Discovery Box| (0.18) | (Lam 4:22) | 5 tn The noun עָוֹן (ʿavon) is repeated twice in this verse, denoting first “punishment for iniquity” (v. 22a), and then “iniquity” (v. 22b). See a preceding translator’s note on the broad range of meanings for this word. The repetition of the same root with different meanings creates an ironic polysemantic wordplay: Zion’s “punishment” for its sin is about to come to an end, but the punishment for Edom’s “sin” is about to begin. |
| (0.18) | (Lam 3:22) | 1 tn It is difficult to capture the nuances of the Hebrew word חֶסֶד (khesed). When used of the Lord it is often connected to his covenant loyalty. This is the only occasion when the plural form of חֶסֶד (khesed) precedes the plural form of רַחֲמִים (rakhamim, “mercy, compassion”). The plural forms, as with this one, tend to be in late texts. The plural may indicate several concrete expressions of God’s kindnesses or may indicate the abstract concept of his kindness. |
| (0.18) | (Lam 2:22) | 6 tn This entire line is an accusative noun clause, functioning as the direct object of the following line: “my enemy has destroyed the perfectly healthy children….” Normal word order in Hebrew is: verb + subject + direct object. Here, the accusative direct-object clause is moved forward for rhetorical emphasis: those whom the Babylonians killed had been children born perfectly healthy and then well raised…what a tragic loss of perfectly good human life! |
| (0.18) | (Lam 2:20) | 4 sn Placing the specific reference to children at the end of the line in apposition to clarify that it does not describe the normal eating of fruit helps produce the repulsive shock of the image. Furthermore, the root of the word for “infants” (עוֹלֵל, ʿolel) has the same root letters for the verb “to afflict” occurring in the first line of the verse, making a pun (F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp, Lamentations [IBC], 99-100). |
| (0.18) | (Lam 2:12) | 5 tn Heb “as their life is poured out.” The term בְּהִשְׁתַּפֵּךְ (behishtappekh), Hitpael infinitive construct + the preposition בּ (bet), from שָׁפַךְ (shafakh, “to pour out”), may be rendered “as they expire” (BDB 1050 s.v. שָׁפַךְ), referring to the process of dying. Note the repetition of the word “pour out” with various direct objects in this poem at 2:4, 11, 12, and 19. |
| (0.18) | (Lam 1:10) | 3 tn Heb “she watched,” or “she saw.” The verb רָאָה (raʾah, “to see”) has a broad range of meanings, including “to see” a spectacle causing grief (Gen 21:16; 44:34; Num 11:15; 2 Kgs 22:20; 2 Chr 34:28; Esth 8:6) or abhorrence (Isa 66:24). The words “in horror” are added to “she watched” to bring out this nuance. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 51:42) | 1 tn For the meaning “multitude” here rather than “tumult,” see BDB 242 s.v. הָמוֹן 3.c, which says that this refers to a great throng of people under the figure of an overwhelming mass of waves. The word is used of a multitude of soldiers, or a vast army, in 1 Sam 14:16 and 1 Kgs 20:13, 18 (cf. BDB 242 s.v. הָמוֹן 3.a for further references). |
| (0.18) | (Jer 51:30) | 3 tn Heb “Her dwelling places have been set on fire. Her bars [i.e., the bars on the gates of her cities] have been broken.” The present translation has substituted the word “gates” for “bars” because the intent of the figure is to show that the bars of the gates have been broken, giving access to the city. “Gates” makes it easier for the modern reader to understand the figure. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 51:11) | 3 tn Heb “The Lord has stirred up the spirit of…” The verb is rendered here as a prophetic perfect. The rendering “arouse a spirit of hostility” is an attempt to render some meaning to the phrase and not simply ignore the word “spirit,” as many of the modern English versions do. For a fuller discussion, including cross references, see the translator’s note on v. 1. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 50:43) | 3 sn Compare Jer 6:22-24, where almost the same exact words as 50:41-43 are applied to the people of Judah. The repetition of prophecies here and in the following verses emphasizes the talionic nature of God’s punishment of Babylon; as they have done to others, so it will be done to them (cf. 25:14; 50:15). |
