Exegesis:

hai akoai (cf. 1.28) ‘the ears,’ i.e. the organs of hearing.

ēnoigēsan (only here in Mark) ‘they were opened’ (cf. dianoigō in previous verse).

eluthē ho desmos tēs glōssēs autou ‘the bond of his tongue was loosed.’

luō (cf. 1.7) ‘loose,’ ‘unbind.’

desmos (only here in Mark) ‘bond,’ ‘hindrance,’ ‘fetter.’ Deissmann suggests that these words indicate that the man was possessed of a demon (cf. Lk. 13.16).

kai elalei orthōs ‘and he was speaking clearly,’ ‘he began to speak plainly.’

orthōs (only here in Mark) ‘clearly,’ ‘normally,’ ‘correctly.’

Translation:

The ears must be the inner ear, not the outer ear (many languages make such a distinction, e.g. Spanish oidos vs. orejas).

Where languages cannot speak of the ‘ears being opened,’ it is still possible to say ‘he could hear with his ears’ or ‘he could hear.’

“Loosing the tongue” seems to us to be quite a universal kind of idiom, but in some languages it is meaningless, for there is obviously no actual cord binding toe tongue. In San Mateo del Mar Huave, therefore, one must say ‘his tongue was softened,’ in the sense of made pliable; in Toraja-Sa’dan it is said ‘his tongue became supple, mobile.’ In other languages one may say ‘healed what kept his tongue from moving,’ and in this way describe the cure.

Spoke plainly introduces a problem in languages which specify whether a particular action represents a new process (something not done previously by the person), or a return to a previous state. This means that one must decide whether the man had ever spoken plainly before. There is no evidence in the Greek text one way or the other. The fact that the man spoke at all would seem to imply that he had not always been deaf (or at least not completely so). Accordingly, it is probably preferable to assume the restoration of ability to speak, rather than miraculous ability to speak after total congenital deafness. On the other hand, the impediment in speech could have been congenital, while the deafness, whether partial or complete, could have come on later in life. One must, of course, make a decision in languages which require certain arbitrary categories expressed, but in making a choice between alternative forms it is well to be on the conservative side, in terms of the extent of the miracle of healing. This does not imply any lessening of the fact of the miracle, only a caution in overdoing what is implied in the originals.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .