complete verse (Ruth 2:18 - 2:20)

Following are a number of back-translations of Ruth 2:18-20:

  • Noongar: “Ruth took the wheat to her house, and Naomi saw what she had gathered. Then Ruth gave her mother-in- law the bread she had not eaten herself. Her mother-in-law asked her, ‘Where did you gather wheat? Where did you work today? May God bless the man who saw you.’ So Ruth told her mother-in-law everything about the man and his wheatfield. Ruth said, ‘This man is called Boaz.’ Naomi said to her daughter, ‘May God bless this man. He has not stopped being merciful to people living and dead.’ Naomi then told Ruth, ‘This man is our relative, our right-way man.’” (Source: Bardip Ruth-Ang 2020)
  • Eastern Bru: “Then he brought the grain back to the town. She brought to her mother-in-law the grain she had gleaned. And Ruth brought out the leftover food that she had kept back and gave that to her mother-in-law.Her mother-in-law asked her: ‘Today where did you glean this? Whose field did you glean in? I ask God to give blessing to the one who helped you.’ After that Ruth told her mother-in-law: ‘That man who allowed me to glean in his field today was named Boaz.’Then Naommi said to her daughter-in-law: ‘May God give him blessings. Surely God has not given up doing good to those still living and to those still living and to those who have died.” And Naomi said: ‘Surely this person is from our clan also very near to us.’” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “She brought these/it back-home to town and showed-(it) to her mother-in-law Noemi. Then she took-out her leftover food and gave (it) to Noemi. Noemi asked her, ‘Where did you(sg) glean some heads-of-grain earlier? Whose field? Blessed is the man who treated you(sg) well.’ Ruth told Noemi that she gleaned there in the field of a man whose name was Boaz. Noemi said to Ruth, ‘May the LORD bless Boaz. He continued to show his kindness to the people who are still alive and to the dead-ones already.’ And she also said, ‘That Boaz is our(incl) close relative; he is one (of those) who has (a) responsibility to-take-care of us(incl).’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “She carried it back to town, and showed to her mother-in-law how much she had gathered. Ruth also showed to her the grain that was left over after she had eaten enough from what Boaz had given her at lunchtime. Her mother-in-law asked her, ‘Where did you gather grain today? In whose field did you work? God will surely bless the man who was kind to you.’ Then Ruth told her about the man in whose field she had been working. She said, ‘The name of the man who owns the field where I worked today is Boaz.’ Naomi said to her daughter-in-law, ‘I hope/desire that Yahweh will bless him! He has not stopped acting kindly toward us, who are still living, and to our husbands who have died.’ Then she added, ‘That man is a close relative of Elimelech; he is one of those who has a responsibility to help those who are his relatives.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)

grace (of God) (Japanese honorifics)

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 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) can be used, as in mi-megumi (御恵み) or “grace (of God)” in the referenced verses.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

See also grace.

Honorary "are" construct denoting God (“bless”)

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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, shukufukus-are-ru (祝福される) or “bless” is used.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on Ruth 2:20

The verb translated exclaimed (literally “said”) introduces an emphatic statement and in some languages may be appropriately translated as TEV has done (see also New American Bible) or, as in some languages, “Naomi said strongly to her.”

May the LORD bless Boaz involves a Hebrew construction which is literally “blessed be he with reference to the LORD”, but the preposition refers clearly to the LORD as the author of the action. See Joüon, par. 132-133; Brockelmann, Hebräische Syntax, par. 107. Such a passive expression, however, is extremely difficult in many languages, and therefore one must use an active form; for example, “May the LORD, who always keeps his promises to the living and the dead, bless him.” In other instances it may be necessary to introduce this expression by a verb marking direct discourse; for example, “I pray that the LORD may bless….”

The relative pronoun in the Hebrew, “who,” can be related to the grammatical subject of the preceding verb, that is “he” = “Boaz,” or to the complement of the agent, “the LORD.” The majority of commentators and translators choose the second interpretation (“the LORD”), but a significant minority present solid arguments for the first interpretation (“Boaz”). Both are acceptable; what is important for the translator is to leave no ambiguity in the receptor language. We suggest that the translator give one interpretation in the text and the other as a variant in a footnote (a variant suggested for Good News Translation is “May he be blessed by the LORD, … for he has always kept his promises…”). In the Septuagint the relative clause may refer back to Boaz or to the LORD. One manuscript de Rossi and the Syriac and Old Latin versions read: “Blessed be the Lord.” Very probably the rare meaning of the preposition le was no longer understood, or both of the existing formulae “Blessed be he by the LORD” and “Blessed be the LORD” were confused. For further reference, see Rebera, “Yahweh or Boaz? Ruth 2.20 reconsidered,” The Bible Translator 36 (1985):317-327.

The term translated promises is rendered in some translations as “kindness” (Revised Standard Version) and in others as “mercy” (cf. New American Bible). The focus here, however, is upon “loyalty” (cf. New English Bible “keep faith with”). One may translate: “The LORD is always loyal to the living and to the dead” or “The LORD continues to be loyal to those who are living and to those who have died.” In many languages, however, the expression of keeps his promises is a very effective rendering, since this clearly specifies the way in which God continues to be loyal. Keeps his promises may be rendered as “does what he has promised he will do,” “helps them even as he said he would help them,” or “is good to them just as he said he would always be good to them.”

And she went on may be translated as “And she also said to Ruth” or “And in addition she said.”

In some languages That man must be rendered as “Boaz,” since it is a specific reference, and therefore the proper name (which has already been mentioned in verse 19) must be employed.

A close relative of ours is rendered in a number of different ways in different receptor languages; for example, “this man is one of our brothers,” “this man belongs to our clan,” “this man is like one of our family,” or “this man is one of our large family” (in which “large family” is a reference to the extended family in contrast with the immediate family).

The Hebrew term translated one of those responsible for taking care of us is a highly technical one which could be literally translated as “one of our redeemers” or “one of those who has the right of redemption over us.” Hebrew has a plural suffixed form of the participle. See H. Bauer and P. Leander, Historische Grammatik der hebräischen Sprache, 1922, par. 252. Such a person was a relative who was obliged to protect the interests of the family and clan. This involved the individual’s freedom, his goods, and his posterity. One of the duties of such a “redeemer” was to produce an heir to one who had died. Another obligation involved buying property that was in danger of being lost to the family by being sold outside the family group. As is clear in chapter 4, both of these duties play an important role in the story of Ruth, and the same term occurs in 3.9-12 and 4.1, 3, 6, 8, 14. Various aspects of the duties involved will be pointed out in the comments on these verses. For more recent literature we refer especially to J. J. Stamm, Erlösen und Vergeben im Alten Testament, 1940, pages 27 ff.; A. R. Johnson, “The primary meaning of gaʾal,” V. T. Suppl. I (1953), pages 67 ff.; and A. Jepsen, “Die Begriffe des Erlösens im Alten Testament” (in Festgabe für Rudolf Hermann z. 70. Geburtstag: “So lange es ‘huete’ heißt”), 1957, pages 153-163.

In most receptor languages it is necessary to employ some type of descriptive phrase which will identify not only the relationship of a person to a particular family or clan, but also something of his obligations. Accordingly, Good News Translation employs the translation a close relative of ours, one of those responsible for taking care of us. An equivalent descriptive phrase might also be “he is one of those who can help us as a relative” or “he is one of those who can provide for us as one does for members of a family.” Where levirate marriage is well known in a society and where there are other similar responsibilities and obligations involved, one may even employ a translation such as “he is one of those who can take us as widows.” Such an expression could be classified as a fully dynamic equivalent and one which would be in keeping with this context.

In some languages, however, it is not easy to speak of “responsibility.” One of those responsible for taking care of us may need to be rendered as “one of those who must take care of us,” “one of those who our customs say must take care of us,” or “one who must take care of us because he is related to us.”

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 .

3rd person pronoun with high register (Japanese)

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 third person singular and plural pronoun (“he,” “she,” “it” and their various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. While it’s not uncommon to avoid pronouns altogether in Japanese, there are is a range of third person pronouns that can be used.

In these verses a number of them are used that pay particularly much respect to the referred person (or, in fact, God, as in Exodus 15:2), including kono kata (この方), sono kata (その方), and ano kata (あの方), meaning “this person,” “that person,” and “that person over there.” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

See also third person pronoun with exalted register.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Ruth 2:20

2:20a

May he be blessed by the LORD: Naomi again asked the LORD to bless Boaz.

2:20b

who has not withdrawn His kindness from the living or the dead: The Hebrew verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as withdrawn His kindness is more literally “forsaken, abandoned.”

There are two interpretation issues in this clause. The first is whether His kindness is the object or the subject of the Hebrew clause. The possibilities are:

(1) His kindness is the object of the verb. According to this interpretation, “he” is the subject of the verb, and kindness is something that “he” has not abandoned or forsaken. For example:

he has not abandoned his loyalty to the living or to the dead (NET Bible)

(2) His kindness is the subject of the verb. According to this interpretation, God’s kindness has not abandoned or forsaken his people. For example:

whose kindness has not forsaken the living or the dead (New Revised Standard Version)

It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1).

The second issue is that in Hebrew it is not clear who has not withdrawn His kindness. Scholars have interpreted the clause in two ways:

(1) The LORD is the subject of the verb. For example:

May he be blessed by the Lord, who never fails to show kindness to the living and to the dead. (New American Bible, Revised Edition)

(2) Boaz is the subject of the verb. For example:

May he be rewarded by the Lord because he has shown loyalty to the living on behalf of the dead. (NET Bible)

It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1) along with the majority of English versions.

who has not withdrawn His kindness: The verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as withdrawn is more literally “abandoned” or “forsaken.” Naomi was saying that the LORD was still being kind and faithful to her family. The LORD was showing his kindness through Boaz.

In some languages, it may be more natural to say:

He has not stopped being kind
-or-
He has not stopped acting kindly
-or-
He has continued to act with kindness/faithfulness

His kindness: The Hebrew word ḥesed that the Berean Standard Bible translates as kindness means faithfulness, love, and loyalty. See also the note at 1:8d.

from the living: The phrase the living here refers to Naomi and Ruth. The LORD had been kind to them by guiding Ruth to the field of a relative who was generous to her.

or the dead: The phrase the dead here probably refers to Elimelech and his sons. Perhaps Naomi was already thinking that Boaz might act as a guardian-redeemer, marry Ruth, and so continue Elimelech’s family line. This would be considered a great kindness to Elimelech and his sons, who had all died.

2:20c

Naomi continued: The phrase Naomi continued indicates that Naomi continued speaking to Ruth. She started to talk about Boaz directly. Use the words that are normal in your language to indicate that the speaker continued to speak but changed the topic slightly.

The man is a close relative: Naomi referred to Boaz as The man. In some languages, it might not be polite to refer to a wealthy relative as The man. You should translate this with words that indicate respect.

Here are some other ways to translate this:

Boaz is a close relative (Contemporary English Version)
-or-
That gentleman/landowner is a close relative

a close relative: The Hebrew phrase that the Berean Standard Bible translates as a close relative is literally “close/near to us.” It is clear from the context that Naomi was talking of kinship and family ties. Naomi refers to him as a close relative even though Boaz was a relative of her deceased husband. In some languages, it may be necessary to say “a close relative of our family/husbands.”

2:20d

He is one of our kinsman-redeemers: In Israel, close relatives had a responsibility to preserve the property and family name of those related to them. The closest relatives—a brother, uncle, or cousin—had the main responsibility. These closest relatives were called kinsman-redeemers. By using this special term, Naomi was saying that Boaz was one of the men who had a close enough family relationship to help both her and Ruth.

In some languages, a term such as “guardian/kinsman-redeemer” may be misunderstood, because most people will associate it with Christ’s role as the redeemer of sinners.

In some languages, it may be necessary to translate kinsman-redeemers with a phrase that clarifies the meaning in the context of this book. For example:

one of those who is supposed to look after us (Contemporary English Version)
-or-
one who should take care of us (New Century Version)
-or-
one of those responsible for taking care of us (Good News Translation)
-or-
one of those who have responsibility to care for our family
-or-
a relative with the duty to help us

It is suggested that you use one or more of the above examples where the phrase kinsman-redeemer occurs in the source line. In this verse part, Naomi is speaking to Ruth, so the inclusive pronoun “us” is used. In other contexts, such as where Ruth speaks to Boaz, the exclusive pronoun should be used.

© 2024 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.