| (0.18) | (Jer 50:12) | 1 tn Heb “Your mother will be utterly shamed, the one who gave you birth…” The word “mother” and the parallel term “the one who gave you birth” are used metaphorically for the land of Babylonia. For the figure compare “mother” in Isa 50:1 (Zion) and Hos 2:2, 5 (2:4, 7 HT; Israel) and see BDB 52 s.v. אֵם 2 and 408 s.v. יָלַד Qal.2.c. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 49:7) | 5 tn The meaning of this last word is based on the definitions given in KBL 668 s.v. II סָרַח Nif and HALOT 726 s.v. II סָרַח Nif, which give the nuance as “to be [or become] corrupt.” Instead, BDB 710 s.v. סָרַח Niph gives the nuance as “let loose (i.e., to be dismissed; to be gone),” deriving it from a verb used elsewhere of the overhanging of a curtain or a cliff. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 48:41) | 1 tn Parallelism argues that the word קְרִיּוֹת (qeriyyot) be understood as the otherwise unattested feminine plural of the noun קִרְיָה (qiryah, “city”) rather than the place name Kerioth mentioned in v. 24 (cf. HALOT 1065 s.v. קִרְיָה). Both this noun and the parallel term “fortresses” are plural but are found with feminine singular verbs, being treated either as collectives or distributive plurals (cf. GKC 462-63 §145.c or 464 §145.l). |
| (0.18) | (Jer 48:5) | 2 tn Heb “the distresses of the cry of destruction.” Many commentaries want to leave out the word “distresses” because it is missing from the Greek version and the parallel passage in Isa 15:5. However, it is in all the Hebrew mss and in the other early versions, and it is hard to see why it would be added here if it were not original. |
| (0.18) | (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. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 46:5) | 2 tn Heb “Their soldiers.” These words are actually at the midpoint of the stanza as the subject of the third of the five verbs. However, as G. L. Keown, P. J. Scalise, and T. G. Smothers (Jeremiah 26-52 [WBC], 291) note, this is the subject of all five verbs: “are terrified,” “are retreating,” “have been defeated,” “have run away,” and “have not looked back.” The subject is put at the front to avoid an unidentified “they.” |
| (0.18) | (Jer 41:13) | 1 tn Heb “all the people who were with Ishmael.” However, this does not refer to his own troops but to those he had taken with him from Mizpah, i.e., the captives. The phrase is specifically clarified in the next verse: “the people whom Ishmael had taken captive from Mizpah.” Hence the phrase is translated here according to sense, not according to the literal wording. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 41:18) | 1 tn Verses 16-18a are a long, complex sentence in the Hebrew text with some rather awkward placements of qualifying terms. In the Hebrew text these verses read, “41:16 And he took, Johanan…and all the army officers with him, all the people who were left alive that he [Johanan] had taken back from Ishmael son of Nethaniah from Mizpah after he [Ishmael] had killed Gedaliah…men, men of war, and women and children and court officials that he [Johanan] had brought back from Gibeon, 41:17 and they went and stayed at Geruth Kimham…to go to enter Egypt 41:18 because of the Chaldeans, because they were afraid of them because Ishmael…” The sentence has been broken down and restructured to reflect all the relevant data in shorter sentences that better conform with contemporary English style. There are a couple of places where the text and syntax are debated. Many modern English versions and commentaries read, “They led off/took control of/took all survivors of the people whom Ishmael…had taken captive [reading שָׁבָה אֹתָם (shavah ʾotam) in place of הֵשִׁיב מֵאֵת (heshiv meʾet), “whom he (Johanan) had taken back/rescued from Ishmael] from Mizpah after he had…” This is a decidedly smoother text, but there is no manuscript or versional evidence for it, and so it has been rejected here. Some commentators and English versions see the words “men of war” (“soldiers”) following the word “men” as appositional to that word and hence see only one category. However, there are no parallels to these words used in this kind of apposition. So the translation reflects two categories. |
| (0.18) | (Jer 39:15) | 2 tn Heb “Now the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah while he…saying.” The form of this clause is disjunctive, showing that it does not follow the preceding events in either chronological or logical sequence. For a discussion of the form and function of such disjunctive clauses, see IBHS 650-52 §39.2.3. This example most closely fits the description and function of example 12, Ruth 4:18, 21-22 on p. 652. |
| (0.18) | (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. |
