The Greek in Matthew 10:16 that is translated in English as “wise as serpents” is translated in Bambam as “take-guard like a langkasi (= a small animal similar to a squirrel).”
Phil Campbell explains: “The Bambam people just could not connect with the snakes as being shrewd, but they have a lot of traditional folk tales of a shrewd squirrel-like-animal. We did add a footnote to explain the literal meaning in the original.”
In the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) it is translated with seid umsichtig wie die Schlangen unter dem Laub or “be as cautious as snakes under the leaves.” And the translators add in a footnote: “… that don’t expose themselves to danger directly.”
In Komba, the extended phrase that is translated in English as “be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” was translated as “live without falsity and with wisdom and straightness” since “the picture was too strange.” (Source: Deibler / Taylor 1977, p. 1076f.)
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated in English as “Leviathan” is translated in Poqomchi’ as “monster crocodile” (source: Ronald Ross), in Kalanga as “a monster of the sea called Leviathan” (source: project-specific notes in Paratext), and in Hiligaynon as “the dragon Leviatan” (source: Hiligaynon Back Translation).
Scholars are divided in the details of the meaning of this word, but all are agreed that it refers to a monster that lives in water. The word seems to be related to a Hebrew root that means “to twist.” Some believe that the notion of livyathan is related to ancient Egyptian beliefs about a mythical monster crocodile that was thought to be responsible for the annual flooding of the Nile and for causing eclipses of the sun. The passages in Job 41:1 and Psalms 74:14 support this view. In Psalms 74:13 and 14 livyathan occurs in parallel with another word tannin, which refers to a monster that lives in the water. In Ezekiel 29:3tanim is described as having powerful jaws and scales. The similarity to a crocodile has been noted by many commentators.
Others relate this monster to Babylonian myths about the chaos dragon Tiamat. The Ugaritic texts refer to a similar monster called lotan, which is the Ugaritic form of livyathan. It seems possible that this is the reference in Isaiah 27:1. The probability is that the name is used in both senses in the Bible.
There is general agreement among Jewish scholars that tannin is the more generic word for “sea monster”, while behemoth and livyathan are the names of two of those monsters. This is reflected in 2 Esdras 6:49 and 52, where leviathan is clearly a proper name for one of these monsters.
Crocodiles are the largest of all reptiles. The species found in the Nile valley is the Nile Crocodile Crocodylus niloticus. In biblical times these crocodiles also lived in the larger rivers of the land of Israel, and another species lived in the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in Mesopotamia.
Crocodiles look like enormous lizards with large teeth, and they often reach more than 5 meters (16 feet) in length. Their skin is covered in thick fleshy scales. They live in rivers and in river estuaries and come out of the water onto land to sun themselves for long periods each day. When they are in the water they can stay submerged for ten minutes or more.
They feed on fish that they catch in the water, or lie in wait, wholly or partly submerged until some animal or person comes to drink. They then leap out of the water and seize their prey and throw or drag it into the water where they drown it. They then wedge the prey under a log or between rocks or reeds and tear large pieces from the carcass by seizing the flesh in their teeth and twisting themselves over and over until the flesh comes loose. They then swallow the meat without chewing it. In areas where these crocodiles live, people are killed every year by them.
The monster crocodile of the Egyptians, however, was not a real crocodile but a mythical one of gigantic proportions, which was associated with the annual flooding of the Nile River. It was believed to be so big that whenever it entered the Nile, it caused the river to overflow its banks.
Leviathan symbolized the Egyptian nation and probably its gods; it also symbolized the two mighty nations of Assyria and Babylon. Thus it symbolized the great enemies of Israel.
In most translations the word is transliterated from the Hebrew rather than translated, but the name by itself conveys little to the average reader. In languages where crocodiles are well known, the more meaningful expression “the giant crocodile Leviathan” can be used in the Job and Psalms passages. Then, in the Isaiah passage, where the text itself identifies Leviathan as a serpent (or reptile), the name can be used by itself. In some societies, where there are beliefs about mythical monster serpents or crocodiles associated with the flooding of rivers, the local name for the mythical monster can be used, with a footnote to indicate that in Hebrew the monster’s name is livyathan and that it represented the enemies of Israel.
The Hebrew in Job 41:6 that is translated as “merchants” (for Leviathan) in English had to be translated more specifically in Poqomchi’.
Ronald Ross explains: “In at least some Mayan languages the word for ‘vendor’ cannot be used without expressing what it is they sell. So here, in Poqomchi’ we have had to put ‘fish vendors,’ even though we are assuming that Leviathan is a crocodile. [See Leviathan] It seems that even in the Hebrew the context is that of a fish market, which is logical since Leviathan is considered to be a sea monster. This may be a case of Hebrew classification of anything that swims or lives in the water being a fish, like anything that flies is a bird (bats, for example).”
The Hebrew in Deuteronomy 14:19 that is translated as “insects that fly” or “swarming insects” in English is translated as “small animals with wings like flies” in Mam, “insects that fly in big groups” in Chuj, and “animals that fly and have more than two legs” in Kaqchikel. None of these languages has a pre-existing category for insects.
The Hebrew, Greek, Ge’ez, and Latin that is translated in English typically as “vine” is translated in Lak as къюмайтӀутӀул мурхьра: “the (grape-) cluster tree.”
Vitaly Voinov tells this story: “Laks (who live in the mountainous regions of Dagestan) historically have had no experience with planting and tending vineyards. They buy grapes at the market or the store, but that’s about all they know of grape growing. Thus, in field testing, none of the readers could picture the primary image of this chapter. The translator’s initial attempt of rendering ‘vine’ as ‘grape stalk’ met with complete non-understanding. After much discussion of the problem and potential solutions, we settled on what one of the field testing respondents suggested to remedy the problem: ‘vine’ was rendered as ‘the (grape-)cluster tree’ (къюмайтӀутӀул мурхьра). Technically grapes of course don’t grow on trees, but something had to be put in the text, and it had to be said in a way that the average reader/hearer could understand it. The Lak team could have borrowed the Russian word for ‘vine’ (лоза), but since this is a very low-frequency word in the Russian language, it’s likely that many Laks wouldn’t know the Russian word either. So the team settled for a reduction of accuracy in order to achieve greater clarity. After all, the primary point of importance in this passage is not a horticultural analysis, but a metaphorical comparison to the spiritual world, to the relationship between the Father, His Son, and the followers of Jesus. This rendering allows readers to get to the core of this meaning without getting tangled up in unknown terms.”
The Common Grape Vine Vitis vinifera is mentioned more often than any other plant or tree in the Bible. Excavations in Greece have discovered grape seeds dating to 4500 B.C. Egyptian records document the existence of cultivated vines in Canaan as early as 2375 B.C., and subsequent records report trade in vine products around 1360 B.C. and many times thereafter.
The vine is a creeping plant that develops a woody stem when it matures. It grows along the ground until it finds a tree or other object to climb, using tendrils. It bears bunches of small round fruit that are sweet and juicy. Today farmers grow them commercially throughout the Mediterranean area, in South Africa, in North America, and in many other countries. The first reference to the vine in the Bible (Genesis 9:20) tells us that Noah planted a vineyard (Hebrew kerem) and that he made an alcoholic drink from the fruit. Farmers since then have improved on the size, color, and quality of the fruit by careful pruning and selection until now there are at least 65 kinds of grapevines. Like many other plants in temperate areas, the vine has leaves that appear in early spring. After the fruit is picked and the weather gets cold, the leaves drop off and the plant is bare until the following spring. A typical vineyard in Bible times was surrounded by a stone fence. It had a stone tower from which the owner could watch for predators, and a place to squeeze the juice out of the fruits.
The vine is the most frequently cited plant in the Bible, and that alone makes it special. Vines, grapes, raisins, and wine were a major element of Jewish life, so it is not a surprise that the vine and its products are used figuratively probably more than any other Bible plant. After the flood purified the earth at the time of Noah, the vine became the means by which the human race was plunged again into sin (Genesis 9:20). We know from Jacob’s blessing in Genesis 49:11f. and other passages that the vine was the symbol of blessing, prosperity, and happiness. The fact that there were groups like the Nazirites and Rechabites who abstained from drinking wine simply shows the radical self-denial that these people imposed on themselves. A drink offering of wine was an important part of worship (Exodus 29:40), and the image of contentment was “every man under his vine and under his fig tree” (Micah 4:4). Jotham includes the vine in his well-known Parable of the Trees (Judges 9:7ff.). In the New Testament, Jesus rescued a man from humiliation at a wedding party by miraculously providing a fresh supply of wine (John 2:1ff.). Wine becomes a major symbol in the Christian community when Jesus foreshadows his crucifixion by comparing the wine poured out in the Passover celebration to his blood (Matthew 26:27f. et al.). He speaks of the need for Christians to be like the branches of the vine, drawing their nourishment from him, the True Vine (John 15.:1ff.). Nearly every New Testament writer makes some metaphorical reference to the vine or its products.
There are around 65 kinds of grapevines (Vitis vinifera) found in the Northern Hemisphere. They belong to a larger family of creeping plants called Vitaceae, which has over 800 species throughout the world including many in the tropical and warm climates of the world.
Grapevines have occasionally been grown in West Africa (for example, in The Gambia and in northern Nigeria) but are not well known even where they are grown commercially. Attempts at substituting a local tree name have not been entirely successful because the species chosen is usually not cultivated and/or does not have the same economic or social function that the grape had in Israel.
Thus it is probably best to use a transliteration from a major language. However, in parts of Nigeria and perhaps elsewhere, the word grep refers to “grapefruit” and should be avoided in translation. A transliteration from “vine” or “wine” is preferred, although a translator needs to be careful. The English word “vine” refers to any creeping plant, but it also refers to a particular kind of vine that produces grapes (Vitis vinifera). This can be confusing. Furthermore, translators in English-speaking countries should think carefully about what they are going to do with the word “wine.” In The Gambia, Mandinka translators first used “wayini tree” but later concluded that it may be better to have a word for “vine” that is not necessarily identical with “wine.” Bine, from binekaro (“vinegar”), was considered, as was inabi (“grape”) from Arabic.
Languages that borrow the Arabic word inabi must deal with the fact that this word bears an unfortunate resemblance to annabi (“prophet”) and new readers reading “water of inabi” in a context of prophecy may associate it, for better or worse, with prophets and prophecy. In northern Nigeria church people have gotten used to inabi in the New Testament even though many of them don’t know what it is. Basa in Nigeria uses a wild grape-like plant (afwafwa), and Igala has used the same species (achiwebetema) for years. Likewise, two translations in Mali and Burkina Faso use their local name for a wild vine (Lannea microcarpa) for the biblical vine. There is a species (Rhoicissus tridentata) in southern and eastern Africa known as “African grape” (locally called “bobbejaantou”). In such cases translators should write a footnote (or glossary item) stating that the grapes of Bible times were larger and sweeter than the local variety, and that they were cultivated extensively as a source for producing beverages. Other possibilities for transliteration are: vinyola/videra (Portuguese), vitis (Latin), and inab (Arabic).
Fruit of the vine (Hebrew ‘enav; Greek botrus, staphulē): There is some evidence that botrus refers to a bunch of grapes, while staphulē refers to individual grapes. According to Louw and Nida (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament based on Semantic Domains, 1988), however, both words may refer to individual grapes as well as bunches of grapes. The Hebrew word tirosh is equivalent to the word “vintage” in English, that is, the grape harvest and possibly the first squeezing of the grapes. It is normally used along with the words referring to the olive harvest (yitshar) and grain harvest (dagan).
The Greek in Romans 1:23 that is translated as “birds or four-footed animals or reptiles” in English presented an obstacle in the translation into Gamale Kham so that it was dropped from the translation.
D. E. Watters (p. 226f.) tells that story:
“Khams see things differently. It’s not that they don’t observe the same traits that we do; it’s just that the distinction between giving birth to living young or laying eggs doesn’t matter a lot to them. Babies are babies. They’re more concerned with other factors, such as “is the animal naughty or nice?” Their classification system comprises things like laa-gaa: ‘leopard-eagles,’ syaa-baa: ‘deer-pheasants,’ baza-biza: ‘bird-rats,’ and rwihza-wanza: ‘bug-worms.’
“’Leopard-eagles’ cause harm; it doesn’t matter if they’re mammals or birds. They prey on the domain of man, stealing his chickens and sheep; they are what we would call predators. ‘Deer-pheasants’ are the opposite, providing food for man; these are the game animals. ‘Bird-rats’ are the little critters, things that scurry around on the forest floor and flit through the village. ‘Bug-worms’ are the creepy-crawlies, things that make your skin crawl. They’re mostly bugs, snakes, and lizards, but they also include a few unexpected creatures like the river otter (which is regarded as a slimy creature, similar to Gollum from The Lord of the Rings).
“So what were we to do with a passage like Romans 1:22—23, in which a Greek classification is assumed: ‘Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things’?
“Any attempt to translate this passage verbatim in Kham, which we tried, only makes it seem that four-footedness is the point of the passage. Khams have no such classification, and the mere novelty of singling out ‘four-footed’ beasts makes it a highly marked expression, the focus of assertion. It’s like saying, ‘If only they had made images of three-footed beasts, it wouldn’t have been so bad. But these fools made four-footed beasts!’
“The point of the passage is clear enough: ‘professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.’ This is not a treatise on biological classification; it’s a statement about the foolishness of idolatry. Even the Khams laugh at the idolatry of the Hindus, so when the passage is rendered in their language, the absurdity is heightened: “In those very things in which they claimed to ‘know it all,’ they became totally ignorant. In place of the glorious, living, and eternal God, they made images of man, animal-beasts, bird-rats, and bug-worms, and worshiped them instead of God.
“Who but a fool would stoop to worship a bird-rat or a bug-worm?”
The Greek in Luke 13:32 that is translated in virtually all English translations as “fox” (exceptions: Passion Translation of 2014 with “deceiver” and The Voice of 2012 with “sly fox”) presents an intriguing example of the complexity of translation and meaning across different cultures.
Edward Hope (2005, p. 64ff.) describes the occurrence of the fox and its meaning in the Bible as an inferior rather than crafty animal (see jackal / fox).
Due to a lack of understanding of the differences in the meaning of “fox” as a metaphor in Hebrew and Greek culture, early versions of translations tended to emphasize the craftiness of the metaphor:
Harry McArthur (in Notes on Translation 1992, p. 16ff), who had worked on a translation of the Aguacateco New Testament in the 1970s and then revised that version in the 1990s describes the original translation of this passage as one of “the few places where, when I was translating, I did not understand the original text (or the translations of it). (…) The helps we had at that time told us that the point of comparison was that Herod was a ‘cheater.’ We have since come to understand from the use of the word ‘fox’ on many other Biblical passages that Jesus was calling him a small or inconsequential man: a better rendering would be “go tell that poor benighted soul…”
An early Swati version translates “fox” as nyoka: “snake” (in the 1996 Swati translation it says mphungutja: “jackal”). Eric Hermanson comments on this:
“This change, however, rather than bringing out what was intended in the original utterance, made it suggest even more strongly that Jesus was calling Herod a twisty schemer than is indicated when ‘fox’ is used as a metaphor in English. What happened in this case. then, was that replacing a metaphor from the original language with a different metaphor from the second language resulted in readers and hearers having different thoughts and ideas than were intended by the original author. (…)
“In Zulu and other African languages, however, itnpungushe (‘the jackal’) is also seen as an insignificant animal; and referring metaphorically to a king as itnpungushe instead of as iSilo or iNgonyama (‘the lion’), the normal praise-names of a paramount chief, has the same effect (…) that was intended by Jesus.” (Source: Eric Hermanson in The Bible Translator 1999, p. 235 ff. )
The German translation by Jörg Zink (1965) translates “dieser Fuchs, dieser Verderber”: “that fox, that spoiler (or: destroyer).”
In Meyah, it is translated as “evil person” (source: Gilles Gravelle in Kroneman 2004, p. 502).
