Translating the Overall Structure of Amos
The collection of prophetic messages (and other material) in Amos is not always organized with a smooth, logical flow from one passage to the next. In fact, a careful reading of the Hebrew (or of most translations) from beginning to end will show that some parts go together very well while others do not seem to belong logically where they are at all.
For example, why does the meeting between Amaziah and Amos (7.10–17) come between two visions which seem as though they should be together (7.7–9 and 8.1–3)? Or why does the statement that “the Lord will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob” (rsv 9.8c) come between two passages which say he will destroy it (9.7–8b, 9–10)? Or why does “The Lord is his name” (rsv) come two thirds of the way down the piece of hymn describing the power of the Lord in 5.8–9 instead of coming at the end of the description where it seems to belong, and where it is found in other similar passages (4.13 and 9.5–6)? And, for that matter, why are these pieces of very similar hymns scattered through the book the way they are?
The footnotes in this Handbook occasionally refer to the large amount of discussion by scholars who have worked on problems like these. In specific cases we have suggested translational decisions based on the best judgment of such scholars. On the other hand, our suggestions are also frequently influenced by what we see as an overall structure to the book of Amos. Many of these seeming inconsistencies in the book fit into a larger design.
2.1 The Structure of Amos
The general plan of the book, and some of the details which have influenced our suggestions to translators, are discussed in the Appendix to this Handbook, and we suggest the translator who is interested in that more technical background read it as part of this discussion. We will not go into detail in this chapter, but just say that messages or groups of messages in Amos are balanced off against each other in various ways, so that messages at corresponding places in the design are sometimes related to each other more than they are to messages right next to them. This can be seen in the Appendix, Section 1.1, Figure 3, where section A is balanced by A’, B by B’, etc.
But Figure 5 in the Appendix shows more of the story. There is evidence that the book has three parts, and that each of these parts also has a balanced structure within itself; these shorter balanced groups are there in addition to the larger balance shown in Figure 3. The basis for understanding Amos in this way is discussed in connection with those figures, and once the reader has seen all this, the book makes much more sense as a whole.
Many translators may find that the best policy is not to try to show their readers the more complicated ways in which the different parts of the book fit together, but to translate in traditional fashion. Others, however, may want to try to help the modern reader at least have a chance to see something of how the parts of the book of Amos fit together, so that the reader may possibly feel the message more strongly and understand the relationship between the ideas more clearly. We suggest some ways of trying to do this in the sections which follow. Perhaps some of these suggestions can be used only in translations for well-educated readers, but others may also be useful in situations where readers have more limited background. The translator will have to decide for himself.
2.2 Translating with a Balanced Structure
For one thing, when the passages which show balance are not very long, and not very far apart, it is sometimes possible to translate them and then print them on the page in such a way that a kind of balance similar to that of the Hebrew is seen in the translation. This should only be done if it would be effective in the language of the translation (see Translating Amos, Section 5). Using 5.4–6 and 5.14–16 as examples, we do not make any attempt to reproduce the Hebrew balanced structure as such, but do try to create one of similar effect, and to give some hint of it in the way the translation is organized on the page. Any translator who is interested in this sort of thing should study the Hebrew balanced structure as shown in Appendix, Section 3.5 to see how it compares.
Amos 5.4–6
The Lord says to the people of Israel,
“Come to me, and you will live.
Do not try to find me at Bethel;
Do not go to Gilgal;
Do not go to Beersheba to worship.
No, Gilgal’s people are doomed to exile,
And Bethel will come to nothing.
Come to the Lord, and you will live.”
“If you do not,” said Amos,
The Lord will sweep down like a fire on the people of Israel.
The fire will burn up the people of Bethel,
And no one will be able to put it out.”
Amos 5.14–15
Come back to doing what is right, not what is evil,
so that you may live.
Then the Lord God Almighty
really will be with you,
as you claim he is.
Hate what is evil, love what is right,
and see that justice prevails in the courts.
Perhaps the Lord God Almighty
will be merciful
to the people of Israel who are still left alive.
The above examples have the wording of the tev as much as possible. In the discussion of these passages later on in the handbook other wordings will be suggested, and some of them would strengthen the balanced pattern. The examples have a small number of changes from the tev, where it hides a relationship which we want to show. For example, tev has come (5.4), go (5.6), and make it your aim (5.14), where Hebrew has “seek.” There are good reasons for not using the same word in the tev, but because we want to show the balanced relationships we use various expressions which all include the words “come to.”
Then again, in the example above the first part of verse 6 is included as part of what the Lord says in verses 4–5 rather than as part of what Amos says in verse 6 because the balanced structure in the Hebrew indicates this relationship. In similar fashion, we have translated “people of Israel” instead of people of this nation (Hebrew: house of Joseph) to keep the parallel with people of Israel in verse 6. We have changed the order in verse 5 back to the Hebrew order so that Bethel balances against Bethel, Gilgal against Gilgal, with Beersheba between them. Come to me, and you will live is balanced by “Come to the Lord, and you will live,” providing a frame before and after the lines with the place names.
In 5.14–15 “come to,” so that you may live, and “people of Israel”, all pick up from the earlier passage. The meaning of the passage as a whole balances 5.4–6 in the contrast which it presents to it. Within 5.14–15 itself, right … evil balances evil … right, the Lord God Almighty is repeated in balanced position, will be merciful balances will be with you (in this context a very similar meaning).
We believe that this kind of arrangement of the translation can sometimes be done in a way that is not forced or artificial for English and some other languages, especially if the translation is in an oratorical style, which would be very appropriate to the prophets.
2.3 Use of Paragraphs and Connections
Once the translator has seen the organization of a particular passage and the way in which the parts relate to each other, sometimes he can make this clear in his translation by the way he divides up the material into paragraphs. He can also help by relating those paragraphs (and the sentences within them) to each other, using connecting words, differences in the order of words, etc. Amos 2.6b–16, for example, is an important passage which has a very complicated organization, as explained in the Appendix, Section 3.1 (see also the discussion of the text under 2.9–12). The most difficult problem is the way in which verses 9–11 come into the passage, breaking into the list of Israel’s sins, and the fact that these verses have a balanced structure, with the events sometimes mentioned in a different order from that in which they happened.
rsv and tev have paragraph divisions only at verse 9. Few modern English translations have more than that; yet the English restructuring below uses paragraphing and different kinds of connections to try to make the relationship of the parts of the passage clearer. We start with verse 8 because paragraphs are not needed earlier.
8 “… You drink up the wine you take from people in payment of fines. Yes, you do it in my house—the temple of your God.
9—“But I was the one who defeated the Amorites who stood in your way, my people! They stood tall as cedar trees and strong as oaks, but I withered their fruit and rotted their roots.
10 Before that I rescued you out of Egypt, and for forty years I took care of you in the barren desert until I gave you this land—this rich land of the Amorites—to be your own.
11 “Then I chose some of your sons to be prophets, to speak my message, and I called some of your young men to be Nazirites, to serve me.
“You know this is true, Israel, don’t you? It is I—it is the Lord who is reminding you!—
12 “But you, you made the Nazirites break their vows to me, and you ordered the prophets not to speak my message.
13 “So, then, I will crush you to the ground, and you will groan with weakness, as a cart groans when it is overloaded with grain ….”
1. In verse 9, in addition to the paragraph break, the dash helps to show that there is a major break in the thought, and the closing dash in verse 11 shows the end of that break. It is as though this part were in parentheses, except that the passage is extremely important and parentheses might indicate that it was of less importance.
2. “I was the one” (verse 9) not only translates the emphatic Hebrew, but also helps to contrast this paragraph with the previous one emphasizing Israel’s sins.
3. “Before that” (verse 10) takes care of the fact that the rescue from Egypt came before the conquering of the Amorites. In some languages the translation will have to change the order of these two verses.
4. A new paragraph is made at the beginning of verse 11 because the action changes and because now the passage is setting up a contrast again between the Lord’s helpful acts and Israel’s disobedient ones. It is easier to see the balance between verses lla and 12 where both are separate paragraphs.
5. The last part of verse 11 is made a separate paragraph because it does not fit the flow of the passage. It is as though the Lord is interrupting himself and asking for confirmation from Israel.
6. Verse 12 is not only made a new paragraph, but the contrasting pronoun “you” is repeated to help strengthen the relationship back to the end of verse 8, and the sharp change from verse 11.
7. Verse 13 begins the announcement of punishment and needs a paragraph because of that change alone. “So, then” relates the punishment to the discussion which has gone before.
Translators in other languages should follow the paragraphing systems of their own languages, not of English, of course. But it is very likely that in many cases translations of this passage, and others like it, can be made clearer by giving attention to the way in which paragraphs and their connections show up in the organization of the passage.
2.4 Headings and Cross References
For the longer passages and the more distant relationships between them, however, the only way we know to help the reader see how they fit together is to use section headings and cross references to show the organization. Again, this is not something which all translators should try to do. It may be difficult to do effectively, and there would be no point to doing it for translations prepared for readers of very limited education. But for serious readers with some education, section headings prepared in this way might be of considerable help in seeing just what the book of Amos is saying and how it is built up.
Here follows one possibility of this kind, based on Appendix, Figure 5. This is only an example. Headings which accomplished the same purpose would have to be prepared according to what is clear and appropriate in each language. Suggestions are made in different places where section headings are discussed in the handbook.
ISRAEL’S GUILT; THE PROPHET’S RESPONSIBILITY (1.1)
A Introduction: the prophet
B The power of God to punish (2)
(Also 5.8–9; 9.5–6)
C Israel’s special guilt among the nations (3)
(Also 8.4—9.4)
Syria
Philistia (6)
Tyre (9)
Edom (11)
Ammon (1.13)
Moab (2.1)
Judah (4)
Israel (6)
Basis for Israel’s guilt (3.1)
D The prophet’s role and commission (3)
(Also 7.1—8.3)
Role: witness to disaster
Commission: to witness against Samaria (9)
C’ Israel doesn’t learn God’s lessons (4.4)
(Also 5.18—6.14)
B’ The power of God to create (13)
(Also 5.8–9; 9.5–6))
A’ Conclusion: Lament for Israel (5.1)
(Also 5.16–17)
POSSIBILITY OF SALVATION; ISRAEL’S PERIL (4)
A Seek God and avoid destruction
B Warning to sinners (7)
C The power of God to create and punish (8)
(Also 1.2b; 4.13; 9.5–6)
B’ Warning to sinners and righteous (10)
A’ Seek good and obtain mercy (14)
ISRAEL’S PUNISHMENT; THE PROPHET’S INVOLVEMENT (16)
A Introduction: Lament for Israel
(Also 5.1–3)
B Israel relies on false security (18)
(Also 4.4–12)
False reliance on religion
False reliance on power (6.1)
C The prophet’s experiences (7.1)
First vision of punishment
Second vision of punishment (4)
Third vision of punishment (7)
D The prophet’s role and commission (10)
(Also 3.3—4.3)
C’ The prophet’s experiences: fourth vision of punishment (8.1)
B’ Punishment of Israel (4)
(Also 1.3—3.2)
Sins
Cosmic disaster (7)
Absence of God (11)
Individual disaster (9.1)
The power of God to punish and create (5)
(Also 1.2b; 4.13; 5.8–9)
A’ Epilogue: Punishment and re-creation of Israel (7)
Israel no better than the other nations
Israel will be restored (11)
These suggestions for the organization of section headings differ from the usual practice in Bible Society publications in four ways. 1) There are three levels of heading, whereas tev has only two in Amos, and normally one elsewhere. (Jerusalem Bible sometimes uses three levels.) 2) Capital letters before the headings are used to help show the balancing passage within each of the three major sections. 3) Cross references (like those for the gospel parallels) are used to show the balancing passages in other major sections. 4) The wording of the headings is chosen to help point up the similarity between balancing passages. In addition, the introduction to the translated book would need to have some explanation of the meaning of the capital letters and the cross references.
But even if the translator feels that he should use a simpler, more conventional set of section headings for the book, he should still keep in mind the overall structure of Amos as he translates. Understanding how the parts fit together helps to see the overall meaning more clearly, which certainly helps to build the background for translating with greater understanding and skill.
No comments:
Post a Comment