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 Elhomwe it is translated as “tree seed.” (Source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
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 Greek that is translated as “for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” or similar in English is translated in Muna as “what comes-out at the lips, it comes from the fullness/overflowing of the heart.”
René van den Berg explains: “It is very impolite in Muna to mention someone’s mouth (wobha) or tongue (lela). The words themselves are not taboo or obscene, but in combination with a possessor they are frowned upon and should be avoided. In fact, if you want to abuse someone, you should refer to his or her mouth or tongue. The implications for translation are obvious (…). [Sometimes] ‘mouth’ was replaced by ‘lips’ (wiwi), a perfectly acceptable term, even when possessed.”
In the German Luther Bible it says: Denn wes das Herz voll ist, des geht der Mund über or “what the heart is full of, with that the mouth flows over” (source: Zetzsche), in Uab Meto it says “his mouth says only what the heart is more than full of,” and in Tzeltal it is “in our hearts arise all those things which come out of our mouths” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel), and in Elhomwe it is translated literally since that exact idiom is used in that language as well (source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext).
The Hebrew, Greek, and Latin that is translated in English as “wolf” is translated in Muna as da’u ngkahoku: “forest dog,” because there is no immediate lexical equivalent. (Source: René van den Berg)
In Asháninka, it is translated as “ferocious animal,” in Waffa and Kui as “wild dog,” and in Navajo as “Coyote” (source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125), and in Odia as “tiger” (source for this and for Kui: Helen Evans in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 40ff. )
In Lingala it is translated as “leopard.” Sigurd F. Westberg (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 117ff. ) explains: “The wolf, for example, does not exist here, but its relative the jackal does and we have a name for it. But the jackal does not prey on domestic animals as the wolf did in Palestine, nor is he as fierce. The equivalent from these points of view is the leopard. Hence in Genesis 49 Benjamin is likened to a ravenous leopard, and the basic meaning is approached more closely than if we had been governed by scientific classification.”
Mungaka also uses “leopard” (see also bear (animal)) (source: Nama 1990). Likewise in Klao and Dan (source: Don Slager).
In Elhomwe “fierce animal” is used. (Source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
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 Greek that is translated as “casting a net” in English has an immediate equivalent in Muna with buani: “to cast a (circular) net.” René van den Berg: “In this instance the Muna translation is possibly more graphic than the English, which leaves the nature of the net rather vague.”
This is illustrated for use in Bible translations in East Africa by Pioneer Bible Translators like this:
Image owned by PBT and Jonathan McDaniel and licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Yakan: “the lonely place” (source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “a land where no people lived” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “the place with no inhabitants” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Matumbi uses various term: lubele (desert, sandy place without water) — used in John 11:54, lupu’ngu’ti (a place where no people live, can be a scrub land, a forest, or a savanna) — used in Mark 1:3 et al.), and mwitu (a forest, a place where wild animals live) — used in Mark 1:13 et al.) (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
Chichewa Contemporary translation (2002/2016): chipululu: a place uninhabited by people with thick forest and bush (source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Note that in Luke 15:4, usually a term is used that denotes pastoral land, such as “eating/grazing-place” in Tagbanwa (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation).
Bura-Pabir: “sacrifice mound” (source: Andy Warrren-Rothlin)
Kalanga: “fireplace of sacrifice” (source: project-specific notes in Paratext)
The Ignaciano translators decided to translate the difficult term in that language according to the focus of each New Testament passage in which the word appears (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
Willis Ott (in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.) explains:
Matt. 5:23,24: “When you take your offering to God, and arriving, you remember…, do not offer your gift yet. First go to your brother…Then it is fitting to return and offer your offering to God.” (The focus is on improving relationships with people before attempting to improve a relationship with God, so the means of offering, the altar, is not focal.)
Matt. 23:18 (19,20): “You also teach erroneously: ‘If someone makes a promise, swearing by the offering-place/table, he is not guilty if he should break the promise. But if he swears by the gift that he put on the offering-place/table, he will be guilty if he breaks the promise.'”
Luke 1:11: “…to the right side of the table where they burn incense.”
Luke 11.51. “…the one they killed in front of the temple (or the temple enclosure).” (The focus is on location, with overtones on: “their crime was all the more heinous for killing him there”.)
Rom. 11:3: “Lord, they have killed all my fellow prophets that spoke for you. They do not want anyone to give offerings to you in worship.” (The focus is on the people’s rejection of religion, with God as the object of worship.)
1Cor. 9:13 (10:18): “Remember that those that attend the temple have rights to eat the foods that people bring as offerings to God. They have rights to the meat that the people offer.” (The focus is on the right of priests to the offered food.)
Heb. 7:13: “This one of whom we are talking is from another clan. No one from that clan was ever a priest.” (The focus in on the legitimacy of this priest’s vocation.)
Jas. 2:21: “Remember our ancestor Abraham, when God tested him by asking him to give him his son by death. Abraham was to the point of stabbing/killing his son, thus proving his obedience.” (The focus is on the sacrifice as a demonstration of faith/obedience.)
Rev. 6:9 (8:3,5; 9:13; 14:18; 16:7): “I saw the souls of them that…They were under the table that holds God’s fire/coals.” (This keeps the concepts of: furniture, receptacle for keeping fire, and location near God.)
Rev. 11:1: “Go to the temple, Measure the building and the inside enclosure (the outside is contrasted in v. 2). Measure the burning place for offered animals. Then count the people who are worshiping there.” (This altar is probably the brazen altar in a temple on earth, since people are worshiping there and since outside this area conquerors are allowed to subjugate for a certain time.)
In the Hebraic English translation of Everett Fox it is translated as slaughter-site and likewise in the German translation by Buber / Rosenzweig as Schlachtstatt.
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).
There were two types of camel known in Bible times the most common being the Arabian Dromedary camelus dromedarius, which was indigenous to the area. The two-humped Bactrian Camel camelus bactrianus was also known and prized, but it was imported from Central Asia.
Camels belong to the same family as the South American llama, vicuna, alpaca, and guanaco, but camels are much larger and have a big fatty hump on their backs. Bactrian camels may reach a height of about two meters (6.5 feet), while dromedaries are even bigger. Dromedaries are a uniform light fawn color, while Bactrian camels are darker, especially in winter when they grow longer fur.
Camels do not have hooves but a large footpad with two broad toes ideally suited to walking on sand. In other ways too they are ideally suited to life in desert areas. They store excess food in their humps and this makes it possible for them to go a long time without eating. Special blood cells also enable them to go without water for long periods. They also have a very efficient digestive system and can extract the maximum amount of nutrition from apparently dry vegetation. This adaptation to harsh environments means that camels can make long journeys through dry areas which would be beyond the abilities of other types of pack animal such as donkeys. Camels were used for riding and for carrying heavy loads. They were also used to pull carts.
In winter the fur of camels thickens and grows longer and then when summer comes they shed their winter fur in large wads. These wads of camel hair are collected and twisted into cords and ropes or spun into thread which is then used for weaving coarse cloth. This cloth was usually used for making tents but it was sometimes used for making outer robes.
Camels’ milk was used as food and drink but their meat was considered unclean by the Israelites.
In spite of the fact that camels were considered to be unclean for food they were a symbol of wealth and commerce. People or nations with many camels were automatically viewed as commercially successful and wealthy as the possession of camels opened up the possibility of transporting goods long distances and engaging in trade.
In areas where camels are not known, the word is often transliterated from Hebrew or the dominant language of the area. However, in some languages descriptive names have been invented. In some South American languages names meaning “hump-backed llama” or “big alpaca with a hump” have been used. Elsewhere expressions such as “hump-backed horse” have been used. A fuller description should usually be included in a glossary or word list.
