heir

In Highland Puebla Nahuatl there is no immediate equivalent for the Greek that is translated with the English term “heir.” So here an expression is used that means “someone who will receive the property (or: things).” (Source: Nida 1947, p. 200f.) Likewise, in Chimborazo Highland Quichua the translation is “those who receive what belongs to their father” (source: Julia Woodward in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 140ff. ) and in Sayula Popoluca “will receive all that God has for us” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.).

tenants (of a vineyard) / winegrower

The Greek that is translated as “tenants (of a vineyard)” or similar in English is translated in the Pfälzisch translation by Walter Sauer (publ. 2012) as Winzer and in Luxembourghish as Wënzer, both “winemaker (vintner).” The area were Pfälzisch and Luxembourghish are spoken are traditional wine making areas and this is the commonly used term.

The same term is also used in John 15:1 for (English) “winegrower.” (Source: Zetzsche)

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Matt. 21:38 / Mark 12:7 / Luke 20:14)

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 vine-growers to each other).

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

complete verse (Matthew 21:38)

Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 21:38:

  • Uma: “‘But in fact, when the workers in the field saw the child of the field owner, they made-plans, they said: ‘Here comes his child, he is the one who will become the owner of this field. Let’s kill him, so we will become the owners of this field.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “But when the caretakers of that garden saw the son, they planned, they said, ‘He hep is the heir. Come let us kill (him) so that we will get the garden.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “However, when the ones caring for the vineyard saw his son, they said, ‘Now, this is now his son. Come on, because we will kill him, and we will come to own this vineyard of his.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “‘But when those farmers saw that son of his, they said, ‘This is the heir (lit. inheritance owner) of this farm. Let’s kill him so that we will take his inheritance!'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Whereas when those ones he’d left in charge saw his son coming, they were saying, ‘Expletive, there is the heir! Come on. Let’s kill him, so that this ubas plantation which is his inheritance can be ours.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “But when the son of the field-owner arrived, the workers said among themselves: ‘This one is the son to whom the field will go. Let’s kill him now so that we will own the field,’ they said.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Matthew 21:38

But when the tenants saw the son may need to be translated “… saw the son coming” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). Said to themselves may wrongly imply silent thought rather than oral conversation. “Said one to another” (New American Bible, New English Bible) will be better.

The heir is translated “the owner’s son” by Good News Translation. That he is the heir is brought out indirectly by Good News Bible in what follows: “… let’s kill him, and we will get his property!” Some scholars argue that the reasoning of the tenants reflects a law which was in effect in Galilee during the time of Jesus. According to this law, there were certain circumstances under which an inheritance could be considered ownerless property, and thus could be claimed by the persons who secured immediate possession of it. If this interpretation is allowed, then the tenants would have assumed that the owner of the property was dead, and that his son was now coming to take possession of the land. Therefore if they kill the son, the property would belong to them. Other scholars argue, however, that the murder of the son is a purely literary feature of the story and does not reflect this law. But regardless of which interpretation is adopted, the impact is basically the same, and the translation will not differ.

Many languages have a word they can use for heir. Occasionally translators have to say something like “the one who will inherit (everything) when the owner dies” or “the one who will have these things when the owner dies.”

The inheritance is what the heir will receive. “All the property he will get from his father” or “everything the father will leave him when he dies” are possible translations.

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 .