no one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back

The Greek that is translated as “no one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back (is fit for the kingdom of God)” in English is translated in Sa’a as “Whoever at all who works in his garden, but just thinks indiscriminately about other things, then he is not fit for the Kingdom of God.”. Carl Gross explains: “In a society in which plowing is unknown, it is not possible to have a farmer setting his hand to the plow, let alone looking back once he had started. [The chosen translation] would even make sense to western urban dwellers who have never seen a plow.”

In Bislama “plow” is translated as stia blong bot, “steering paddle” or “rudder.” The whole verse is translated as “A person who holds the rudder but keeps looking back cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (Source: Ross McKerras)

mustard seed

The Greek that is translated in English as “mustard seed” is translated in Muna as “wonolita seed.” René van den Berg explains: “The mustard plant rarely exceeds 50 cm in height. A wonolita is a big forest tree growing from a tiny seed.”

In the Bislama and Uripiv translations it is translated as “banyan.” “The banyan tree is one of the biggest in the islands, and it grows from a tiny seed. We (Uripiv) added a footnote to explain to more advanced readers what we had done: ‘Here Matthew compares the kingdom of God to a mustard seed, but since mustard doesn’t grow here, we put banyan, so that Matthew’s meaning will be clear.’” (source: Ross McKerras)

camel

The Greek that is translated in English as “camel” is translated in Muna as “water buffalo.” René van den Berg explains: “Camels are unknown; the biggest known animal is the water buffalo (though now rare on Muna).”

In Bislama is is translated as buluk: “cow” / “bull.” (Source: Ross McKerras)

dual vs. plural (Matt. 9:28)

Many languages in the world distinguish between plural and dual (and sometimes trial) pronouns (for instance, “you” specifically addressing many, two, or three people).

In Matt. 8:30 (“Now there was a herd of many swine feeding at a distance from them” in one English translation) it is left open whether “them” refers to the two demon-possessed men, to the men and Jesus or to the men, Jesus and the disciples?

The Bislama translators (in the Nyutesteman long Bislama of 1980) use a dual, whereas the Uripiv uses a plural.

One of the translators explains: “I would argue, however, for a plural rather than a dual or trial, since we were told in Matt. 9:28 that the two men had ‘come to’ Jesus (who was probably accompanied by his disciples). ‘Come to’ renders the Greek word hypantao, otherwise used by Matthew only in 28:9. It is used also in the Markan parallel, in Mark 5:2; here we see from 5:7 that the man came right up to Jesus, so I interpret the them as referring at least to Jesus and the demoniacs.”

Source: Ross McKerras in Notes on Translation 2/1 1988, p. 53-56.

dual vs. plural (Matt. 9:32)

Many languages in the world distinguish between plural and dual (and sometimes trial) pronouns (for instance, “you” specifically addressing many, two, or three people).

In Matt. 9:32 (“As they were going out…” in one English translation) it is left open whether “them” refers to the two blind men or Jesus and the two blind men.

Both the Bislama translators (in the Nyutesteman long Bislama of 1980) and the Uripiv use a dual (indicating that this refers to just the two blind men).

One of the translators explains: “(1) Only Jesus is mentioned as going into the house (Matt. 9:28). The disciples no doubt entered with him, but it is a fair enough working assumption that if they were explicitly mentioned in one place (Matt. 9:32) they would have also been in the other. So we conclude that the ‘they’ in 9:32 is probably not referring to Jesus and the disciples. (2) A reasonably close parallel, as far as the Greek text is concerned, supporting this interpretation can be seen in Matt. 2:13. (First verb of new section repeats last verb of previous section, with same subject, in a genitive absolute construction, with de and followed by idou introducing new participants.)”

Source: Ross McKerras in Notes on Translation 2/1 1988, p. 53-56.

dual vs. plural (Matt. 20:22)

Many languages in the world distinguish between plural and dual (and sometimes trial) pronouns (for instance, “you” specifically addressing many, two, or three people).

In Matt. 20:22 (“You do not know what you are asking…” in one English translation) it is left open whether “you” refers to James and John or James and John and their mother (who had asked the questions preceding Jesus’s answers).

While one Fijian translation uses a trial and the Wantoat uses a plural (both indicating that the mother is included), the Bislama translators (in the Nyutesteman long Bislama of 1980) and the Tok Pisin translators use a dual (indicating that the mother is not included).

One of the translators explains: “Here, because of differences between this Matthew passage and the parallel passage which begins at Mark 10:35, the translator must enter into the issues of the so-called ‘Synoptic Problem’ when deciding how many people Jesus is addressing. I suggest the following guidelines for making a decision here and in the passage considered below: a single real historical event is recounted by both Mark and Matthew, both without error, although each with their own selection of material and emphasis. So what do we make of the fact that Matthew has James and John’s mother asking the question, whereas Mark does not mention her at all, having the two men themselves ask it? We conclude that she must have been there, since Matthew says she was; but she was not important in Mark’s eyes, and so he abbreviates her out of his account. Now the answer Jesus gave to the question is identical in the Greek text of the two gospels; and it must have had only one intention, even though as it stands in Greek, it is ambiguous as to dual or trial reference. I suggest that although the mother asked the question, Jesus either perceived that she was merely a ‘front’ for the two men, or else his primary interest was in them anyway, and so he bypasses the mother and makes his answer directly to them. This is certainly the way Mark saw the situation.”

Source: Ross McKerras in Notes on Translation 2/1 1988, p. 53-56.