The Hebrew, Greek, and Latin that is translated as “soul” in English is translated in Chol with a term that refers to the invisible aspects of human beings (source: Robert Bascom), in Yagaria with oune or “shadow, reflection” (source: Renck, p. 81), and in Elhomwe as “heart” (source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext).
The Mandarin Chineselínghún (靈魂 / 灵魂), literally “spirit-soul,” is often used for “soul” (along with xīn [心] or “heart”). This is a term that was adopted from Buddhist sources into early Catholic writings and later also by Protestant translators. (Source: Zetzsche 1996, p. 32, see also Clara Ho-yan Chan in this article )
In Chichewa, moyo means both “soul” and “life.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 38:15:
Kupsabiny: “Now what shall I still say? You alone have done this. All my sleep died from me because of the pain I have.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “But now, what can I say? He has talked with me and he has done like this, by reason of the anxiety for my life I will be humble until the end of my life.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “But what can I still say? For he already answered me and he himself is the one who healed me. I will-live in humbleness because of the bitterness that I experienced.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “But there was really nothing that I could say and ask him to reply to me, because it was Yahweh who sent this illness. So now I will live humbly during my remaining years because I am very anguished.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (祂) is used.”
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains in the following way: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, okonaw-are-ru (行われる) or “do/perform” is used.
This verse contains several textual problems that make understanding and translating it difficult.
But what can I say?: This rhetorical question may be rendered as an emphatic statement by saying “I have nothing at all to say.”
For he has spoken to me, and he himself has done it: The pronoun he refers to Yahweh. There is a textual problem with the clause For he has spoken to me, which is literally “and he has spoken to me.” This is the reading in Masoretic Text, but Dead Sea Scrolls has “and I will say to him.” The Septuagint omits this clause (so Good News Translation). Hebrew Old Testament Text Project and de~Waard support Masoretic Text here. De~Waard recommends New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh’s rendering, which is “He promised me.” Another version that follows Masoretic Text is Bible en français courant (1997), which renders the first two lines as “But what will I say, for him to talk to me, since it is he who acts?” Some versions that follow the reading in Dead Sea Scrolls are Revised English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New American Bible. For the first two lines Revised English Bible has “How can I complain, what can I say to the LORD when he himself has done this?” and New Jerusalem Bible says “How can I speak and what can I say to him? He is the one to act.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch seems to combine both readings by saying “But how can I reach him at all through my words? He has done what he told me he would do.” It is evident that the versions handle the connectors in these two lines differently, depending on what text they follow. We prefer Masoretic Text here, but translators may follow Dead Sea Scrolls or the Septuagint. Whatever text they follow, it would be helpful to include the alternatives in a footnote.
All my sleep has fled because of the bitterness of my soul: There is also a textual problem with the clause All my sleep has fled (Good News Translation “I cannot sleep”). This is the reading in Dead Sea Scrolls, but Masoretic Text has “I will walk slowly all my years,” and the Septuagint omits it. Both Hebrew Old Testament Text Project and de~Waard recommend Masoretic Text here. According to de~Waard, this clause in Masoretic Text can have a positive or negative sense. New International Version expresses it positively by rendering the last two lines as “I will walk humbly all my years because of this anguish of my soul.” New Jerusalem Bible renders it negatively with “I must eke out the rest of my years in bitterness of soul,” and so does Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch with “In bitter anguish do I spend my years and I drag myself along step for step.” Translators may follow Masoretic Text or Dead Sea Scrolls here, but it would be helpful to include a footnote with the alternative.
Because of the bitterness of my soul is the reason for the previous statement. The Hebrew word for bitterness occurs again in verse 17. In this context it has the sense of “deep anguish,” even “resentment.” My soul is a common way of referring to one’s inner self in Hebrew (see 1.14).
Several translation examples for this verse are:
• What can I say? He has promised and done what he said [he would do].
Sleep is impossible for me because my life is bitter.
• But what can I say to him?
He himself is the one who did this to me.
With bitterness in my soul
I will have to drag myself along.
Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Sterk, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.