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)
In Toposa it is translated as “No one aiming at an animal looks to the side when throwing the spear.” Plowing is not known in that culture and this communicated the meaning well. (Source: Martin and Helga Schröder in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 58f.)
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)
In Gbaya is is translated with the ideophone (a word that expresses what is perceived by the five senses) kɛ̧́ɛ̧́ which “denotes a very tiny and barely visible object. (…) The Gbaya team applied it to faith instead of referring to a mustard seed which is unknown to Gbaya readers.” (Source: Philip Noss in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 423ff. )
The Hebrew, Latin and 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) and in Bahnar as aseh lăk-đa which is a combination of the Vietnamese loan word for “camel” (lăk-đa) and the Bahnar term for “horse” (aseh) to communicate that the camel is a beast of burden (source: Pham Xuan Tin in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 20ff. ).
In the 1900 Kalaallisut (Greenlandic) translation (a newer version was published in 2000) it was as ĸatigagtôĸ or “big-backed ones.” “Katigagtôĸ (modern qatigattooq), which has the literal meaning of ‘something with a big back.’ It comprises the noun ĸatigak (modern qatigak) ‘back’ combined with the suffix –tôĸ (modern –tooq) ‘something possessing a big X.’” (Source: Lily Kahn & Riitta-Liisa Valijärvi in The Bible Translator 2019, p. 125ff.)
In Luke 18:25, Mark 10:25, and Matthew 19:24 some versions of the Peshitta translation in Syriac Aramaic (Classical Syriac) show an ambiguity between the very similar words for “camel” and “rope.” Some translations of the Peshitta, therefore, use the “rope” interpretation, including the Classical Armenian Bible (մալխոյ for “rope”), the English translation by George Lamsa (publ. 1933) (It is easier for a rope to go through the eye of a needle), or the Dutch translation by Egbert Nierop (publ. 2020) (het voor een kabel eenvoudiger is het oog van een naald binnen te gaan).
In the above-mentioned three verses, it is translated in Noongar as “kangaroo” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “eunuch” in English is translated in Low German as “man (or: person) who does not have male strength” (Minsch, de ehr Mannskraft nicht hebt) (translation by Johannes Jessen, publ. 1933, republ. 2006). Similarly, in the German Luther Bible it is translated as Entmannter or “de-masculated.” (Source: Jost Zetzsche)
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.
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.
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.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Genesis 28:1:
Newari: “Isaac summoned Jacob and, blessing him, said — ‘You must not marry any Canaanite woman.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “So Isaac caused-to-be-called Jacob. When he arrived, he blessed him and commanded, ‘[You (sing.)] do- not (emphasis) -marry one-who comes-from-Canaan.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Bislama (verses 1-3): “Isaac called Jacob to him and said to him, ‘You shall not marry a girl from Canaan. You must go back to Mesopotemia, to the house of your grandfather Bethuel. Laban your mother’s brother lives there. It would be good for you to marry one of his daughters.’ And then he blessed him saying,’ And my prayer is that God who has complete power will bless you, and give you plenty of children, so that you will become the ancestor of the people from plenty of places.'” (Source: Bill Camden in The Bible Translator 1995, p. 240ff.)
English: “Then Isaac summoned Jacob, and gave him a blessing. He told him, ‘Do not marry a woman of the Canaan people-group.” (Source: Translation for Translators)