The Hebrew and the Greek that are translated in English versions as “prophesy” are translated into Anuak as “sing a song” (source: Loren Bliese), into Balanta-Kentohe as “passing on message of God” (source: Rob Koops), and into Ixcatlán Mazatec with a term that does not only refer to the future, but is “speak on behalf of God” (source: Robert Bascom).
Other translations include: “God making someone to show something in advance” (Ojitlán Chinantec), “God causing someone to think and then say it” (Aguaruna), “speaking God’s thoughts” (Shipibo-Conibo), “God made someone say something” “Xicotepec De Juárez Totonac) (source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125), “proclaim God’s message” (Teutila Cuicatec), “speak for God” (Chichimeca-Jonaz), “preach the Word of God” (Lalana Chinantec), “speak God’s words” (Tepeuxila Cuicatec), “that which God’s Spirit will cause one to say one will say” (Mayo) (source for this and four above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.), “say what God wants people to hear” (tell people God wod dat e gii oona fa say) (Gullah) (source: Robert Bascom), and “bring God’s mouth” (Bariai) (source: Bariai Back Translation).
In Luang it is translated with different shades of meaning:
For Acts 3:18, 3:21, 3:25: nurwowohora — “mouth says words that don’t come from one’s own mind.” (“This term refers to an individual’s speaking words that are not his because either a good or bad spirit is at work through him. The speaker is not in control of himself.”)
For Acts 19:6, Acts 21:9: nakotnohora — “talk about.” (“The focus of this term is on telling God’s message for the present as opposed to the future.”)
For Acts 21:11: rora — “foretell” (“The focus of this term is giving God’s message concerning the future. The person who speaks is aware of what he is doing and he is using his own mind, yet it is with God’s power that he foretells the future.”)
Source: Kathy Taber in Notes on Translation 1/1999, p. 9-16.
The Greek that is translated as “blindfold” in English cannot be translated in some languages without specifying the object that the blindfolding is done with. In Quetzaltepec Mixe it says “blindfold him with a cloth.”
Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 22:64:
Noongar: “They covered Jesus’ eyes and asked, ‘Who hit you? Guess!'” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “They wrapped/covered his face so that he could not see, and they asked him: ‘Ee prophet! Try to say who is slapping you (sing.)!'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “They blindfolded his face and they slapped him and asked him saying, ‘Guess, who was it that slapped you?'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And as for those people who were watching Jesus, they treated him shamefully. They tied something around his eyes and they hit him with their fists, and they said, ‘As for you, you prophet, prophesy as to who hit you.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “They also covered his eyes, then they said, ‘All-right now, guess who boxed you (sing.).'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “They covered his face and kept on asking, ‘Guess/prophesy! Who was it who hurt you?'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
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 choice of a second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used anata (あなた) is typically used when the speaker is humbly addressing another person.
In these verses, however, omae (おまえ) is used, a cruder second person pronoun, that Jesus for instance chooses when chiding his disciples. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Barclay Newman, a translator on the teams for both the Good News Bible and the Contemporary English Version, translated passages of the New Testament into English and published them in 2014, “in a publication brief enough to be non-threatening, yet long enough to be taken seriously, and interesting enough to appeal to believers and un-believers alike.” The following is the translation of Luke 22:54-65:
Peter kept his distance after Jesus was arrested
and led away to the house of the high priest.
Some people were sitting around a fire
in the courtyard of the house, and Peter joined them.
“This man was with Jesus!” blurted out a servant girl.
“I don’t even know the guy!” insisted Peter.
“You’re one of them!” someone said with a smirk.
“Not me!” denied Peter.
An hour or so later, another man swore,
“This man was with Jesus—they’re both from Galilee.”
“I don’t know what you’re talking about!”
came Peter’s denial.
At that very moment, while Peter was still speaking,
he heard the sound of a rooster crowing.
The Lord looked in Peter’s direction,
and Peter remembered those solemn words,
“Before a rooster crows tomorrow morning,
you’ll say three times you don’t even know me.”
Peter left and wept bitterly.
Meanwhile, the guards insulted and struck Jesus.
They put a blindfold on him and sneered as they said,
“Tell us who hit you?”
And this was not the worst they did to him.
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
For a correct understanding of these verses it should be noted that the mocking and beating related in v. 63 are understood to be going on in v. 64. The latter represents as it were one specific moment in the events related in v. 63.
hoi andres hoi sunechontes auton ‘the men were holding him in custody.’
sunechō ‘to hold in custody,’ ‘to guard.’
enepaizon autō derontes lit. ‘mocked him beating (him)’ with auton understood. derontes (cf. on 12.47) may refer to the same act as enepaizon (cf. Phillips), or to a separate act (cf. Revised Standard Version), preferably the latter.
(V. 64) kai perikalupsantes auton epērōtōn legontes ‘and after blindfolding him they asked him.’ epērōtōn in the imperfect tense may be iterative.
perikaluptō ‘to cover,’ ‘to conceal,’ here with personal object, ‘to blindfold,’ probably with a cloth.
prophēteuson, tis estin ho paisas se ‘prophesy, who is it that struck you?.’ For prophēteuō cf. on 1.67. Here it may be used in an ironical sense (‘Play the prophet! Who is it…,’ Bible de Jérusalem, cf. New English Bible) or in a less specific meaning, viz, ‘to tell what one cannot see,’ preferably the former.
paiō ‘to strike,’ ‘to hit.’
Translation:
For mocked him see on 14.29, for beat him, i.e. struck him repeatedly, probably with fist or stick.
(V. 64) Blindfolded him, or ‘covered his face/eyes/head.’
Prophesy. Where an ironical use of the verb or the cognate noun (see on 1.67, 70) is undesirable one may shift to a more generic term, cf. “guess” (Good News Translation, similarly Shona 1966, Colloquial Japanese), ‘make known’ (Toraja-Sa’dan, Trukese). Phillips combines the two solutions, “Now, prophet, guess who…”.
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.