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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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 Esther 8:5   

The verse break in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia comes after stood before the king. It is therefore preferable to begin verse 5 with And she said, unless the translator wishes to restructure and incorporate verses 4 and 5 into one discourse unit.

If it please introduces four formulaic conditions offered by Esther instead of one as in 5.4, or two as in 5.8. In alternating succession the conditions refer to the king’s attitude toward Esther’s request (conditions one and three; see comments on 1.19), and to the king’s attitude toward Esther herself (conditions two and four; see comments on 2.9, 15, 17). Pleasing in his eyes means that she has the king’s approval (so New Revised Standard Version, “if … I have his approval”).

As in other passages in the book, the king is addressed in the third person: If it please the king, and if I have found favor in his sight. Some translations will need to change the pronoun to second person to avoid confusion for the reader (see comment on 1.19). The style of language is formal as in Esther’s earlier requests addressed to the king.

Let an order be written is in the passive, but the agent is made explicit in Good News Translation: “[you] please issue a proclamation.” Although Revised Standard Version specifies that an order is requested by Esther, the Hebrew text merely says “Let it be written….” The formality of court language can be retained by restating the verb; “May the king write,” for example, or “May the king cause to be written.”

Revoke: literally “to cause to come back.” Esther’s request seems to be in direct contradiction to what was stated in 1.19 about the laws of the Persians and the Medes. The translator may use an equivalent verb such as “withdraw, call back, remove.”

Provinces: see comments on 1.1.

Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .