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)
During the translation of the New Testament into Huixtán Tzotzil, translation consultant Marion Cowan found that questions where the answer is obvious, affirmative rhetorical questions, as well questions raising objections tended to cause confusion among the readers. So these are rendered as simple or emphatic statements.
Accordingly, Matthew 7:9-11 reads “If your son asks you for a tortilla to eat, not a stone you would give him. If he asks you for fish to eat, not a snake you would give him. You whose hearts are not good, know what good gifts you will give your children. Your father in heaven surpassingly knows what good gifts he will give to those who ask him.”
Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 7:9:
Uma: “‘Are there any of you who give rocks to your children when your children ask for rice?” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Who of you here, if your child asks food from you will give him a stone?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “You parents, if there is food that your child is asking for, it cannot be that you’ll give him a stone.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Because look, you fathers, if your child asks for bread, will you do-you-suppose give-him a stone?” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “For is it a rock which you will give your child who asks for food?” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “How about the person who has a child, when the child asks for bread, the person doesn’t go and give a stone to the child.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.
As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.
Here, Jesus is addressing his disciples, individuals and/or crowds with the formal pronoun, showing respect.
In most Dutch translations, Jesus addresses his disciples and common people with the informal pronoun, whereas they address him with the formal form.
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).
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 Matthew 7:7-12:
Keep knocking until God opens the door for you,
as he always does for someone who doesn’t give up.
Ask and receive—seek and find—that’s how it works.
Although you’re evil, you’re still good to your children.
If they were hungry for fish and chips,
you’d never feed them snakes and stones.
Your Father above is goodness personified
and will gladly do good for anyone who asks.
What’s the Bible all about? I’ll tell you —
Treat others the way you want them to treat you.
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®).
The comparisons (bread with stone and fish with serpent) were used for perhaps two reasons: (1) bread and fish were the foods that would be most common near the Sea of Galilee, and (2) bread is shaped somewhat like a stone, and a fish has scales and other features similar to those of a snake. One commentator in fact notes that a certain species of fish (barbut) even has the appearance of a snake. Though most translations retain the question form of the Greek text, it is obvious that in many languages a statement would be more effective: “No father would give his son a stone when he asks for bread….” This can also be rendered “Surely none of you who is a father would give” or “No father would give his son a stone … would he?”
The sentence in verse 9 may need to be reversed, as in “When a son asks his father for bread, do you think the father would give him a stone?”
All these ways of rendering verse 9 can be used in verse 10 too. In fact, it is probably a good idea to use the same structure.
Bread is widely known, but in areas where it is not, “food” or “something to eat” can be used, or possibly some local food that has a similar function to bread.
A serpent is a snake. The type of snake does not need to be specified. For the passage to be meaningful, it must be understood by the readers that the Jews did not eat snakes. It would be just as unlikely for a Jew to eat a snake as a stone. In areas where people do eat some kinds of snakes, translators can add a footnote saying that Jews were forbidden to eat snakes, or they can use the name of a type of snake that is not eaten. They can even add the phrase “which God forbids us to eat” in the translation itself, if they feel that otherwise the verse will make no sense.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.