The Hebrew olah (עֹלָה) originally means “that which goes up (in smoke).” English Bibles often translates it as “burnt-offering” or “whole burnt-offering,” focusing on the aspect of the complete burning of the offering.
The GreekSeptuagint and the LatinVulgate Bibles translate it as holokautōma / holocautōsis (ὁλοκαύτωμα / ὁλοκαύτωσις) and holocaustum, respectively, meaning “wholly burnt.” While a form of this term is widely used in many Romance languages (Spanish: holocaustos, French: holocaustes, Italian: olocausti, Portuguese: holocaustos) and originally also in the Catholic tradition of English Bible translations, it is largely not used in English anymore today (the preface of the revised edition of the Catholic New American Bible of 2011: “There have been changes in vocabulary; for example, the term ‘holocaust’ is now normally reserved for the sacrilegious attempt to destroy the Jewish people by the Third Reich.”)
Since translation into Georgian was traditionally done on the basis of the Greek Septuagint, a transliteration of holokautōma was used as well, which was changed to a translation with the meaning of “burnt offering” when the Old Testament was retranslated in the 1980’s on the basis of the Hebrew text.
In the Koongo (Ki-manianga) translation by the Alliance Biblique de la R.D. Congo (publ. in 2015) olah is translated as “kill and offer sacrifice” (source: Anicet Bassilua) and in Elhomwe as “fire offering.” (Source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
The English translation of Everett Fox uses offering-up (similarly, the German translation by Buber-Rosenzweig has Darhöhung and the French translation by Chouraqui montée).
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Psalm 66:13:
Chichewa Contempary Chichewa translation, 2002/2016:
“I will come to your House with burnt sacrifices
and fulfil my vows.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Newari:
“I will come to your temple bringing burnt offerings.
And I will fulfill my vow.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon:
“I will-sacrifice/offer in your (sing.) temple with burnt offerings.
I will-fulfill my promises to you (sing.)” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Laarim:
“I will bring animals which are slaughtered and roasted to your House,
I will fulfil to you the oath that I told you,” (Source: Laarim Back Translation)
Nyakyusa-Ngonde (back-translation into Swahili):
“Nitakuja katika nyumba yako na sadaka ya kuchoma,
nitatoa ambavyo niliahidi kwako,” (Source: Nyakyusa Back Translation)
English:
“Yahweh, I will bring to your temple offerings that are to be completely burned on the altar;
I will offer to you what I promised.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed. The first example is from a language where God is always addressed distinctly formal whereas the second is one where the opposite choice was made.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
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.
In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.
Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”
In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.
Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking (source Philip Noss).
In Dutch and Western Frisian translations, however, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.
The psalmist now promises to offer his sacrifices to God, in keeping with the promises he had made when he was in trouble. The change from the experience and needs of the nation to those of the psalmist himself is abrupt and unexpected, and this leads some to think that this psalm is a composite work. It may be that the psalmist identified the two, so that his troubles and those of the nation were thought of as one.
Thy house (verse 13a) is the Temple in Jerusalem, where the psalmist, in keeping with the promises he had made earlier (my vows, verse 13b), offers his sacrifices.
In verse 14 Good News Translation “I said I would” reduces to one sentence the double statement in Hebrew, my lips uttered and my mouth promised. The chronological sequence of the statements in verse 14 may sometimes require recasting, since the psalmist’s troubles came first, followed by the promise he made, and then later his promise to do what he said earlier. In some languages the time sequence following their natural order will make for clearer understanding; for example, “when I was in trouble I made you a promise. Now I will do what I promised.”
The psalmist offers as burnt offerings animals that are identified as fatlings (verse 15a). The word can refer to sheep, goats, or bulls which have been especially fattened for sacrifice. Instead of Good News Translation “sheep,” something like “fat animals” (Bible en français courant) or “fattened animals” (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy) would be better. The psalmist also offers rams (male sheep) and bulls and goats; the word translated goats is specifically the male animal.
In verse 15b the Hebrew with the smoke is expanded by Good News Translation into “and the smoke will go up to the sky.” Bible en français courant is similar: “and their smoke will go up to you.”
This is an unusually large number of animals that is being offered; as Anderson suggests, either there is poetic license at work, or else the psalmist was quite a rich person.
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Reyburn, William D. A Handbook on the Book of Psalms. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1991. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.