(0.18) | (Nah 1:12) | 4 tn The particle וְכֵן (vekhen, “and moreover”) functions as an emphatic comparative adverb of degree (BDB 486 s.v. כֵּן; IBHS 663, 665-67 §39.3.4). It draws a comparison between שְׁלֵמִים (shelemim, “strong”) and רַבִּים (rabbim, “many”) but goes one step further for emphasis. This creates an “A, what is more B!” parallelism: “They are strong—what is more—they are many!” |
(0.18) | (Hos 12:13) | 3 tn Heb “was protected”; cf. NASB “was kept.” The verb שָׁמַר (shamar, “to watch, guard, keep, protect”) is repeated in 12:13-14 HT (12:12-13 ET). This repetition creates parallels between Jacob’s sojourn in Aram and Israel’s sojourn in the wilderness. Jacob “tended = kept” (שָׁמַר) sheep in Aram, and Israel was “preserved = kept” (נִשְׁמָר, nishmar) by Moses in the wilderness. |
(0.18) | (Hos 11:5) | 1 tc Or “Will they not return to Egypt?” (so NIV). Following the LXX and BHS, the MT לֹא (loʾ, “not”) should probably be read as לוֹ (lo, “to him”) and connected to the end of 11:4 rather than the beginning of 11:5. The textual confusion between לֹא and לוֹ probably reflects an unintentional scribal error due to a mistake in hearing (cf., e.g., Kethib/Qere in Ps 100:3). |
(0.18) | (Lam 2:20) | 1 tn Heb “Look, O Lord! See!” When used in collocation with verbs of cognition, רָאָה (raʾah) means “to see for oneself” or “to take notice” (1 Sam 26:12). The parallelism between seeing and understanding is often emphasized (e.g., Exod 16:6; Isa 5:19; 29:15; Job 11:11; Eccl 6:5). See also 1:11 and compare 1:9, 12, 20; 3:50, 59, 60; 5:1. |
(0.18) | (Jer 52:9) | 1 sn Riblah was a strategic town on the Orontes River in Syria. It was at a crossing of the major roads between Egypt and Mesopotamia. Pharaoh Necho had earlier received Jehoahaz there and put him in chains (2 Kgs 23:33) prior to taking him captive to Egypt. Nebuchadnezzar had set up his base camp for conducting his campaigns against the Palestinian states there and was now sitting in judgment on prisoners brought to him. |
(0.18) | (Jer 40:6) | 1 sn Mizpah. It is generally agreed that this is the Mizpah that was on the border between Benjamin and Judah. It was located approximately eight miles north of Jerusalem and had been an important military and religious center from the time of the judges (cf., e.g., Judg 20:1-3; 1 Sam 7:5-14; 1 Sam 10:17; 1 Kgs 15:22). It was not far from Ramah, which was approximately four miles north of Jerusalem. |
(0.18) | (Jer 39:5) | 4 sn Riblah was a strategic town on the Orontes River in Syria at a crossing of the major roads between Egypt and Mesopotamia. Pharaoh Necho had earlier received Jehoahaz there, putting him in chains (2 Kgs 23:33) prior to taking him captive to Egypt. There Nebuchadnezzar had set up his base camp for conducting his campaigns against the Palestinian states, and now he was sitting in judgment on prisoners brought to him. |
(0.18) | (Jer 20:10) | 6 sn An ironical wordplay occurs between terms here (“enticed,” “prevail over”) and the same Hebrew words in v. 7 (“coerced,” “prevailed over”), where they describe the Lord coercing Jeremiah into being a spokesman by overcoming his resistance. Jeremiah is lamenting that it was God’s call to speak his word, which he could not (and still cannot) resist, that has led, ironically, to his endangerment. |
(0.18) | (Jer 17:2) | 1 tn It is difficult to convey in good English style the connection between this verse and the preceding. The text does not have a finite verb but a temporal preposition with an infinitive: Heb “while their children remember their altars…” It is also difficult to translate the verb “literally” (i.e., what does “remember” their altars mean?). Hence it has been rendered “always think about.” Another possibility would be “have their altars…on their minds.” |
(0.18) | (Jer 9:12) | 1 tn The words, “I said” are not in the text. It is not clear that a shift in speaker has taken place. However, the words of the verse are very unlikely to be a continuation of the Lord’s threat. It is generally assumed that these are the words of Jeremiah and that a dialogue is going on between him and the Lord in vv. 9-14. That assumption is accepted here. |
(0.18) | (Jer 9:10) | 1 tn The words “I said” are not in the text, but there is general agreement that Jeremiah is the speaker. Cf. the lament in 8:18-9:1. These words are supplied in the translation for clarity. Some English versions follow the Greek text which reads a plural imperative here. Since this reading would make the transition between 9:10 and 9:11 easier, it is probably not original but a translator’s way of smoothing over a difficulty. |
(0.18) | (Jer 1:17) | 1 tn The name “Jeremiah” is not in the text. The use of the personal pronoun followed by the proper name is an attempt to reflect the correlative emphasis between Jeremiah’s responsibility noted here and the Lord’s promise noted in the next verse. The emphasis in the Hebrew text is marked by the presence of the subject pronouns at the beginning of each of the two verses. |
(0.18) | (Isa 30:18) | 1 tn Heb “Therefore the Lord waits to show you mercy, and therefore he is exalted to have compassion on you.” The logical connection between this verse and what precedes is problematic. The point seems to be that Judah’s impending doom does not bring God joy. Rather the prospect of their suffering stirs within him a willingness to show mercy and compassion, if they are willing to seek him on his terms. |
(0.18) | (Isa 14:17) | 1 tc The pronominal suffix is masculine, even though its antecedent appears to be the grammatically feminine noun “world.” Some have suggested that the form עָרָיו (ʿarayv, plural noun with third masculine singular suffix) should be emended to עָרֶיהָ (ʿareha, plural noun with third feminine singular suffix). This emendation may be unnecessary in light of other examples of lack of agreement between a suffix and its antecedent noun. |
(0.18) | (Sos 5:1) | 2 sn The physical love between the couple is compared to eating and drinking at a wedding feast. This is an appropriate figure of comparison because it would have been issued during the feast which followed the wedding and the consummation. The term “drink” refers to intoxication, that is, it compares becoming drunk on wine with enjoying the physical love of one’s spouse (e.g., Prov 5:19-20). |
(0.18) | (Ecc 11:6) | 2 tn The terms “morning” (בֹּקֶר, boqer) and “evening” (עֶרֶב, ʿerev) form a merism (a figure of speech using two polar extremes to include everything in between) that connotes “from morning until evening.” The point is not that the farmer should plant at two times in the day (morning and evening), but that he should plant all day long (from morning until evening). This merism is reflected in several translations: “in the morning…until evening” (NEB, Moffatt). |
(0.18) | (Ecc 9:14) | 3 tn The root גדל (“mighty; strong; large”) is repeated in 9:13b for emphasis: “a mighty (גָדוֹל, gadol) king…building strong (גְדֹלִים, gedolim) siege works.” This repetition highlights the contrast between the vast power and resources of the attacking king, and the meager resources of the “little” (קְטַנָּה, qetannah) city with “few” (מְעָט, meʿat) men in it to defend it. |
(0.18) | (Ecc 7:5) | 3 tn Or “praise.” The antithetical parallelism between “rebuke” (גַּעֲרַת, gaʿarat) and “song” (שִׁיר, shir) suggests that the latter is figurative (metonymy of association) for praise/flattery which is “music” to the ears: “praise of fools” (NEB, NJPS) and “flattery of fools” (Douay). However, the collocation of “song” (שִׁיר) in 7:5 with “laughter” (שְׂחֹק, sekhoq) in 7:6 suggests simply frivolous merrymaking: “song of fools” (KJV, NASB, NIV, ASV, RSV, NRSV). |
(0.18) | (Ecc 5:6) | 2 tc The MT reads הַמַּלְאָךְ (hammalʾakh, “messenger”), while the LXX reads τοῦ θεοῦ (tou theou, “God”) which reflects an alternate textual tradition of הָאֱלֹהִים (haʾelohim, “God”). The textual problem was caused by orthographic confusion between similarly spelled words. The LXX might have been trying to make sense of a difficult expression. The MT is preferred as the original. All the major translations follow the MT except for Moffatt (“God”). |
(0.18) | (Ecc 1:5) | 2 tn Heb “the sun goes.” The participle בָּא (baʾ, “to go in”) emphasizes continual, durative, uninterrupted action (present universal use of participle): the sun is continually rising and continually setting day after day. The repetition of בָּא in 1:4-5 creates a comparison between the relative futility of all human endeavor (“a generation comes and a generation goes [בָּא]”) with the relative futility of the action of the sun (“the sun rises and the sun goes” [i.e., “sets,” בָּא]). |