah for hallaylah. In some languages the closest and most appropriate equivalent would be “even if I should sleep with a husband tonight” The euphemism used in NEB, “if I were to marry this night,” has the disadvantage of not focusing on sexual intercourse. or “even if a husband should cause me to conceive tonight.”
The Hebrew term involved in the expression keep you from marrying occurs only here in the Old Testament, though it is frequent in later rabbinic literature. See M. Jastrow, A Dictionary of the Targumim, the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi, and the Midrashic Literature, I, II, New York, 1950, s.v. ʾagan. In this context one might render the verb as “shut yourselves off from marrying” or “deprive yourselves of marrying.”
Since the questions posed by Naomi in verse 13 are regarded not as real questions but as rhetorical exclamations of something which is quite impossible, it is frequently preferable to render them as strong negative statements; for example, “If I should have a husband tonight and then give birth to sons, you surely would not wait until they had grown up. You would not refrain from marrying someone else.”
The clause you know that’s impossible renders a negative particle in Hebrew which presupposes a verbal form which is not made explicit. See Joüon, par. 160 and 161. The negation may refer either to the impossibility of Naomi’s having sons for her daughters-in-law to marry, or it may be a negative command advising the daughters not to accompany her.
The clause The LORD has turned against me occurs in the Hebrew text at the end of verse 13, following a clause which may have either of two meanings: (1) “I am terribly sorry for you” or (2) “my lot is worse than yours.” Both interpretations are already present in the Septuagint tradition. For the elliptic comparison in the first, see Joüon, par. 141. Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, and Good News Translation follow the first interpretation, while Moffatt and New English Bible favor the second. One can argue that because of the clause The LORD has turned against me the second interpretation is to be preferred, but that does not necessarily follow. If the order of clauses is reversed, as in Good News Translation, the meaning is quite clear and the relation between the events is logical, since it was evidently adversity brought on by the LORD which caused Naomi to feel so sorry for her daughters-in-law. This is, of course, a reference to the death of the two sons.
In the Hebrew text the phrase “the hand of the LORD” is a figurative expression to identify the power of the LORD. In most instances it is better to drop this figure of speech and say simply The LORD has turned against me rather than “the hand of the LORD has gone against me.”
Quoted with permission from de Waard, Jan and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Ruth. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
would you wait for them to grow up?: This is a rhetorical question. It is used for emphasis. Naomi’s daughters-in-law would certainly not wait for any sons she might have to grow up. Her new sons would be too young to marry Ruth and Orpah.
There are two ways to translate this rhetorical question:
• Use a rhetorical question. For example:
Would you wait for them until they become old enough to marry? (Contemporary English Version)
• Use a statement. For example:
Surely you would not want to wait until they were old enough to marry! (NET Bible)
1:13b
Would you refrain from having husbands?: This is another rhetorical question. It emphasizes again that Orpah and Ruth had no reason to go with Naomi. They would not turn down other opportunities to get married, and to wait until Naomi’s sons became old enough to marry.
There are two ways to translate this rhetorical question:
• Use a rhetorical question. For example:
Would you…and stay single just for them? (God’s Word) -or-
Would you…refuse to marry someone else? (New Living Translation (2004))
• Use a statement. For example:
Surely you would not remain unmarried all that time! (NET Bible)
1:13c
No, my daughters: There are two ways to interpret the word No :
(1) Naomi said No to the idea that Ruth and Orpah could expect her to have more sons. For example:
No, my daughters, you know that’s impossible. (Good News Translation)
(2) Naomi said No to Ruth and Orpah’s proposal to accompany her. For example:
No, my daughters, you must not return with me. (NET Bible)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). This is supported by some commentaries and some English versions. Most versions, including the Berean Standard Bible, are ambiguous.
it grieves me very much for your sakes: There are three ways to interpret the phrase it grieves me very much :
(1) It means that the situation grieves Naomi more than her daughters-in-law. For example:
My bitterness is much worse than yours (God’s Word)
(2) It means that the situation grieves Naomi on account of her daughters-in-law. She felt sorry for them. For example:
For your sakes I feel bitter that the Lord has inflicted such misfortune on me (Revised English Bible)
(3) It means that the situation grieves Naomi too much to share her grief with her daughters-in-law. For example:
For my intense suffering is too much for you to bear. (NET Bible)
It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1). This interpretation is followed by many English versions and fits the context well.
grieves me: The Hebrew phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as grieves me is more literally “bitter to me.” The word “bitter” refers to an irritating, pungent taste. It is used figuratively to refer to an unpleasant experience.
Here are some other ways to translate this clause:
My bitterness is much worse than yours (God’s Word) -or-
Life is harder for me than it is for you (Contemporary English Version) -or-
Your situations are bad…my situation is much worse (Translation for Translators)
1:13d
the hand of the LORD has gone out against me: The phrase the hand of the LORD is a figure of speech. It indicates the power or ability of Yahweh to perform some action. Naomi was accusing the LORD of taking action against her, or at least using others to cause her difficulty.
Here are some ways to translate this clause:
• Keep the figure of speech. For example:
because the Lord himself has raised his fist against me (New Living Translation (2004))
• Translate the meaning without the figure of speech. For example:
The Lord has turned against me (Good News Translation) -or-
because the Lord has been against me (New Century Version) -or-
because the Lord has sent me so much trouble (God’s Word)
General Comment on 1:13c–d
In some languages, it may be best to reverse the order of 1:13c and 1:13d. Here is one way to do this:
The LORD ⌊himself⌋ has turned against me, so what has happened to me is even worse than what has happened to you.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.