priest

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that are typically translated as “priest” in English (itself deriving from Latin “presbyter” — “elder”) is often translated with a consideration of existing religious traditions. (Click or tap for details)

Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this:

“However, rather than borrow local names for priests, some of which have unwanted connotations, a number of translations have employed descriptive phrases based on certain functions: (1) those describing a ceremonial activity: Pamona uses tadu, the priestess who recites the litanies in which she describes her journey to the upper or under-world to fetch life-spirit for sick people, animals or plants; Batak Toba uses the Arabic malim, ‘Muslim religious teacher;’ ‘one who presents man’s sacrifice to God’ (Bambara, Eastern Maninkakan), ‘one who presents sacrifices’ (Baoulé, Navajo (Dinė)), ‘one who takes the name of the sacrifice’ (Kpelle, and ‘to make a sacrifice go out’ (Hausa); (2) those describing an intermediary function: ‘one who speaks to God’ (Shipibo-Conibo) and ‘spokesman of the people before God’ (Tabasco Chontal).”

In Obolo it is translated as ogwu ngwugwa or “the one who offers sacrifice” (source: Enene Enene), in Mairasi as agam aevar nevwerai: “religious leader” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Ignaciano as “blesser, one who does ritual as a practice” (using a generic term rather than the otherwise common Spanish loan word sacerdote) (source: Willis Ott in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.), and in Noongar as yakin-kooranyi or “holy worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

For Guhu-Samane, Ernest Richert (in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. ) reports this: “The [local] cult of Poro used to be an all-encompassing religious system that essentially governed all areas of life. (…) For ‘priest’ the term ‘poro father’ would at first seem to be a natural choice. However, several priests of the old cult are still living. Although they no longer function primarily as priests of the old system they still have a substantial influence on the community, and there would be more than a chance that the unqualified term would (in some contexts particularly) be equated with the priest of the poro cult. We learned, then, that the poro fathers would sometimes be called ‘knife men’ in relation to their sacrificial work. The panel was pleased to apply this term to the Jewish priest, and the Christian community has adopted it fully. [Mark 1:44, for instance, now] reads: ‘You must definitely not tell any man of this. But you go show your body to the knife man and do what Moses said about a sacrifice concerning your being healed, and the cause (base of this) will be apparent.'”

For a revision of the 1968 version of the Bible in Khmer Joseph Hong (in: The Bible Translator 1996, 233ff. ) talks about a change in wording for this term:

​​Bau cha r (បូជា‌ចារ្យ) — The use of this new construction meaning “priest” is maintained to translate the Greek word hiereus. The term “mean sang (មាន សង្ឃ)” used in the old version actually means a “Buddhist monk,” and is felt to be theologically misleading. The Khmer considers the Buddhist monk as a “paddy field of merits,” a reserve of merits to be shared with other people. So a Khmer reader would find unthinkable that the mean sang in the Bible killed animals, the gravest sin for a Buddhist; and what a scandal it would be to say that a mean sang was married, had children, and drank wine.

See also idolatrous priests.

complete verse (Joshua 4:3)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Joshua 4:3:

  • Kupsabiny: “‘Tell those twelve men who have been chosen from the twelve clans of Israel to each one pick a stone from the middle of the river Jordan where the priests are standing. Then, let (them) bring (them) and arrange (them) where your are going to sleep tonight in tents.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “Then order them to take twelve stones from the place where the priests were standing in the middle of the Jordan river and bring [them here]. Tell them to carry those stones with you and bring them along to the place where [you] will take shelter tonight."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “and command them that each/every one of them to-take one stone from the middle of the river, there in-the-same-place where- the priests -are-standing. Then they are-to-bring this to the place where you (plur.) are going-to-stay tonight.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Tell them to carry the stones with you and put them down at the place where you will stay tonight.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)

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 Joshua 4:2 - 4:3

The verbs choose and command in Hebrew are plural, as in 3.12 where Joshua speaks to the people, and not singular; the Traduction œcuménique de la Bible footnote suggests that originally the order was given to the leaders, not just to Joshua alone. English versions do not reflect this difference between singular and plural imperative forms. Choose twelve men, one from each tribe may be rendered “Choose one man from each of the twelve tribes of Israel.” The twelve men, representatives of the twelve tribes, are to take one stone each from the Jordan, from the very place where the priests were standing, and take them to the place where the people will spend the first night on the west side of the river.It should be noted that in the Masoretic text hakin in verse 3 is to be parsed as the hiphil infinitive of the verb k-w-n “to stand”; Soggin calls it “a curious form” and says it makes no sense here; but there are other explanations. New English Bible treats it as having the same meaning as haken in 3.17, “stood firmly.”

Command them to take twelve stones could possibly be ambiguous, suggesting that each of the men was to take twelve stones. To avoid this ambiguity one may render “Command them each to take a stone.” For some languages it may be necessary to include a verb of motion, which may involve a slight reordering of the command: “command them to go to the place where the priests were standing in the middle of the Jordan River. Tell each of them to take a stone from there and carry it to the place where you will camp tonight.” In this restructuring, put them down is left implicit, but in some languages this aspect of the command may also need to be stated explicitly.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .