(0.25) | (Joh 1:5) | 1 tn To this point the author has used past tenses (imperfects, aorists); now he switches to a present. The light continually shines (thus the translation, “shines on”). Even as the author writes, it is shining. The present here most likely has gnomic force (though it is possible to take it as a historical present); it expresses the timeless truth that the light of the world (cf. 8:12; 9:5; 12:46) never ceases to shine. |
(0.25) | (Zec 11:5) | 1 sn The expression those who buy them appears to be a reference to the foreign nations to whom Israel’s own kings “sold” their subjects. Far from being good shepherds, then, they were evil and profiteering. The whole section (vv. 4-14) refers to the past when the Lord, the Good Shepherd, had in vain tried to lead his people to salvation and life. |
(0.25) | (Zec 11:7) | 1 sn The first person pronoun refers to Zechariah himself who, however, is a “stand-in” for the Lord as the actions of vv. 8-14 make clear. The prophet, like others before him, probably performed actions dramatizing the account of God’s past dealings with Israel and Judah (cf. Hos 1-3; Isa 20:2-4; Jer 19:1-15; 27:2-11; Ezek 4:1-3). |
(0.25) | (Nah 3:13) | 2 tn Or “has consumed.” The Qal perfect אָכְלָה (ʾokhlah) from אָכַל (ʾakhal, “to consume”) refers either to a past-time action (“has consumed”) or a present-time action (“consumes”). The context suggests the present-time sense is preferable here. This is an example of the “instantaneous perfect” which represents a situation occurring at the very instant the expression is being uttered (see IBHS 488-89 §30.5.1). |
(0.25) | (Lam 1:9) | 4 tn The basic meaning of זָכַר (zakhar) is “to remember, call to mind” (HALOT 270 s.v. I זכר). Although it is often used in reference to recollection of past events or consideration of present situations, it also may mean “to consider, think about” the future outcome of conduct (e.g., Isa 47:7) (BDB 270 s.v. 5). The same term is used in Lam 1:7a. |
(0.25) | (Jer 46:12) | 3 tn The word “defeated” is added for clarity. The picture is not simply of having fallen down physically; it implies not getting up and therefore being defeated in battle. The verbs in this verse are in the perfect conjugation, translated past tense for the dynamic verbs and present tense for the stative verb (“fill”). This verse speaks from the same perspective as v. 2, which indicates that Egypt has been defeated. |
(0.25) | (Jer 36:18) | 1 tn The verbal forms emphasize that each word came from his mouth. The first verb is an imperfect, which emphasizes repeated action in past time, and the second verb is a participle, which emphasizes ongoing action. However, it is a little awkward to try to express this nuance in contemporary English. Even though it is not reflected in the translation, it is noted here for future reference. |
(0.25) | (Jer 15:7) | 3 tn Or “did not repent of their wicked ways”; Heb “They did not turn back from their ways.” There is no casual particle here (either כִּי [ki], which is more formally casual, or ו [vav], which sometimes introduces casual circumstantial clauses). The causal idea is furnished by the connection of ideas. If the verbs throughout this section are treated as pasts and this section is seen as a lament, then the clause can be sequential: “but they still did not turn…” |
(0.25) | (Jer 1:9) | 1 tn Heb “Behold, I have put my words in your mouth.” This is an example of the Hebrew “scheduling” perfect or the “prophetic” perfect where a future event is viewed as so certain it is spoken of as past. The Hebrew particle rendered here “assuredly” (Heb הִנֵּה, hinneh) underlines the certitude of the promise for the future. See the translator’s note on v. 6. |
(0.25) | (Isa 63:19) | 2 tn Heb “you did not rule them; your name was not called over them.” The expression “the name is called over” indicates ownership; see the note at 4:1. As these two lines stand, they are very difficult to interpret. They appear to be stating that the adversaries just mentioned in v. 18 have not been subject to the Lord’s rule in the past, perhaps explaining why they could commit the atrocity described in v. 18b. |
(0.25) | (Isa 50:2) | 1 sn The present-tense translation of the verbs assumes that the Lord is questioning why Israel does not attempt to counter his arguments. Another possibility is to take the verbs as referring to past events: “Why did no one meet me when I came? Why did no one answer when I called?” In this case the Lord might be asking why Israel rejected his calls to repent and his offer to deliver them. |
(0.25) | (Isa 9:8) | 4 tn The present translation assumes that this verse refers to judgment that had already fallen. Both verbs (perfects) are taken as indicating simple past; the vav (ו) on the second verb is understood as a simple vav conjunctive. Another option is to understand the verse as describing a future judgment (see 10:1-4). In this case the first verb is a perfect of certitude; the vav on the second verb is a vav consecutive. |
(0.25) | (Ecc 2:16) | 2 tn As HALOT 798-99 s.v. עוֹלָם and BDB 762-64 s.v. עוֹלָם note, עוֹלָם (ʿolam) has a wide range of meanings: (1) indefinite time: “long time; duration,” (2) unlimited time: “eternal; eternity,” (3) future time: “things to come,” and (4) past time: “a long time back,” that is, the dark age of prehistory. The context here suggests the nuance “a long time.” |
(0.25) | (Ecc 1:11) | 4 sn According to Qoheleth, nothing new really happens under the sun (1:9). Apparent observations of what appears to be revolutionary are due to a lack of remembrance by subsequent generations of what happened long before their time in past generations (1:10-11a). And what will happen in future generations will not be remembered by the subsequent generations to arise after them (1:11b). |
(0.25) | (Pro 31:18) | 1 tn As the perfect form of a dynamic verb, טָעֲמָה (taʿamah) should be understood as past tense or perfective. The basic meaning of the word is to “taste.” By extension it means to “perceive; discern; evaluate” (cf. Job 12:11; 34:3). It either refers to evaluating the quality of her merchandise (that she sells) or to being sure that she is making a good and profitable trade. |
(0.25) | (Pro 30:15) | 4 tn This verb is a Hebrew imperfect for the future tense, while the next verb is a Hebrew perfect for the perfective. Most translations render both as present tense “are satisfied…say” (KJV, NIV, ESV, Holman, while NASB gives both as future “will not be satisfied…will not say”). Using both the future and the past is more emphatic, these never have been and never will be satisfied. |
(0.25) | (Pro 26:15) | 1 tn Heb The verb תָּמַן (taman) means “to bury” (so many English versions) or “to hide” (so KJV). As the perfect form of a dynamic verb it should be understood as past or perfective. The proverb presents a scene where the sluggard has not just reached to the food in the dish but has buried his hand in it. The second comment reveals that this is not a frozen frame, but a continuing scene revealing the extent of his laziness. |
(0.25) | (Pro 19:24) | 1 tn Heb The verb תָּמַן (taman) means “to bury” (so many English versions) or “to hide” (so KJV). As the perfect form of a dynamic verb it should be understood as past or perfective. The proverb presents a scene where the sluggard has not just reached to the food in the dish but buried his hand in it. The second comment reveals that this is not a frozen frame, but a continuing scene revealing the extent of his laziness. |
(0.25) | (Pro 17:9) | 3 sn W. G. Plaut notes that harping on the past has destroyed many friendships and marriages (Proverbs, 188). W. McKane observes that this line refers to the person who breaks up friendships by his scandalous gossip, even if it is done with a kind of zeal for the welfare of the community, for it will destroy love and trust (Proverbs [OTL], 508-9). |
(0.25) | (Pro 11:8) | 1 tn The verb is the Niphal perfect from the first root חָלַץ (khalats), meaning “to draw off; to withdraw,” and hence “to be delivered.” The saying uses a perfect verb for past time followed by a preterite with vav consecutive. In so doing, the perspective of the proverb is that of a sage telling the student of a situation which has happened, and is prototypical of what will happen again. |