OET interlinear 1COR 9:9

uW Translation Notes:

Note 1 topic: writing-quotations

ἐν γὰρ τῷ Μωϋσέως νόμῳ, γέγραπται

in for the ˱of˲_Moses law ˱it˲_/has_been/_written

In Paul’s culture, For it is written is a normal way to introduce a quotation from an important text. In this case, Paul clarifies that the quote comes from the law of Moses. It is specifically from Deuteronomy 25:4. If it would be helpful in your language, you could express how Paul introduces the quotation with a comparable phrase that indicates that Paul is quoting from an important text. Alternate translation: [For it can be read in the law of Moses] or [For in the book of Deuteronomy, in the law of Moses we read]

Note 2 topic: figures-of-speech / activepassive

ἐν & τῷ Μωϋσέως νόμῳ, γέγραπται

in & the ˱of˲_Moses law ˱it˲_/has_been/_written

If your language does not use the passive form in this way, you can express the idea in active form or in another way that is natural in your language. Paul uses the passive form here to focus on what is written rather than focusing on the person doing the “writing.” If you must state who does the action, you can express it so that: (1) the scripture author writes or speaks the words. Alternate translation: [Moses has written in the law] (2) God speaks the words. Alternate translation: [God has said in the law of Moses]

Note 3 topic: figures-of-speech / quotations

Μωϋσέως & οὐ φιμώσεις βοῦν ἀλοῶντα

˱of˲_Moses & not /will_be/_muzzling /an/_ox threshing

If your language does not use this form, you can translate the command as an indirect quote instead of as a direct quote. Alternate translation: [of Moses that you should not muzzle an ox treading out grain]

Note 4 topic: figures-of-speech / yousingular

οὐ φιμώσεις

not /will_be/_muzzling

The command from the law of Moses is addressed to specific individuals. Because of this, the command is in the singular.

Note 5 topic: translate-unknown

οὐ φιμώσεις βοῦν ἀλοῶντα

not /will_be/_muzzling /an/_ox threshing

In Paul’s culture, farmers often would make oxen walk or “tread” on harvested wheat to separate the kernels of grain from the wheat stalks. Some people would muzzle an ox while it is treading out grain in order to keep the ox from eating the grain. The point of the command is that the ox should be allowed to eat what it is working to produce: the grain. If your readers would not understand what this command is about, you could include a footnote explaining the context or add a short clarifying phrase. Alternate translation: [Do not muzzle an ox to keep it from eating the grain it is treading out]

Note 6 topic: figures-of-speech / rquestion

μὴ τῶν βοῶν μέλει τῷ Θεῷ?

not ˱for˲_the oxen /is/_caring ¬the ˱with˲_God

Paul does not ask this question because he is looking for information. Rather, he asks it to involve the Corinthians in what he is arguing. The question assumes that the answer is “no, he does not.” If it would be helpful in your language, you could express the idea behind this question with a strong negation. Alternate translation: [God does not care about the oxen.]

Note 7 topic: figures-of-speech / hyperbole

μὴ τῶν βοῶν μέλει τῷ Θεῷ?

not ˱for˲_the oxen /is/_caring ¬the ˱with˲_God

Here Paul speaks as if God has no concern or interest in oxen. The Corinthians would have understood him to mean that the primary intent of the command he quotes is not about caring for oxen but rather caring for something or someone else. He specifies what the primary intent of the command is in the next verse: it is for our sake (9:9). If it would be helpful in your language, you could soften Paul’s question so that it argues that the command is not “primarily” or “mostly” about oxen. If possible, however, maintain the strength of Paul’s statement, since he offers an explanation in the next verse. Alternate translation: [God does not mostly care about the oxen, does he]