The Greek that means “catch (or: capture) alive” is usually translated as “catch (people)” of “fish (for people)” in English which implies the fact that the captured or caught are still alive.
The Syriac Aramaic (Classical Syriac)Peshitta translation, however, makes the meaning of “catch alive” more explicit by translating ṣāeḏ ləẖayye (ܨܳܐܶܕ݂ ܠܚܰܝܶܐ) or “catch alive.” Following that translation, other translations that are based on the Peshitta, including the Classical Armenian Bible (vorsayts’es i keans [որսայցես ի կեանս] or “catch for life”), the Afrikaans PWL translation (publ. 2016) (mense vang tot verlossing or ” catch [people] to salvation”), the Dutch translation by Egbert Nierop (publ. 2020) (vangen tot redding or “catch to save”) or various English translations (see here ) explicitly highlight the “alive” as well. (Source: Ivan Borshchevsky)
Some languages have to find strategies on how to deal with the metaphor of “catching.” “In some cases the metaphor can be rendered rather literally, cp. ‘seeking for men’ (Kekchí, where ‘to seek fish’ is the idiomatic rendering of ‘to catch fish’). In several other languages, however, more radical adjustments are necessary, such as making explicit the underlying simile, ‘you will catch men as if you were catching fish’ (Inupiaq); or a shift to a non-metaphorical rendering, sacrificing the play-on-words, e.g. ‘you will be a bringer of men’ (Northern Grebo). In some cases the durative aspect of the construction is best expressed by n occupational term, e.g. ‘youwill be one-whose-trade-is catching men’ (Tae’ and Toraja-Sa’dan).” (Source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Other translations include:
Uma: “teach people to become my followers” (source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “fetch people to follow me” (source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “look for people so that they might be my disciples” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “persuade people” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “as-it-were catch/hunt/fish-for” (source: Tagbanwa 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 Translator 2002, 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’ brothers address Jesus with the informal pronoun.
Vitaly Voinov explains: “Whether one believes that these were Jesus’ younger brothers, his older halfbrothers, or his cousins, it seems that their familial intimacy coupled with a lack of faith and respect would preclude them from using a polite form in addressing Jesus. Using the informal address here in the Tuvan text is an excellent means to reinforce their expression of disbelief and possible mockery of Jesus’ mission.”
In most Dutch translations and Western Frisian, the brothers also use the informal pronoun, in Afrikaans, they use the formal variety.
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 Translator 2002, 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, angels address people with the formal pronoun, expressing respect.
In most Dutch as well as in Western Frisian and Afrikaans translations, the angels are addressing people with the informal pronoun.
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 Translator 2002, 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, the disciples are addressing Jesus with the informal pronoun, unless they are in his physical presence (see formal pronoun: disciples addressing Jesus). This is in contrast to how the disciples addresses Jesus before the resurrection with the formal pronoun. “The Tuvan translation team [wanted to] highlight the change in the disciples’ consciousness about Jesus, signalling a greater degree of intimacy due to their recognition of Jesus as God.”
Vitaly Voinov explains the process that the translation team went through in different editions of the translation (click here):
“In the Tuvan New Testament of 2001, we had Peter use the informal pronoun with Jesus in John 21. However, when we were revising the NT for inclusion in the full Bible ten years later, we decided to change Peter’s address to the formal form in this place for the reason that I had already noted in the article: ‘since the disciples address Jesus with the formal pronoun before his resurrection as a sign of respect, it may seem somewhat strange to readers that they start using the formal form after.’ We realized that Peter still sees the same Jesus in front of himself that he saw prior to the resurrection and he still has a personal relationship with Jesus as a respected rabbi/teacher. We decided that it’s too rash of a change for Peter to suddenly start addressing Jesus with an informal pronoun at this point, especially since in John 21:20 there is a reminiscence about how John has addressed Jesus during the Last Supper (with a formal pronoun). So we decided to let Peter continue to speak to Jesus here as he was used to speaking to Him prior to the crucifixion/resurrection, with a formal pronoun. As a result, we tweaked our pronominal system so that Jesus is addressed by the disciples with a formal pronoun when He is physically present with them in the Gospels (whether pre- or post-resurrection), and with an informal pronoun in Acts, the Epistles and Revelation, since Jesus is now acknowledged by the church as God and is at the right hand of the Father, not physically present with them as a rabbi/teacher.”
In Marathi, three pronouns for the second person are used: tu (तू) for addressing a child, an inferior and among very close friends, but also respectfully for God, in prayer, tumhi (तुम्ही), the plural form of tu but also used to address an individual courteously, and apana (आपण), an even more exalted form of address. In most of the gospels, Jesus is addressed with the second-person pronoun apana but — like in Tuvan — after his resurrection and realization of his divinity, the pronoun is changed to be the familiar tu which is used for God. (Source: F.W. Schelander in The Bible Translator 1963, p. 178ff.)
In English some translations, including the New King James Version, the New American Standard Bible, or the Holman Christian Standard Bible capitalize “You” when Jesus or any other person of the trinity is addressed but don’t differentiate between pre- or post-resurrection.
The Hebrew text of Psalms 9/10, 25, 34, 37, 111, 112, 119, and 145 uses acrostics, a literary form in which each verse is started with one of the successive 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. According to Brenda Boerger (in Open Theology 2016, p. 179ff. ) there are three different reasons for acrostics in the Hebrew text: “for ease of memorization,” the representation “of the full breadth and depth of a topic, all the way from aleph to taw (tav),” and the perception of “the acrostic form as aesthetically attractive.” (p. 191)
While most translations mention the existence of an acrostic in a note or a comment, few implement it in their translation. The Natügu translation is one such exception. Boerger (see above) cites a strong tradition in singing the psalms and the fact that Natügu, like Hebrew, also has 22 possible initial letters as motivating factors to maintain the acrostics in that language.
Click or tap here for the complete psalm in Natügu
1 Awi Yawe! Glqpxku Yawe!
Bilvzx nide mz nabznge atwrnrngr, mz nzyrlwr-lxblr-krgr badr leplz nedeng.
2 Clvele nrlc x da kcng tqwz-ngrde, tqaletileng nzmyalzng.
Delc, leplz amrlx na-aotingr drtwrdr da lcng mz nzabrtzlvz-krdrleng.
3 Eu, da lcng amrlx nzaelwapx-ngrdr zmrlue x zmatq rde.
Glqpxku nztubq-krde kc tqvzpe tqvzpe.
4 Ipqle nigu mz zmrlz ngrde kxmyalz x ycngr drtwrde nigu.
Jzsle nigu x nayc zvz mz drtwrgu rkx ngrdeng.
5 Kabzle dakxnzng mz leplz kcng tzamrluelr nide.
Lolvz-amqngile mz drtwrde da kx esalz-ngrbzle badr.
6 Mz nzaprc-krbzle drtc’ ngr lr mrkzbleng mz doa nedeng,
Nide kc tqaelwapx-ngrbzle zmatq rde badr.
7 Okatrle nidr mz nzaclve-krdeng kxtubq.
Prlxpx-zvzle da angidr x nzrsakrlrngr.
8 Rkapx zvz natq kx rsakrlrngr.
Sa na-atutrleng murde nqmq krde mrlz x tubq.
9-10 Takitrde nzangio-krgu drtqde kxtr mz nzamrluengr murde
Vz-nqblq-zvzle nzesalz-krde x
Witi nelzde nzarlapx-krde leplz nedeng.
X aelwapx-ngrgu nzyrplapx-krgu mz nzamrlue-krgu nide.
Yawe kabzle nzrkrlz-angidrngr mz krkcng tzyrlq-angidrlr natqde.
Zbq kalvz nzrglqpxngr nide navz zvz x tqvzpe, tqvzpe.
The DanishBibelen på Hverdagsdansk (publ. 1985, rev. 2015 et al.) translated Psalm 111 into an acrostic. Iver Larsen who worked in this translation explained (in Roelie Van der Spuy in Old Testament Essays 2008, p. 513ff. ) the choice of letters: “We don’t use c, q, w, x and z. On the other hand we do use the extra Danish vowel symbols æ, ø and å, and the y is a vowel, not a consonant. Since Danish has more than 22 letters, we cannot use all the letters, so among those last ones (æ, ø, å) I chose what fits best.”
Click or tap here for the complete psalm in Danish with its English translation
1. Af hele mit hjerte vil jeg takke Herren,
[From all of my heart I will thank the Lord]
berømme ham midt i de gudfrygtiges forsamling.
[extol him in the midst of the assembly of the God-fearing.[
2. De ting, han gør, er vidunderlige,
[The things he does are wonderful,[
enhver, der oplever dem, må juble og glæde sig.
[all who experience them rejoice and are happy.]
3. Fantastiske er alle hans undere,
[All his wonders are fantastic,]
glem ikke hans uendelig godhed.
[never forget his unending goodness.]
4. Herren er nådig og barmhjertig,
[The Lord is compassionate and merciful]
ingen må glemme hans velgerninger.
[no one should ever forget his good deeds.]
5. Jeg ved, at han altid sørger for sit folk.
[I know that he always provides for his people,]
Kan han nogensinde glemme sin pagt med dem?
[Could he ever forget his covenant with them?]
6. Landet, som tilhørte de fremmede, gav han til sit eget folk,
[The land that belonged to foreigners he gave to his own people,]
med magt drev han de andre væk for øjnene af sine udvalgte.
[he forced them away before the eyes of his chosen ones.]
7. Når han handler, gør han altid det rigtige,
[When he acts, he always does what is right,]
ordene fra ham kan man stole på.
[his words are trustworthy.]
8. Pas på, at I trofast adlyder hans bud,
[Be careful to faithfully obey his commands,]
retsindighed har evighedsværdi.
[uprightness/justice is of eternal value.]
9. Sit folk har han sat i frihed,
[He has given his people their freedom,]
til evig tid varer hans pagt med dem.
[his covenant with them will last forever.]
Underfuld og hellig er Herren.
[Wonderful and holy is the Lord.]
10. Visdom udspringer af ærefrygt for Gud.
[Wisdom results from respectfully honoring God.]
Ypperlig er den indsigt, man får ved at adlyde ham.
[The insight you get from obeying him is superb.]
Æren er hans for evigt!
[He is to be honored forever!]
In the Zürich German dialect (Züritüütsch) of Swiss German, the Psalms were translated while maintaining the acrostic by Josua Boesch (publ. 2009 ).
Click or tap here for the complete psalm in Zürich German
1 Halleluja! ER isch is mee wèrt als ales.
Au iich wil IMM tanke vo ganzem hèrze,
Bi siine friind i siinere gmäind.
2 Chumm lueg, was èr ales ttaa hät für öis.
Die, wo s ggluschtet, psined sich drüber.
3 ER hat ales herrlich und schöön gmacht.
Für eewig bliibt siini grächtigkäit fescht.
4 Gaar nie wil iich sini wunder vergässe.
Häsch ghöört, ER isch barmhèrzig und güetig.
5 I siinere hand isch z ässe fur d fründ.
Käine chunnt z chuurz, èr haltet s verschpräche.
6 Lueg, was er mit chraft fur siis volk tuet,
Mit welere liebi èr ine s land gitt.
7 Nüüt isch nöd zueverlèèssig und rächt vo dèm, won er gmacht hät.
Ooni siis soorge hett ales kä sinn.
8 Probier nöd z flicken a siineren oornihg, suscht hebt si nöd eewig.
Rue hetsch au nümen und ales gieng schieff.
9 Siim volk hät èr emaal d freihäit ggèè.
Tänk doch an bund, won èr mit em gschlosse.
Uurhäilig isch IMM sini nööchi bi öis.
10 Vo aafang aa hämer nur INN als mitti vo öisere wiishäit.
Wèr siich dernaa richtet, hät s imer guet.
Zum schluss wämer inn rüeme imer und eewig, ER isch is mee wèrt als ales.
The English Bible translation by Ronald Knox (publ. 1950) maintains most Hebrew acrostics (even though Knox’s translation itself is based on the Latin text of the Vulgate rather than the Hebrew). Due to the higher number of letters in the English alphabet, it skips the letters J, Q, X, and Z.
1 All my heart goes out to the Lord in praise, Before the assembly where the just are gathered.
2 Chant we the Lord’s wondrous doings, delight and study of all who love him.
3 Ever his deeds are high and glorious, faithful he abides to all eternity.
4 Great deeds, that he keeps still in remembrance!
5 He, the Lord, is kind and merciful. In abundance he fed the men who feared him, keeping his covenant for ever.
6 Lordly the power he shewed his people,
7 making the lands of the heathen their possession. No act but shews him just and faithful; of his decrees there is no relenting.
8 Perpetual time shall leave them changeless; right and truth are their foundation.
9 So he has brought our race deliverance; to all eternity stands his covenant. Unutterable is his name and worshipful;
10 vain without his fear is learning. Wise evermore are you who follow it; yours the prize that lasts for ever. (Source )
This blog post mentions several English translation of Psalm 111 with an acrostic that were not published in official Bible translations. The above-quoted Van der Spuy also has his own Afrikaans translation with an acrostic (quoted in Old Testament Essays 2008, p. 513ff. ).
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 Translator 2002, 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, Pilate is addressing Jesus with an informal pronoun and Jesus Pilate with the formal, respectful form.
Voinov explains: “Pilate, as governor of Judea, would consider himself superior to Jesus, a carpenter and itinerant teacher, on the power hierarchy. This is especially visible when Pilate reminds Jesus that he is the one who decides whether Jesus lives or dies. An informal pronoun is appropriate in Tuvan to render this attitude. The more difficult question concerns the form Jesus should use in responding to Pilate. On the one hand, it can be argued from passages such as John 18:33-37 and 19:11 that Jesus did not accept Pilate’s authority. There Jesus affirms himself as king and lets Pilate know that Pilate’s authority is subordinate to God. On the other hand, it seems likely that Jesus would show due respect to the authorities, not out of fear for his life, but rather because this constituted a part of the Jewish concept of righteousness. (…) One potential problem with this solution is that readers may think that Jesus is trying to curry the favor of these powerful people in order to save himself. Before making a final decision the Tuvan translators did comprehension testing concerning this point. None of the readers interpreted Jesus’ use of the informal pronoun in this way, but rather said that Jesus was showing respect appropriate to the position of his addressee.”
In Gbaya, where God is always addressed with the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́, the common way to address superiors, Pilate and Jesus address each other with the less courteous nɛ́. (Source Philip Noss)
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 Translator 2002, 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 the woman with an informal pronoun whereas she addresses him with a formal pronoun, showing respect.
In Gbaya, where God is always addressed with the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́, the common way to address superiors, the woman addresses him with the less courteous nɛ́ in verse 4:9 but then switches to the courteous plural form ɛ́nɛ́. (Source Philip Noss)
Likewise in Burmese where in the Common Language Version (publ. 2005) the Samaritan woman changes her language level from the Common to the Royal and Religious as she discovers the real nature of Jesus. Jesus appears here as a divine revealer. (Source: Gam Seng Shae, The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff.)
In most Dutch translations, both Jesus and the woman use the formal pronoun, whereas in Afrikaans and Western Frisian Jesus addresses the woman informally and she addresses him with the formal pronoun.
In many English translations the Greek terms “hieron” (the whole “temple” in Jerusalem or specifically the outer courts open to worshippers) and “naos” (the inner “shrine” or “sanctuary”) are translated with only one word: “temple” (see also for instance “Tempel” in German [for exception see below] and “tempel” in Dutch, Danish, or Afrikaans).
Other languages make a distinction: (Click or tap here to see more)
Navajo: “house in which worship is carried out” (for naos)
Balinese: “inner part of the Great Temple” (“the term ‘inner part’ denoting the hindmost and holiest of the two or three courts that temples on Bali usually possess”) vs. “Great Temple”
Telugu: “womb (i.e. interior)-of-the-abode” vs. “abode”
Thai: a term denoting the main audience hall of a Buddhist temple compound vs. “environs-of-the-main-audience-hall”
Kituba: “place of holiness of house-God Lord” vs. “house-God Lord”
Shipibo-Conibo: “deep in God’s house” vs. “God’s house” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022): “inner court of the temple” (Tempelinnenhof) vs. “temple”
Languages that, like English, German, Dutch, Danish, or Afrikaans don’t make that distinction include:
Toraja-Sa’dan: “house that is looked upon as holy, that is sacred, that is taboo and where one may not set foot” (lit. “house where-the-belly-gets-swollen” — because taboo is violated — using a term that is also applied to a Muslim mosque) (source for this and the three above: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
Aguaruna: “the house for talking to God” (source for this and above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
Guhu-Samane: “festival longhouse of God” (“The biiri, ‘festival longhouse’, being the religious and social center of the community, is a possible term for ‘temple’. It is not the ‘poro house’ as such. That would be too closely identified with the cult of poro. The physical features of the building, huge and sub-divided, lend it further favor for this consideration. By qualifying it as ‘God’s biiri’ the term has become meaningful and appropriate in the context of the Scriptures.”) (Source: Ernest Richert in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. )
Enga: “God’s restricted access house” (source: Adam Boyd on his blog)
Another distinction that tends to be overlooked in translations is that between hieron (“temple” in English) and sunagógé (“synagogue” in English). Euan Fry (in The Bible Translator 1987, p. 213ff. ) reports on this:
“Many older translations have simply used transliterations of ‘temple’ and ‘synagogue’ rather than trying to find equivalent terms or meaningful expressions in their own languages. This approach does keep the two terms separate; but it makes the readers depend on explanations given by pastors or teachers for their understanding of the text.
“Translators who have tried to find meaningful equivalents, for the two terms ‘temple’ and ‘synagogue’ have usually made a distinction between them in one of two ways (which focus on the contrasting components of meaning). One way takes the size and importance of the Temple to make a contrast, so that expressions such as ‘sacred meeting/ worship house of the Jews’ and ‘big sacred meeting/worship house of the Jews’ are used. The other way focuses on the different nature of the religious activity at each of the places, so that expressions such as ‘meeting/worship house of the Jews’ and ‘sacrifice/ceremony place of the Jews’ are used.
“It is not my purpose in this article to discuss how to arrive at the most precise equivalent to cover all the components of meaning of ‘temple’. That is something that each translator really has to work through for himself in the light of the present usage and possibilities in his own language. My chief concern here is that the basic term or terms chosen for ‘temple’ should give the reader of a translation a clear and correct picture of the location referred to in each passage. And I am afraid that in many cases where an equivalent like ‘house of God’ or ‘worship house’ has been chosen, the readers have quite the wrong picture of what going to the Temple or being in the Temple means. (This may be the case for the word ‘temple’ in English too, for many readers.)”
Here are some examples:
Bambara: “house of God” (or: “big house of worship”) vs. “worship house” (or: “small houses of worship”)
Toraja-Sa’dan: “house where-the-belly-gets-swollen” (see above) vs. “meeting house for discussing matters concerning religious customs” (and “church” is “house where one meets on Sunday”)
Navajo: “house in which worship is carried out” vs. “house of gathering” (source for all above: Bratcher / Nida)
Click or tap here to see a short video clip about Herod’s temple (source: Bible Lands 2012)Click or tap here to see a short video clip showing synagogues in New Testament times (source: Bible Lands 2012)