inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (1Kings. 20:23)

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, both the Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation use the inclusive pronoun (including Ahab).

king

Click here to view graphically

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:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • 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 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.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

Translation commentary on 1 Kings 20:23

The servants of the king of Syria: Servants here refers to the officials in the court of King Benhadad of Syria. It should probably be so translated in most languages to avoid the impression that the text is speaking of household servants (see the comments on 1 Kgs 1.2).

Since Good News Translation begins a new section here, it reintroduces the king of Syria by name and omits of Syria. If translators follow the model of Good News Translation and begin a new section here, they may wish to say “the officials of the Syrian king Benhadad.”

Their gods are gods of the hills …: Both occurrences of gods are plural in the Hebrew. Since the plural form of this noun is often used in the Old Testament to refer to the one God of Israel, some translations translate here with the singular as follows: “Their God is a God of the mountains” (La Bible du Semeur) and “The God of Israel is a God of the mountains” (Bible en français courant, Parole de Vie). In those translations that use the singular here, the Israelites must be the subject of the Hebrew verb rendered they were stronger. Parole de Vie and Bible en français courant, for example, say “That is why the Israelites were stronger than we were.” This understanding of the Hebrew text is certainly possible. But it seems more likely that the Syrians thought that the Israelites worshiped numerous gods. If so, then Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, along with most modern translations, express the correct meaning. The fact that the plural form is clearly singular in verse 28 is explained by the fact that God is speaking about himself.

Hills translates a Hebrew noun that is the usual word for “mountain” (so New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). If a word such as hills is used in the receptor language, the reference should be to something larger than simply small hills. Samaria, the capital of Israel, was built on a high hill (1 Kgs 16.24), while Damascus, the Syrian capital, was located on a plain. For this reason the Syrian officials thought that their own gods would have more power than the God of Israel in a battle on the plain.

The translation of the word plain may present problems in certain languages. Contemporary English Version speaks of “flat land,” but in some cases translators may have to say “land where there are no mountains.”

Surely we shall be stronger than they: A possible model here is “truly we will be victorious over them.”

When the officials in Benhadad’s court are speaking directly to their king, the first person plural pronoun we will, of course, be inclusive both here and in verse 25.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Kings, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .