A family (clan) might well move to a different location at a time of prolonged drought (= famine in Central Africa) or when the ground/range was depleted. But in the past it would be unusual for them to travel out of the area of their particular ethnic group (which might include some closely related tribes, e.g., the Tonga, IIa, and Lenje of south-central Zambia). Thus Elimelech’s action of transfer-ring his family from Judah to Moab (i.e. outside of the land of the “twelve tribes”) is atypical from an African perspective. A man might go off to work in a “foreign” place in order to earn some hard cash, but then he would generally travel alone, leaving his wife and children behind.
It sounds rather strange right at the beginning to hear that “judges ruled” in the land of Judah. Traditionally the position of “judge” was not all that important in the Central African community, for it was the diviner who usually determined the question of guilt and innocence. It might be that subsequently the council of “elders” would decide what penalty ought to be meted out in the case of offenders. Even later in colonial history, when government-appointed official judges came on the scene, such men were never viewed as functioning in any capacity of administrative rule, for this work was being done by others. Part of the problem, of course, arises with the English translation itself. The Hebrew shophetim is in many contexts better rendered as “deliverers”; they acted more in the capacity of military leaders than as judicial arbiters. They would correspond to the paramount chief of certain African peoples, particularly those with a strong military tradition.
Source: Wendland 1987, p. 166f.
For more of the “Ruth in Central Africa” series, see here.
In the context of being in the wilderness, the Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “wild ass” in English is translated in Chitonga as cibize or “zebra,” because “from the Tonga perspective, no ‘donkey of the bush’ [the literal correspondent of ‘wild ass’] could be expected to live very long, due to predators like lions, etc.” (Source: Wendland 1987, p. 130)
Two species of wild ass were known by the Israelites, the Nubian Wild Ass Equus asinus africanus, which lived on the African side of the Red Sea, and the Persian Wild Ass or Onager Equus hemionus, which was common in the land of Israel, Syria, and Mesopotamia. It seems likely that the Hebrew ‘arod and the Aramaic ‘arad refer to the Nubian wild ass, and the Hebrew pere’ to the onager.
Both species of wild ass were hunted for their meat.
The Nubian wild ass is probably the ancestor of virtually all domestic donkeys. It is a smallish, light brown donkey with a characteristic dark stripe down its spine and across its shoulders. It originally had stripes on the lower part of its forelegs. It has long ears and a tufted tail. It is still found in Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Somalia.
The onager, or Persian wild ass, is a larger animal, classified scientifically as a species of horse. It looks something like a mule. The scientific name hemionus means “half-ass”. It has smaller ears than a typical donkey. It is a fawn color but has a whitish chest and belly. It was evidently never fully domesticated, although one ancient Sumerian illustration shows onagers harnessed to a chariot. Onagers are still found in very small numbers in parts of Syria and Iraq and have been reintroduced into Israel.
The onager was a symbol of untameable wildness, and thus the metaphor “wild ass” was used to describe anyone with wild uncontrolled behavior.
In Africa the closest equivalent to the wild ass is the zebra, which is about the same size and belongs to the same animal family. Like the onager, the zebra has never been widely domesticated. Where the phrase “wild donkeys” would refer to domestic donkeys that have returned to living in a wild state (“feral donkeys”), a phrase meaning “wild horse” is a better choice, since feral donkeys are easily captured and domesticated, whereas feral horses are harder to domesticate. Languages that use the same word for horse and zebra may still have a problem.
The same word or expression can be used for both Hebrew words and for the Aramaic ‘arad, since no distinction between the wild ass species is intended in the biblical text, except in Job 39:5. In this verse, the Hebrew pere’ and ‘arod are both used:
The parallelism can be preserved either by using a pronoun in the second line (Who untied its ropes?) or by using “zebra” or “wild horse” for pere’ and “wild ass” for ‘arod.
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “sycamore” in English is translated in Chichewa as mkuyu or “fig tree.” (Source: Wendland 1987, p. 72)
The use of “sycomore” might be preferable to “sycamore,” since the “o” spelling preserves the Latin (sycomorus) and Greek (sukomorea) better and is used in French.
The Sycomore Fig Ficus sycomorus, also called the Mulberry Fig (compare GermanMaulbeerfeigenbaum), is a type of fig that is found especially in lowland areas in the Mediterranean region. It was known in Egypt as early as 3000 B.C. but also in the Indus Valley in India.
The prophet Amos identified himself as “a dresser of sycamore trees” (Amos 7:14). It is possible that this refers to the practice of making a cut in the immature fruit, which has the effect of accelerating the growth of the fruit. Hepper (Baker Encyclopedia of Bible Plants: Flowers and Trees, Fruits and Vegetables, Ecology. Baker Book House, 1992) reports that this sudden growth is caused by ethylene gas released when the fruit is cut.
The sycomore fig is not a tall tree (up to 10 meters [33 feet]) but has large low, spreading branches — just right for a short man to climb up in order to see over a crowd of taller people (see the story of Zacchaeus in Luke 19:4). The fruit, while edible, is not as juicy or sweet as the more common variety. The most unusual thing about the fruit is that it grows in bunches right on the trunk and branches of the tree rather than among the leaves.
In 1 Kings 10:27 the sycomore is used as an image of something plentiful. The last half of this verse says “he [King Solomon] made cedar as plentiful as the sycamore of the Shephelah.” Translators should take care with the logic here. The verse does not say that Solomon would introduce cedars into the lowlands (the Shephelah), but rather that just as there are plenty of sycomores in the lowlands, there will be plenty of cedars in the land of Israel.
Translators need to deal with both sycomore and fig at the same time. If the translation leans toward foreignization, the translator may want to transliterate both fig and sycomore (sikomori, for example). It may be useful to use the full name sycomore fig in some cases. If a local type of fig is known, the translator could use the local name for the domestic fig (Hebrew te’enah, Greek sukē), and add the word “wild” or “lowland” when referring to the sycomore fig (Hebrew shiqmah, Greek sukomorea).
Where figs are totally unknown, transliterations can be made from an international language, for example, French (sycomore), Spanish (sicomoro), or Hebrew (shiqmah). In contrast to the regular fig, the sycomore grows in the lower elevations (Shephelah), a fact that could potentially come into use in a translation (for example, “lowland fig”).
The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated in English as “reptiles” or “creeping things” or similar is translated as “those which crawl along upon their stomach” in San Mateo del Mar Huave, “those that crawl the way they travel” in Chichimeca-Jonaz, and “animals that crawl on the ground” in Lalana Chinantec. (Source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
In Nyamwezi it is translated as as vitundwa vya ku’yu’mba or “creatures that move.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
The Hebrew words zachal and remes literally mean “creeping [things]” or “crawling [things]”, which is the Hebrew way of referring to small unclean creatures, reptiles in particular. The Greek word herpeton is also a general word for reptile; it includes snakes and lizards. All of the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin words usually exclude fish.
The Hebrew words carry the connotation of uncleanness.
In languages which have a word meaning “reptile”, this will fit most contexts. In languages which do not, phrases such as “snakes and lizards”, “wriggling things”, and so forth could be used.
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “bear” in English is translated in Mungaka and Berom as “leopard” since bears are not known in that culture (see also wolf) (source: Nama 1990 and Andy Warren-Rothlin).
In Vidunda and Kutu it is translated as “lion,” in Kwere as “cheetah” (in Proverbs 17:12) (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext) and in Idakho-Isukha-Tiriki as “jackal” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).
Michel Kenmogne comments on this and comparable translations (in Noss 2007, p. 378 ff.): “Some exegetical solutions adopted by missionary translations may have been acceptable during that time frame, but weighed against today’s translation theory and procedures, they appear quite outdated and even questionable. For example, Atangana Nama approvingly mentions the translation into Mungaka of terms like ‘deer’ as ‘leopard’, ‘camel’ as ‘elephant’, and ‘wheat’ as ‘maize,’ where the target language has no direct equivalent to the source text. These pre-Nida translation options, now known as adaptations, would be declared unacceptable in modern practice, since they misrepresent the historico-zoological and agricultural realities in the Bible. Nowadays it is considered better to give a generalized term, like ‘grain,’ and where necessary specify ‘a grain called wheat,’ than to give an incorrect equivalence. Unknown animals such as bears, can be called ‘fierce animals,’ especially if the reference is a non-historical context.”
The bear that was known in biblical times was the Syrian Brown Bear ursus arctos syriacus. The same word in Hebrew refers to either male or female bears, and it is the gender of the associated words that will indicate the gender of the bear in a specific context.
The Syrian brown bear is very large, similar to the North American Grizzly Bear ursus horribilis, or the European Brown Bear ursus arctos. It has a rather doglike face. It has thick fur, and walks on all fours, but may stand up on its back legs to get a better view. When it stands up like this it may be 2 meters (6 feet) or more tall. It may also weigh over two hundred kilos (440 pounds). Like many other bears Syrian brown bears accumulate fat by gorging themselves in the summer and autumn, and then they sleep through the winter in caves or holes they have dug under logs.
Although its basic food is roots, berries, wild fruit, mice, and lizards, occasionally a rogue bear might kill small livestock. Bears are not able to see very well, and this means that often a person gets quite close to a bear before either one sees the other. The bear is then likely to attack, striking out with its strong digging claws and perhaps biting. Female bears are very protective of their young.
In the Bible, bears and lions are often mentioned together, both being symbols of fierce strength and danger. The female bear in particular was viewed as dangerous, especially if she had young.
For translators in the Northern Hemisphere, finding a word for bear is not usually too difficult. The best choice is a generic word for “bear” rather than the specific word for a type of bear. If a specific word must be used, the word for the grizzly bear is suitable in North America, while in Europe and parts of Asia the European brown bear is the closest relative to the Syrian brown bear. In parts of mainland Asia where the brown bear is not known, the word for the Himalayan Black Bear selenarctos thibetanus is the best choice. The word for the sloth bear of India and Ceylon, or for the sun and moon bears of Malaysia, Indo-China, and Indonesia should be avoided, since these bears have small teeth and are not dangerous.
In the higher parts of South America the word for the Spectacled Bear tremarctos ornatus can be used if this animal is known to the readers. For translators elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere, the problem is more difficult, especially in areas where bears are not known. The use of the name for a local animal is seldom successful, since the more dangerous local animals are usually too different from bears. The only alternative is to transliterate the name from the dominant major or trade language of the area, or from the original biblical language, with a glossary item saying something like: “A bear is a large dangerous animal with big claws and teeth.”
Following are a number of back-translations of 1 Corinthians 14:34:
Uma: “So, your women/wives must be quiet in the services. They are not permitted to be talking like that, they must submit as is written in the Law of the Lord.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “the women shall be quiet while they are in the gathering. They cannot take part in the arguments with the men because the holy-book says that it is not possible for a woman to cause-herself-to-be-higher than a man.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “There’s also a command I have for you which is what the believers in every town do; it is this: don’t you permit that a woman teach when you gather together to worship. They should just listen, because the Law of the Jews teaches that women should not be in charge.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Because what God wants/likes is not what-is-disorderly but rather what is orderly/harmonious. Women ought to be quiet when you meet-as-a-congregation as they also do in the other congregations of God’s people. It is not permitted that they speak but rather they must submit-themselves to (lit. cause-themselves-to-be-ruled-by) the men just like it is written in God’s law.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well, just as is being followed/obeyed by all the people of God, it’s necessary that the women don’t speak (lit. make a noise) for they are not allowed to speak when the-whole-group is gathered together to worship. For like what was said in the laws, they are under the jurisdiction of the man.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “That is, the women are not allowed to speak where the believers are gathered. Because the women do not have permission to explain the word to the people. Rather the men must be the leaders just like the law of God says.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Burmese (translation by A. Judson, first publ. in 1823, still the most widely-used translation in Myanmar): “The wife of yours should stay silent in the church. They have no permission to preach. As the law commanded they must consent to the ruling of man.” (Source: Hluan 2022, p. 82ff. — see there also for a detailed analysis of Judson’s translation.)
The Greek that is translated “if salt has lost its taste (or “saltiness”)?” or similar in English is translated in Amele as “if salt’s bitterness stings” (source: John Roberts), in Mairasi as “if that salt becomes watery” (source: Enggavoter 2004), and i8n the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) as “even if it would be possible for it to lose its taste.”
John Roberts comments on the nature of the salt in question in this article : “Jesus says salt can lose its salty taste and when it does it is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out. ‘You are the salt of the earth’ in Mat 5.13 is a metaphor. In this metaphor, ‘You’ (the disciples of Jesus) is the tenor and ‘salt of the earth’ is the vehicle of the metaphor. The metaphor applies the properties of salt to the disciples. When Jesus spoke this metaphor the salt (ἅλας) referred to was not pure sodium chloride. It was dug out of the ground mixed with other materials. The salt used in the area mostly came from mines around the Dead Sea and material extracted from that area demonstrates these same properties today. This ‘salt’ was used as seasoning or fertilizer, or as a preservative. However, when exposed to the elements, the sodium chloride in this ‘salt’ would leach out and leave only the sediment or impurities behind. What was left was good for nothing, except that it was used to place in paths, or walks, as we use gravel today. (See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_5:13 ). These are the properties of ‘salt’ that Jesus applies metaphorically to his disciples.”
