Proverbs 24:4

When I read Proverbs 24 in the ESV months ago, I noticed a small feature in verse 4:  "by knowledge the rooms are filled with all precious and pleasant riches."  The words precious and pleasant alliterate, and they have the same number of syllables (with the emphasis falling on the same syllable in each).  To some degree, the euphony of these features matches the meaning.

Matthew 13:16

Months ago, the Daily Dose of Greek went over Matthew 13:16:

Ὑμῶν δὲ μακάριοι οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ὅτι βλέπουσιν καὶ τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν ὅτι ἀκούουσιν.

In the ESV, this is:

"But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear."

I've been following along in my French New Testament and noticed a feature specific to that translation:

Mais heureux sont vos yeux, parce qu'ils voient, et vos oreilles, parce qu'elles entendent!

"Heureux" ("blessed") and "yeux" ("eyes") rhyme, and this resemblance highlights the relationship between the two words:  that they're being equated in this copulative sentence and therefore, as subject and predicate nominatives, are in the same case.

Matthew 27:46, Mark 15:34

The divine vocatives in Daniel 9:19 that I wrote about last week got me thinking about Matthew 27:46:

And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?" that is, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Mark 15:34 is a parallel verse:

And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

I think it may be significant that "My God" is repeated here.  Of course, this is a quotation of Psalm 22:1, where אֵלִי appears twice, but in this context, where Jesus is experiencing a separation from God as part of the punishment for sin, it's almost as if each "My God" is directed to an-other Person in the Trinity:  one to God the Father and one to the Holy Spirit.  The verbs here are singular, though.

Daniel 9:19

A few months ago, I watched the Daily Dose of Hebrew video on Daniel 9:19:

אֲדֹנָי ׀ שְׁמָעָה אֲדֹנָי ׀ סְלָחָה אֲדֹנָי הַֽקֲשִׁיבָה וַעֲשֵׂה אַל־תְּאַחַר לְמַֽעֲנְךָ אֱלֹהַי כִּֽי־שִׁמְךָ נִקְרָא עַל־עִירְךָ וְעַל־עַמֶּֽךָ׃

In the ESV, this is:

"O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive.  O Lord, pay attention and act.  Delay not, for your own sake, O my God, because your city and your people are called by your name."

There are three vocatives referring to God in roughly the first half of the verse ("'O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive.  O Lord, pay attention and act.'"), and these are paralleled with a single vocative in the second half ("'Delay not, for your own sake, O my God, because your city and your people are called by your name.'").  To some degree, the placement of these vocatives indicates the Trinity:  three Persons but one God.

Ruth 2:4

Months ago, the Daily Dose of Aramaic went over Targum Ruth 2:4:

As I follow along in the series, I've been referencing the Vulgate, in which this verse is:

et ecce ipse veniebat de Bethleem dixitque messoribus Dominus vobiscum qui responderunt ei benedicat tibi Dominus

In the ESV, it's:

And behold, Boaz came from Bethlehem.  And he said to the reapers, "The LORD be with you!"  And they answered, "The LORD bless you."

In the Vulgate, I found an-other instance of a feature I've noted a few other times.  As usual, the prepositional phrase "cum vobis" ("with you") is inverted and condensed into one word (vobiscum).  Because this immediately follows "Dominus," the words for "the LORD" and "you" are directly next to each other, lending a slightly greater sense of this accompaniment.

Psalm 1:2

Months ago, I watched the Worship Anew program for 16 February (Sixth Sunday after Epiphany).  The Psalm was Psalm 1, and in verse 2, I found the same sort of feature that I'd previously noticed in Psalm 145:5:  the object of the man's meditation comes first in the clause, and to some degree, this placement illustrates its importance for him:

But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.  [ESV]

This structure is also in the Hebrew:

כִּי אִם בְּתוֹרַת יְהוָה חֶפְצוֹ וּֽבְתוֹרָתוֹ יֶהְגֶּה יוֹמָם וָלָֽיְלָה׃

and the Latin Vulgate:

sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte

I'd previously noticed (but didn't think it significant enough to note on its own) that "day and night" is a temporal merism.

Luke 6:17

When I watched the Concordia University Wisconsin chapel service from 18 February, I found the same feature that I'd noticed in the reading from Luke 5 the previous week.

The reading for this service was Luke 6:17-26.  I was following along in the Vulgate, where verse 17 is:

Et descendens cum illis stetit in loco campestri et turba discipulorum eius et multitudo copiosa plebis ab omni Iudaea et Hierusalem et maritimae Tyri et Sidonis

In the ESV, this is:

And he [Jesus] came down with them and stood on a level place, with a great crowd of his disciples and a great multitude of people from all Judea and Jerusalem and the seacoast of Tyre and Sidon

In the Latin, the phrase "multitudo copiosa" (translated as "a great multitude" in the ESV) is redundant (something like "an abundant multitude"), but this redundancy lends a greater sense of the large number of people.

Again like Luke 5:6, the phrase alliterates in Greek (πλῆθος πολὺ), and the repetition involved also suggests a great quantity.  Here's the full verse:

καὶ καταβὰς μετ᾽ αὐτῶν ἔστη ἐπὶ τόπου πεδινοῦ. καὶ ὄχλος πολὺς μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ καὶ πλῆθος πολὺ τοῦ λαοῦ ἀπὸ πάσης τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ Ἱερουσαλὴμ καὶ τῆς παραλίου Τύρου καὶ Σειδῶνος

John 12:6

Months ago, I watched the Daily Dose of Latin video on John 12:6:

dixit autem hoc non quia de egenis pertinebat ad eum sed quia fur erat et loculos habens ea quae mittebantur portabat

In the ESV, this is:

He [Judas Iscariot] said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it.

Where the ESV has "not because he cared about the poor," the Latin has "non quia de egenis pertinebat ad eum."  This is something like:  "not because about the destitute, it pertained to him."  The Greek text is comparable:

εἶπεν δὲ τοῦτο οὐχ ὅτι περὶ τῶν πτωχῶν ἔμελεν αὐτῷ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι κλέπτης ἦν καὶ τὸ γλωσσόκομον ἔχων τὰ βαλλόμενα ἐβάσταζεν.

Like the Latin pertinēre, the Greek verb μέλω is impersonal.  I'm not sure if a native speaker of either of these languages would take it this way, but it seems to me that this sort of construction (where Judas isn't the subject of the verb) lends a greater sense of the distance between him and the poor.  Even grammatically, there's less of a relationship between them.

Ruth 1:21

A few months ago, I watched the two Daily Dose of Aramaic videos on Targum Ruth 1:21:

I was following in the Latin Vulgate and noticed a feature specific to that translation:

Egressa sum plena et vacuam reduxit me Dominus cur igitur vocatis me Noemi quam humiliavit Dominus et adflixit Omnipotens

In the ESV, this is:

"I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty.  Why call me Naomi, when the LORD has testified against me and the Almighty has brought calamity upon me?"

In the Vulgate, there's a chiasm that highlights the opposites "went away" and "brought back" ("egressa sum" and "reduxit") and "full" and "empty" ("plena" and "vacuam"):

Egressa sum

plena et

vacuam

reduxit me Dominus

Following this word order, an English translation of this section of the verse would be something like:  "I went away full, and empty brought me back the LORD."

Luke 5:6

A few months ago, I watched the Concordia University Wisconsin chapel service from 11 February:

The reading was Luke 5:1-11, and while following along in the Vulgate, I noticed a small feature in verse 6:

et cum hoc fecissent concluserunt piscium multitudinem copiosam rumpebatur autem rete eorum

In the ESV, this is:

And when they had done this, they enclosed a large number of fish, and their nets were breaking.

The phrase "multitudinem copiosam" is redundant (something like "an abundant multitude"), but this redundancy does heighten the sense of this large amount.

This feature is also present in the Greek:

καὶ τοῦτο ποιήσαντες συνέκλεισαν πλῆθος ἰχθύων πολύ· διερρήσσετο δὲ τὰ δίκτυα αὐτῶν.

Additionally, the words πλῆθος (multitude) and πολύ (much) alliterate.  To a small degree, the repetition in this alliteration contributes to this sense of abundance even further.

Proverbs 15:9

When I read Proverbs 15:9 in the ESV a few months ago, I found yet an-other chiastic structure, although the elements are a bit more loosely equated:

The way of the wicked

Is an abomination to the LORD,

but he loves

him who pursues righteousness.

Like other chiasms I've found, this one highlights contrasts:  "the way of the wicked" with "him who pursues righteousness" and "an abomination to the LORD" with "he loves."

This structure is in the Hebrew, too, but in the opposite order:

תּוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה דֶּרֶךְ רָשָׁע וּמְרַדֵּף צְדָקָה יֶאֱהָֽב׃

It's more like "An abomination to the LORD is the way of the wicked, but him who pursues righteousness he loves."  The Latin Vulgate follows roughly the same word order:

abominatio est Domino

via impii

qui sequitur iustitiam

diligetur ab eo

2 Kings 2:12

A few months ago, I read 2 Kings 2 in the NIV, where Elijah is taken up to Heaven in a whirlwind after a chariot and horses of fire separate him from Elisha.  Elisha sees Elijah taken up and says (in verse 12), "My father!  My father!  The chariots and horsemen of Israel!"  I think it may be significant that Elisha says, "My father!" twice.  Before Elijah is taken, Elisha makes a request of him:  "Let me inherit a double portion of your spirit" (verse 9), and Elijah replies, "If you see me when I am taken from you, it will be yours" (verse 10).  Because Elisha's repeated "My father!" coincides with his seeing this event, it seems to indicate his inheriting this double portion as it occurs.  (Verse 15 makes it clear that Elisha does receive it:  "The company of the prophets from Jericho, who were watching, said, 'The spirit of Elijah is resting on Elisha.'")