Fled: see the comments on 19.18. In this context some languages may prefer to say “continued running away” or “started running again,” since this is not the first time David tried to get away from Saul.

Naioth in Ramah: see the comments on 19.18.

The difference between the verbs came (Revised Standard Version) and “went” (Good News Translation) is a matter of the perspective of the writer. Since the writer of the books of Samuel was probably not located where Jonathan was, the verb “went” will be more appropriate in most languages. And since David had previously been where Jonathan was, some may prefer to say “went back [to Jonathan].”

The words came and said before Jonathan sound strange in English. Indeed, certain manuscripts of the Septuagint change the word order to something that sounds more natural: “came before Jonathan and said.” In any case this seems to be the meaning of the unusual order, so it is possible to translate simply “came and said to Jonathan.” And since a question follows, many translators may wish to render it “came and asked Jonathan.”

The three questions What have I done? What is my guilt? And what is my sin…? are not three different matters. Rather they focus on a single fact. David cannot see that he has done anything at all to deserve Saul’s anger. For this reason the conjunction and introducing the third question may be out of place in many languages. Since the intent of these questions is to deny forcefully any wrongdoing, one or more of them may be translated by an emphatic statement like “I have done nothing wrong!” Because of the cumulative effect of the three items, they should not be reduced unless absolutely required by the receptor language. In using the words guilt and sin, David is not thinking of any technical distinctions. They are simply synonyms for wrongdoing.

Seeks my life: the Hebrew word (nefesh), translated life, is often rendered “soul” in other contexts. But the whole expression indicates that Saul wanted to take away David’s life; that is, he wanted to kill him.

In some languages the crucial question about why Saul wanted to kill David may come more naturally at the beginning of the series of questions (so Contemporary English Version) rather than at the end.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He said to him: that is, Jonathan said to David. If there is any danger that the pronouns will be misunderstood, the names may by substituted. In fact, both the Septuagint and the Syriac version, as well as many modern translations, supply the name Jonathan here. Also, the verb said may be better translated “responded” (Bible en français courant) in this context.

Far from it! See the comments on 2.30. And compare also 12.23 and 14.45, where the same expression is used. Jonathan is rejecting the idea that David should die, but he also denies that his father could be trying to kill David, as the context shows.

My father does nothing: the Masoretic Text reads “my father does for me,” but the margin of the Masoretic Text contains a suggested change to read “not” instead of “for me.” The difference in Hebrew consists of one letter only, and the sounds are very similar. The context requires a negative, and all translations, including the ancient versions, follow the reading in the margin of the Hebrew text, nothing.

Great or small is a way of saying “anything at all.” It is an all-inclusive expression. Some possible translations are “anything, slight or serious” (Moffatt); “[anything,] important or unimportant” (New Jerusalem Bible); “anything whatever” (Revised English Bible).

Disclosing it to me: literally “uncovering my ears” (see the comment on “revealed” in 9.15). The negative idea does nothing … without disclosing it to me may be more naturally expressed in a positive way in many languages. The whole sentence may be turned around to say something like “my father tells me about everything he is doing no matter how small it is.”

The question why should my father hide this from me? is intended as a strong affirmation and should be so translated in some languages: “there is no way that [or, no reason why] my father would hide this matter from me!”

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

But David replied: the Hebrew says “But David swore again and said.” The English verb “swear” in this context means “to make a vow,” not “to curse” or “to use vulgar language.” Since the text has not already said that David swore once before, many think that the Masoretic Text contains an error. They therefore follow the Septuagint, which reads “replied to him” (so Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation).

Some follow the Masoretic Text but omit the word “again.” Compare New Jerusalem Bible: “In reply, David swore.”

Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament gives a {B} rating to the Masoretic Text. According to Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament the oath refers to the words as the LORD lives and as your soul lives at the end of this verse. Further, the word rendered “again” in the footnotes in Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation should not be translated “again” but rather “moreover.” Revised English Bible provides a good model: “David said, ‘I am ready to swear to it.’ ”

Knows well: literally “to know, he knows.” See “Reinforcing verbs” in “Translating the Books of Samuel,” page 20. Some may translate “he surely [or, certainly] knows.” Fox expresses the emphasis by saying “Your father knows, yes, knows.”

Found favor in your eyes: see the comments on 1.18.

He thinks: literally “he says.” See the comments on 18.11.

The Hebrew contains a quotation within a quotation, as David quotes the words that Saul thinks. Good News Translation has changed the embedded quotation into an indirect quotation. This model should probably be followed in many other languages.

As the LORD lives: see the comments on 14.39.

As your soul lives: see the same expression in 25.26. Without any obvious reason Good News Translation omits these words. They should be kept. New Revised Standard Version says “and as you yourself live.” In some languages it will be possible to say something like “It is as certain as the fact the LORD is alive, and as certain as the fact that you yourself are alive.” Others have attempted to convey the meaning in natural language by saying “I swear in the name of Yahweh and in your presence.”

There is but a step between me and death: at the beginning of this clause, the Hebrew text has a particle that expresses emphasis, but neither Revised Standard Version, nor Good News Translation, nor most other translations attempt to translate it. Fox more closely expresses the force of the Hebrew here: “as YHWH lives, and as you yourself live, indeed, there is only the like of a footstep between me and death!” Compare also Chouraqui: “yes, there is only a footstep between me and death!”

It may not be natural to retain the image of the step in certain languages. The idea here is “I am very close to death” or “I do not have long to live.” Other languages may have different and more colorful metaphors for describing nearness to death.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Whatever you say: literally, “Whatever you say your nefesh.” Many translations seem to ignore the presence of “your nefesh,” but these words add a slight emphasis that may be preserved in translation by saying something like “whatever you yourself say” (so La Bible Pléiade). Since the nefesh is also considered the seat of feelings and sensations, one may translate “whatever you desire” (Traduction œcuménique de la Bible) or “whatever you wish” (New American Bible).

In languages that prefer indirect discourse, this verse can be translated:

• Then Jonathan told David that he would do anything at all that David wanted him to do.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Once again, in the context of this conversation between Jonathan and David, the verb said may be translated more dynamically as “answered” or “responded.”

Tomorrow is the new moon: the Hebrew has no verb here. It is supplied by Revised Standard Version. But in many languages the whole first sentence of David’s reply will have to be turned around to say something like “the new moon will appear tomorrow night” or “people will celebrate the festival of the new moon tomorrow night.”

The new moon: the Israelites held a religious ceremony on the night of each new moon, that is, the night on which the crescent moon first became visible again. Regulations for this celebration are found in Num 28.11-15. The festival continued during the next twenty-four hours, and work was forbidden during this time (Amos 8.5).

I should not fail to sit: literally “to sit I will sit.” This may be rendered in some languages as “I am certainly expected to sit down” or “I am definitely invited.” Fox says “when I must sit, yes, sit beside the king to eat.” On the translation of Hebrew reinforcing verbs, see page 20.

At table: literally “to eat.” The literal reading will be a more natural way to translate in some languages.

But let me go: literally “and you have sent me away.” This seems to be a way of asking Jonathan’s consent to the plan of action being proposed. Traduction œcuménique de la Bible has “but you will let me go,” and New Jerusalem Bible reads “but you must let me go.” Good News Translation attempts to convey this idea of asking for approval by beginning this part of David’s speech with the words “if it’s all right with you, I will go.”

The field: see the comments on 19.3.

The third day at evening: literally “until the evening the third.” Good News Translation and New International Version render this in more natural English as “the evening of the day after tomorrow.” The Septuagint lacks the word third. New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and Osty-Trinquet are based on the Septuagint, saying only “until evening” (see also verse 12).

Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament considers the word “the third” of the Masoretic Text to be a later addition, inserted here on the basis of verses 12 and 19. Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament therefore gives a {C} rating to the Septuagint and recommends that it be followed here.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

If your father misses me at all: literally “If to miss, he will miss me, your father,” which again uses reinforcing verbs. Revised Standard Version attempts to capture the emphatic nature of this Hebrew construction by adding at all. Fox provides another way of expressing the emphasis: “If your father takes-account, yes, account of my (absence).”

The Hebrew text contains another quotation within a quotation. In some languages it will be more natural to change the embedded quotation into an indirect quotation, as in Good News Translation.

Earnestly asked leave: literally “to ask, he asked.” As with the previous verb in this verse, translators need to capture the emphatic nature of the Hebrew. Revised Standard Version adds “earnestly,” and New American Bible says “David urged me to let him go.” Fox says “David requested, requested-leave,” and though this translation does not express in English the same sense as the Hebrew, at least the translator attempted to preserve this aspect of the Hebrew. Other languages may say quite naturally at this point “David begged me” (New Century Version) or “… pleaded with me.”

To run: probably this verb should not be understood literally but rather in the sense of “to hurry off” (Revised English Bible) or “to go on short notice” (New American Bible).

Bethlehem his city: Good News Translation omits his city but retains the meaning by saying “hurry home.” Other models include “Bethlehem, his home town” (New Jerusalem Bible), “Bethlehem, his town of birth” (La Bible du Semeur), or “his home in Bethlehem” (Revised English Bible). Since Bethlehem is not simply the place where he now lives but is rather the place of his birth, New Jerusalem Bible and La Bible du Semeur provide especially good models. If this embedded quotation is changed into an indirect quotation, then the first person pronoun will need to be used, as in Good News Translation.

All the family: “the whole clan” (New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, and Fox, “the entire clan”). See the comments on 18.18.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

If he says, ‘Good!’ may be awkward if translated literally in some languages. It will be more naturally rendered “If he agrees” or “If your father accepts the excuse.”

Your servant here and in verse 8 are indirect self-references. They will be better translated by first person singular pronouns in many languages. See page 12.

But: the common conjunction here serves to mark the contrast between the two possible reactions on the part of Saul after hearing the reason for David’s absence from the meal.

If he is angry: literally “if to be angry he is angry.” On the use of reinforcing verbs in Hebrew and their translation, see page 20. New American Bible attempts to reflect the emphatic nature of the construction in this context by saying “if he becomes quite angry.” Klein similarly has “if he gets really angry,” and Fox says “But if he is upset, yes, upset.”

Then know: the word then is supplied by Revised Standard Version but is not found in the Hebrew. The imperative form is understood by most interpreters to have a future tense meaning “you will know.”

Hebrew says only that evil is determined by him, without making explicit against whom the evil is intended. The context leaves no doubt that the evil is directed against David, and translators may wish to follow Good News Translation in making this information explicit.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Therefore: the Hebrew has only the common conjunction here, and it is omitted in most modern versions other than Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version.

Deal kindly: literally “do kindness (chesed).” This Hebrew noun has a wide range of meanings. The English nouns “goodness,” “grace,” and “kindness” are all possible translations. Others focus on the element of “faithfulness.” Compare New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, “Deal faithfully with your servant.” Compare also the word translated “kindness” in 15.6.

In both cases where the expression your servant is used in this verse, first person singular pronouns will be the best translation in most languages, as in verse 7.

The sacred covenant: literally “a covenant of Yahweh.” The reference is to the agreement between Jonathan and David described in 18.3. A literal translation of the Hebrew will perhaps have no clear meaning in many languages. God was witness to the covenant, and the covenant was secured by swearing in God’s name (see verse 42). New International Version says “for you have brought him into a covenant with you before the LORD,” and New Jerusalem Bible says “since you have bound your servant to you by a pact in Yahweh’s name.” Contemporary English Version provides a more dynamic model communicating the same meaning: “After all, it was your idea to promise the LORD that we would always be loyal friends.”

Why should you bring me to your father? This question assumes that Jonathan’s father Saul would kill David if he had the opportunity. So to be brought to Saul would mean certain death. The meaning of this question is therefore “why put me in a position where your father can kill me?” David prefers to be killed by his friend Jonathan rather than by Saul, if indeed he is really guilty of any wrong doing.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on the First and Second Books of Samuel, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2001. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .