bread, loaf

The Greek term that is translated in English as “bread” or “loaf” is translated in Samo, it is translated as “Sago,” which serves “like ‘bread’ for the Hebrews, as a generic for food in the Samo language. It is a near-perfect metonymy that has all the semantic elements necessary for effective communication.” (Source: Daniel Shaw in Scriptura 96/2007, p. 501ff.)

In Chol it is translated as waj, the equivalent of a tortilla. (Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight)

John Beekman (in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 180f. ) explains: “The word ‘bread’ in Scripture primarily occurs as either a specific term for bread (including the Lord’s Supper), or as a generic term for food. It is not surprising, however, the some aboriginal groups use something other than bread as the staff of life. The Chols, with their cultural focus in the cultivation of corn, use waj, a type of thin corn flake. Since a meal is not complete without this main item of food, the term has been extended to include any other foods which may be served along with waj. While bread is known to them, its use is limited to a few occasions during the year when it functions as a dessert. In translating this term in the Chol New Testament, consistent use has been made of the word waj whenever the function of bread as a basic food was in focus. John 6:35, “I am the bread of life,” was thus translated with this word. If the word for bread had been used, it was feared that the Chol would compare Christ to the desirable, but not absolutely necessary, dessert.”

Robert Bascom adds his thoughts to this in relation to other Mayan languages (in Omanson 2001, p. 260): “In many Mayan languages, ‘bread’ can be translated waj or kaxlan waj. The first term literally means anything made from corn meal, while the second term literally means ‘foreigner’s waj,’ and refers to the local wheat-based sweet breads which are so popular within the broader European-influenced culture of the region. On the one hand, waj would be a better dynamic equivalent in cases where ‘bread’ meant ‘food,’ but in cases where the focus is literal or the reference well-known, kaxlan waj would preserve a flour-based meaning (though in biblical times barley was more in use than wheat) and not insert corn into a time and place where it does not belong. On the other hand kaxlan waj is not the staff of life, but refers to a local delicacy. In cases such as these, it is even tempting to suggest borrowing pan, the Spanish word for ‘bread,’ but native speakers might respond that borrowing a foreign word is not necessary since both waj and kaxlan waj are native terms that cover the meaning (though in this case, perhaps not all that well).”

In Mairasi it is translated bread tubers. Tubers are the main food staple and are therefore synonymous with food. (Source: Enggavoter 2004). In Yagaria, Kâteand Yabem it is translated as “taro cake.” (Source: Renck, p. 101)

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Matt. 16:7 / Mark 8:16)

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, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the disciples talking with each other).

Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.

complete verse (Matthew 16:7)

Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 16:7:

  • Uma: “But they did not know the meaning of that figure-of-speech, they began talking among themselves, they said: ‘The reason he said like that is because we (incl.) did not remember to bring bread.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “His disciples talked about what he had said because they did not understand. They said, ‘Perhaps he spoke like that, because we did not bring any bread.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And they did not understand that it was not the yeast of bread he was talking about, so they talked with each other saying, ‘The reason he said this is because we didn’t bring any bread.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Upon his saying that, they talked-together saying, ‘Jesus said that, because we have no bread for take-along-lunch.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “When the disciples heard that, they said-among-themselves, ‘He spoke like that because we don’t have any bread with us.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “The learners said to each other: ‘It must be that he said that to us because we didn’t bring any bread to eat.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Matthew 16:7

And they: it may be useful to identify they as “The disciples” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), since the last group of persons mentioned were “the Pharisees and Sadducees” of verse 6.

Discussed (Good News Translation “started discussing”) translates a verb which may mean “consider” or “reason (out something),” while the phrase among themselves may also mean “inwardly.”

What the disciples began discussing, represented by the pronoun it, may need to be made more definite. Translators can say “discussing what Jesus had said” or “… these words.”

We brought no bread will strike many readers as completely senseless, unless there is further qualification, and some translations indicate an awareness of the difficulty: “He says this because we didn’t bring any bread” (Good News Translation), “It is because we have not brought any bread” (New Jerusalem Bible), and “It is because we have brought no bread” (New English Bible). Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch overcomes the problem by shifting to indirect discourse: “The disciples took this to refer to their forgetfulness.” Barclay also effectively utilizes indirect discourse: “They kept on talking among themselves about bringing no loaves.” In Moffatt the whole of verse 7 is translated “They argued among themselves, ‘But we have not brought any bread!’ ”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1988. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .