inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Isa 41:26)

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 exclusive pronoun.

righteous, righteousness

Click here to view graphically

The Greek, Hebrew, and Latin terms that are translated in English mostly as “righteous” as an adjective or personified noun or “righteousness” (also as “upright(ness)” and “just(ice)”) are most commonly expressed with concept of “straightness,” though this may be expressed in a number of ways. (Click or tap here to see the details)

Following is a list of (back-) translations of various languages:

  • Bambara, Southern Bobo Madaré, Chokwe (ululi), Amganad Ifugao, Chol, Eastern Maninkakan, Toraja-Sa’dan, Pamona, Batak Toba, Bilua, Tiv: “be straight”
  • Laka: “follow the straight way” or “to straight-straight” (a reduplicated form for emphasis)
  • Sayula Popoluca: “walk straight”
  • Highland Puebla Nahuatl, Kekchí, Muna: “have a straight heart”
  • Kipsigis: “do the truth”
  • Mezquital Otomi: “do according to the truth”
  • Huautla Mazatec: “have truth”
  • Yine: “fulfill what one should do”
  • Indonesian: “be true”
  • Navajo (Dinė): “do just so”
  • Anuak: “do as it should be”
  • Mossi: “have a white stomach” (see also happiness / joy)
  • Paasaal: “white heart” (source: Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)
  • (San Mateo del Mar Huave: “completely good” (the translation does not imply sinless perfection)
  • Nuer: “way of right” (“there is a complex concept of “right” vs. ‘left’ in Nuer where ‘right’ indicates that which is masculine, strong, good, and moral, and ‘left’ denotes what is feminine, weak, and sinful (a strictly masculine viewpoint!) The ‘way of right’ is therefore righteousness, but of course women may also attain this way, for the opposition is more classificatory than descriptive.”) (This and all above from Bratcher / Nida except for Bilua: Carl Gross; Tiv: Rob Koops; Muna: René van den Berg)
  • Central Subanen: “wise-good” (source: Robert Brichoux in OPTAT 1988/2, p. 80ff. )
  • Xicotepec De Juárez Totonac: “live well”
  • Mezquital Otomi: “goodness before the face of God” (source for this and one above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
  • Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl: “the result of heart-straightening” (source: Nida 1947, p. 224)
  • Eastern Highland Otomi: “entirely good” (when referred to God), “do good” or “not be a debtor as God sees one” (when referred to people)
  • Carib: “level”
  • Tzotzil: “straight-hearted”
  • Ojitlán Chinantec: “right and straight”
  • Yatzachi Zapotec: “walk straight” (source for this and four previous: John Beekman in Notes on Translation November 1964, p. 1-22)
  • Makonde: “doing what God wants” (in a context of us doing) and “be good in God’s eyes” (in the context of being made righteous by God) (note that justify / justification is translated as “to be made good in the eyes of God.” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
  • Aari: The Pauline word for “righteous” is generally rendered by “makes one without sin” in the Aari, sometimes “before God” is added for clarity. (Source: Loren Bliese)
  • North Alaskan Inupiatun: “having sin taken away” (Source: Nida 1952, p. 144)
  • Nyamwezi: wa lole: “just” or “someone who follows the law of God” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Venda: “nothing wrong, OK” (Source: J.A. van Roy in The Bible Translator 1972, p. 418ff. )
  • Ekari: maakodo bokouto or “enormous truth” (the same word that is also used for “truth“; bokouto — “enormous” — is being used as an attribute for abstract nouns to denote that they are of God [see also here]; source: Marion Doble in The Bible Translator 1963, p. 37ff. ).
  • Guhu-Samane: pobi or “right” (also: “right (side),” “(legal) right,” “straightness,” “correction,” “south,” “possession,” “pertinence,” “kingdom,” “fame,” “information,” or “speech” — “According to [Guhu-Samane] thinking there is a common core of meaning among all these glosses. Even from an English point of view the first five can be seen to be closely related, simply because of their similarity in English. However, from that point the nuances of meaning are not so apparent. They relate in some such a fashion as this: As one faces the morning sun, south lies to the right hand (as north lies to the left); then at one’s right hand are his possessions and whatever pertains to him; thus, a rich man’s many possessions and scope of power and influence is his kingdom; so, the rich and other important people encounter fame; and all of this spreads as information and forms most of the framework of the people’s speech.”) (Source: Ernest Richert in Notes on Translation 1964, p. 11ff.)
  • German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999): Gerechtheit, a neologism to differentiate it from the commonly-used Gerechtigkeit which can mean “righteousness” but is more often used in modern German as “fairness” (Berger / Nord especially use Gerechtheit in Letter to the Romans) or Gerechtestun, also a neologism, meaning “righteous deeds” (especially in Letter to the Ephesians)
  • “did what he should” (Eastern Highland Otomi)
  • “a clear man, good [man]” (Mairasi) (source: Enggavoter 2004)

See also respectable, righteous, righteous (person), devout, and She is more in the right(eous) than I.

complete verse (Isaiah 41:26)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 41:26:

  • Kupsabiny: “Which idol has shown these things beforehand
    so it can be said that he speaks the truth.
    No one has shown it beforehand
    and those words have not been heard.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “Which of your gods has shown this from the beginning and made it possible for us to know?
    Who has shown this from the beginning and made it possible for us to say that it was right?
    No one has told us of this matter,
    No one has spoken a single word to us before.
    No one has heard the words that you spoke.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Who among you (plur.) have-told in the time-past that this will-happen so-that we (excl.) can-know and can-say that he is right? No one ever have-told you (plur.), and no one have-heard that you (plur.) said-something.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)

formal 2nd person plural pronoun (Japanese)

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 choice of a formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on Isaiah 41:26

Who declared it from the beginning, that we might know…?: The interrogative pronoun Who introduces two rhetorical questions here. This is the first one. In both questions Yahweh challenges the gods of the nations to say which of them in the past had predicted Cyrus’ military victories. The pronoun it refers to these victories mentioned in the previous verse. From the beginning refers to the distant past (see the comments on 40.21). That we might know repeats the phrase found in verses 22-23. The sense here is that if the gods had announced Cyrus’ rise to power long ago, then everyone would have known about it beforehand. Good News Translation has a valid rendering for this whole line, saying “Which of you predicted that this would happen.” Good News Translation leaves that we might know implied. It also refers to the gods in the second person even though the Hebrew text does not do it until the last line of this verse with the pronoun your. Hebrew poetry often switches between second and third person for the same referent, but other languages may prefer to use second person for the gods throughout this verse, as in Good News Translation (see also the first example below).

And beforetime, that we might say, “He is right”: This question is parallel to the first one. Who declared it is implied here. Translators may repeat it for clarity. Beforetime is an archaic way in English of saying “in advance.” New International Version and Revised English Bible have “beforehand.” Good News Translation combines it with the previous line. That we might say, “He is right” means that if a god had predicted Cyrus’ victories, then everyone would admit he was right when they occurred. Say may be rendered “admit.” The Hebrew word rendered He is right comes from a root that usually means “just” or “righteous.” The word translated “victory” in verse 2 comes from the same root (see the comments there). Here it means “correct.” The direct speech in this question may be rendered indirectly as follows: “Who announced it so that we might admit that he was right?”

Bible en français courant provides a helpful model for the first two lines of this verse, saying “Who, then, announced this event in advance, so that we might know about it? Who predicted it, so that we might say: ‘He was right’?”

There was none who declared it, none who proclaimed, none who heard your words: This is Yahweh’s answer to the two questions. The three synonymous clauses in this answer have a similar form in Hebrew: ʾap (conjunction meaning “also”; see verse 10) + ʾayin (negative particle; see verse 11) + participle. The repetition of this form three times emphasizes what Yahweh is saying. Not one of the gods had ever predicted the rise of Cyrus. In translation the emphasis can be made by repeating a word such as “none” or “nobody” as well as by presenting the text in a format that draws attention to each clause (see the examples below). Bible en français courant ends the verse as follows: “None among you, that is certain, was capable of doing it; no one has heard you say anything.”

Translation examples for this verse are:

• Which of you announced in the past these events
that we might know about them?
Which of you told of it before
that we might be able to admit you were right?
Not one of you announced it.
Not one of you told of it.
Not one of you was heard to speak of it.

• Who among you announced long ago these events,
so that we might have known about them?
Who among you told of it before,
so that we might be able to say, ‘Yes, he was correct’?
No one announced it.
No one told of it.
No one was heard to speak of it.

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 .