Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the inclusive pronoun, including everyone.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Deuteronomy 3:8:
Kupsabiny: “So we took to ourselves at that time the land of those two kings of the Amorites who lived on the east side of river Jordan in between the river of Arnon and Mount Hermon.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “At that time we took from the hands of these two Amorite kings, the land east of the Jordan from the Arnon river gorge up to Mount Herman” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “‘So we (incl.) captured from the two kings of the Amornon the land in the east of the River Jordan from Arnon the channel/water-course/place-where-the -water -flows until Mount Hermon.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “‘o at that time we took from those two kings of the Amor people-group all the land east of the Jordan River, from the Arnon River gorge in the south to Hermon Mountain in the north.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))
Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:
“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”
This verse summarizes the two campaigns against Sihon and Og.
The Amorites is the general term used of the inhabitants of the land. See 1.27.
Beyond the Jordan: that is, on the east side of the river, the other side from the point of view of the writer in Israel.
The valley of the Arnon: see 2.24.
Mount Hermon: at the northern end of the land, near the Syrian border.
Contemporary English Version has a helpful model for this verse:
• Sihon and Og had ruled Amorite kingdoms east of the Jordan River. Their land stretched from the Arnon gorge in the south to Mount Hermon in the north, and we captured it all.
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Deuteronomy. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2000. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.