Trevor V. Evans, «Some Alleged Confusions in Translation from Hebrew to Greek», Vol. 83 (2002) 238-248
Two remarkable passages in the Greek translation of Numbers have recently been identified by Anssi Voitila. Both show a clear influence from Hebrew verbal forms on the translator’s choices of Greek verbal forms which overrides the semantic indicators of the broader context. Confused translations result. Are they isolated phenomena or representative of translators’ habits in general? Voitila argues for the latter interpretation. He seeks to demonstrate a number of additional instances in the Greek Pentateuch and sees here support for the theory of segmentation in translation technique, as developed by the Helsinki School. The present paper reassesses his examples and draws the opposite conclusion.
As Voitila points out, wbh) is a Hebrew stative verb, a type traditionally interpreted as expressing a continuous state and conventionally translated into modern European languages by present tense forms10. Thus the RSV has here ‘and his father loves him’. Voitila regards the present indicative as the correct Greek translation and believes the context itself indicates this on the grounds that ‘[b]oth persons under discussion, the younger brother who is loved and the father who loves, are still very much alive’11. The translator’s choice of the aorist indicative as a rendering (as in Gen 22,2) may indicate ignorance of the semantics of Hebrew statives. Whether it produces an inappropriate interpretation of the context is another matter.
The verb a)gapw= is lexically stative in this sense of parental love. The aorist indicatives of Greek stative verbs often have an ingressive force12. In Gen 44,20 Judah is reminding the unrecognized Joseph of his brothers’ earlier report of Jacob and Benjamin. The aorist h)ga/phsen completes a sequence of aorist indicatives and is used, I suggest, to express the natural consequence of the death of the elder brother (a)pe/qanen), leaving the younger brother as the only remaining son of Jacob’s favourite wife (u(pelei/fqh). If this was the translator’s interpretation of the context, the fact that both father and son are still alive is beside the point. The focus of the Greek sentence is on the causes and origin of Jacob’s special affection for Benjamin. I would translate ‘and we said to the master (i.e. you) "we have an elderly father, and he has a child of his old age, rather young, and his brother died, and he alone was left behind for his mother, and his father (as a result) came to love him"’.
Gen 22,2: kai_ ei]pen labe_ to_n ui(o/n sou to_n a)gaphto/n o$n h)ga/phsaj
tbh)-r#$) Kdyxy-t) Knb-t) )n-xq rm)yw
The example of Gen 22,2 involves the same two verbs and essentially the same problem, h)ga/phsaj rendering tbh). Influence on choice of the aorist indicative from the underlying Hebrew perfect does not make the Greek sense ‘and he said "Take your beloved13 son, whom you have come to love"’ inappropriate to the context14.
Gen 1,21: kai_ e)poi/hsen o( qeo_j ta_ kh/th ta_ mega/la kai_ pa=san yuxh_n zw/|wn e(rpetw=n a$ e)ch/gagen ta_ u#data kata_ ge/nh au)tw=n
Myldgh Mnynth-t) Myhl) )rbyw
wcr#$ r#$) t+mrh hyxh #$pn-lk t)w
Mhnyml Mymh
An allegedly similar case is the rendering of wcr#$ by e)ch/gagen in Gen 1,21. Here the difference in lexical values is important. The Hebrew verb