The Greek, Ge’ez, and Hebrew that is translated as “fox” in English is translated in Mam as “weasel.” Ron Ross explains: “Foxes is often a difficult concept to express in this part of the world. The Mayas don’t seem to know them. In the Mam project we finally put ‘weasel’ rather than ‘coyote,’ which were basically our choices.”
In Toraja-Sa’dan it is translated as sindallung or “civet cat.” H. van der Veen (in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 21 ff. ) explains: “This animal is a real chicken thief, and is a type of cat with a head resembling that of a fox.”
In Noongar, it is translated as mokiny or “dingo” (in Luke 9:58) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang) and in Newari as “small jackal” (source: Newari Back Translation).
In Sümi Naga, the replacement of “fox” with “dog” was cited in 2026 as one of the reasons for the rejection of a new “Easy-to-Read” Bible in that language (see this article ).
The Greek and Hebrew terms that are translated as “hypocrite” in English typically have a counterpart in most languages. According to Bratcher / Nida (1961, p. 225), they can be categorized into the following categories:
those which employ some concept of “two” or “double”
those which make use of some expression of “mouth” or “speaking”
those which are based upon some special cultural feature
those which employ a non-metaphorical phrase
Following is a list of (back-) translations from some languages:
Mazahua: “have a swollen mouth” (from too much speaking)
Tai Dam: “have a straight mouth and a crooked heart”
Kongo: “the bitterness of white” (an idiom based on the fact that white-wash looks nice but tastes bitter)
Merina Malagasy: “spread a clean carpet” (an expression used in Madagascar to describe one who covers up the dirt of an unswept floor just before the arrival of guests)
Zanaki: “those who make themselves out to be good”
Tetelcingo Nahuatl: “those who deceive” (this and all examples above acc. to Bratcher / Nida 1961, p. 225)
Kafa: “one who makes as if his belly is clean” (source: Loren Bliese)
Bauzi: “good on top person” (source: David Briley in Kroneman (2004), p. 502)
Tibetan: kha chos pa (ཁ་ཆོས་པ།), lit. “mouth + religion + person” (used for instance in Matt. 7:5) or sgyu zog can (སྒྱུ་ཟོག་ཅན།), lit. “deception + fraud + person” (used for instance in Matt. 24:51) (source: gSungrab website )
Low German: “actor in a comedy” (translation by Johannes Jessen, publ. 1933, republ. 2006)
Lélé: ne kub so or “make mouth two” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
The Latvian term liekulis was likely coined by the Bible translation of Ernst Glück (1654–1705) in the late 17th century and is still being used today (source ).
The English version of Sarah Ruden (2021) uses “play-actor.” She explains (p. li): “A hupokrites is fundamentally an actor. The word has deep negativity in the Gospels on two counts: professional actors were not respectable people in the ancient world, and traditional Judaism did not countenance any kind of playacting. I write ‘play-actor’ throughout.”
The Greek that is often translated in English as “he breathed his last” is translated with idioms that include “his life-force broke-off” (Indonesian, Balinese), “his breath stopped (or: was-exhausted” (Ekari, Sranan Tongo), or “his breath (and body) parted-with-each-other” (Toraja-Sa’dan). (Source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
In the German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999) it is idiomatically translated with er hauchte sein Leben aus or “he breathed out his life.”
The Greek and Ge’ez that is translated in English as “devil” (itself via late Latin from Greek diabolos: “accuser, slanderer”) is sometimes translated with indigenous specific names, such as “the avaricious one” in Tetelcingo Nahuatl, “the malicious deity” in Toraja-Sa’dan (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel), or in Yoruba as èṣù. “Èṣù is thought of as bringing evil, but also as giving protection. The birth of a child may be attributed to him, as the names given to some babies show, Èṣùbiyi (Èṣù brought this forth), and Èṣùtoyin (Èṣù is worthy of praise).” (Source: John Hargreaves in The Bible Translator 1965, p. 39ff. . See also this article by Tunde Adegbola: Èṣù is not Satan: A Christian apologist’s perspective .)
Other translations include:
Muna: Kafeompu’ando seetani or “Master of the evil-spirits” (source: René van den Berg)
Mairasi: owe er epar nan or “headman of malevolent spirits” (source: Enggavoter 2004)
Ojitlán Chinantec: as “head of the worldlings” (source for the last two: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125).
Mandarin Chinesemóguǐ (魔鬼), literally “magical ghost.” This is a term that was adopted from Buddhist sources into early Catholic writings and later also by Protestant translators. (Source: Zetzsche 1996, p. 32)
Uma: “King of Evil-ones” (source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “leader of demons” (source: Yakan Back Translation)
Bariai: “the bad man” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
Kupsabiny: “the Enemy” (source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Adioukrou: agn: “The word agn has been used by Adioukrou for ‘the devil’ through the years despite significant differences between these two categories. The devil of the Bible is an independent spirit being, not a psychic force. In the New Testament, the devil has clearly rebelled against God; agn is perceived to be working under God. The devil is hell-bent on getting people to rebel against God with him, but his only power is to deceive and tempt; people are victims of agn, and often are unaware of agn’s work in their lives. In the Bible, the devil is evil; agn can be used to do good or evil. Many features of traditional agn are not found in the devil of the Bible at all: making a person clairvoyant, soul eating, flying around at night while the person’s body is in bed, being a power that is inherited at birth.abŋ ŋuŋ, originally ‘evil spirit (‘the spiritual/invisible part of a person that leaves the body at death, not an independent spirit being’). (…) When doing the field research for this project, I was very surprised to see the way the category of agn is in the process of being transformed and converted as it is accessed to process Scripture.” (Source: Hill 2006)
In Lak and Shughni it is translated with terms of feminine gender. Vitaly Voinov tells this story (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight):
“In the Lak language of Dagestan, the names ‘Iblis’ and ‘sheytan’ (referring to Satan and his minions, respectively) in this language were borrowed from the Arabic Islamic tradition, but they entered Lak as feminine nouns, not masculine nouns. This means that they grammatically function like nouns referring to females in Lak; in other words, Laks are likely to think of Iblis as a woman, not a man, because of the obligatory grammatical patterning of Lak noun classes. Thus, when the team explained (in Russian) what the Lak translation of Jesus’ wilderness temptation narrative at the beginning of Matthew 4 said, it sounded something like the following: ‘After this, the Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by Iblis… .The temptress came to Jesus, and she said to Him…’
“Since this information (that the devil is a female spirit) is part of the very name used for Satan in Lak, nothing can really be done about this in the translation. The Lak translator did not think that the feminine gender of Iblis should cause any serious misunderstandings among readers, so we agreed to leave it in the translation. Prior to this, I had never heard about languages in which the devil is pictured as a woman, but recently I was told by a speaker of the Shughni language that in their language Sheytan is also feminine. This puts an interesting spin on things. The devil is of course a spirit, neither male nor female in a biologically-meaningful sense. But Bible translators are by nature very risk-aversive and, where possible, want to avoid any translation that might feed misleading information to readers. So what can a translator do about this? In many cases, such as the present one, one has to just accept the existing language structure and go on.”
The Greek that is translated with “deny himself” or “deny oneself” is according to Bratcher / Nida “without doubt one of the most difficult expressions in all of Mark to translate adequately.” These are many of the (back-) translations:
In choosing a word for the Greek that is typically translated as “gospel” in English, a number of languages construct a phrase meaning “good news,” “joyful report” or “happiness-bringing words.” In some instances such a phrase may be slightly expanded in order to convey the proper meaning, e.g. “new good word” (Tzotzil), or it may involve some special local usage:
the Germandas Buch translation by Roland Werner (publ. 2009-2022) translates as “all-transformative good news” (alles verändernde gute Botschaft), also “good news,” and the German translation by Fridolin Stier (1989) as “message of salvation” (Heilsbotschaft)
Vitaly Voinov tells this story about the translation into Rutul (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight):
“In Rutul, it was only during the most recent consultant checking session that I realized that the Rutul word for Gospel – Incir (from Arabic إنجيل — Injil) — sounds and looks exactly like the word that means ‘fig’ in Rutul. This is a case of homonymy, in which two completely non-related words from differing historical sources have come to sound exactly alike. Most Rutul speakers know that incir means ‘fig’ because they grow this fruit in their yard or buy it at the market every week. However, because the religious sphere of discourse was heavily disparaged during the Soviet era, most people simply never encountered Incir with the meaning of ‘Gospel.’ This meaning of the word, which Rutuls of the pre-Soviet era knew from the Koran, simply fell into disuse and never had much reason for returning into contemporary Rutul since there is no Christian church established among the people. So if the translator continues to use the term Incir as the rendering for ‘Gospel,’ he runs the risk that most readers will, at best, read the word with a smile because they know that it also means ‘fig,’ and, at worst, will completely misunderstand the word. The seemingly ‘easy’ solution in this case is for the translator to use a Rutul neologism meaning ‘Joyful Message’ or ‘Good News,’ [see above] instead of Incir; but in fact it is not all that easy to make this change if the translator himself insists on using the historical word because at least some Rutuls still understand it as meaning ‘Gospel.’ This is a situation in which the translation team has to gradually grow into the understanding that a fully intelligible translation of Scripture is preferable to one that maintains old words at the cost of alienating much of the readership.”
