Following are a number of back-translations of 1 John 5:15:
Uma: “And if we know that he hears our requests, we also know that we have received whatever we request of him.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “And because we (dual) know that he hears our (dual) requests to him, we (dual) also know that he has already given us (dual) what we (dual) ask of him.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “He always listens to us when we pray, and because of that, we know also that He will give what we ask for.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “And if we know that he hears what we request, we also know that it is already ours.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well since we know now that he responds-positively to us, we also know now that he gives us whatever it is that we are asking for from him.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “If we know that God pays attention to whatever we ask for, then we know that whatever we ask for will be given to us when we pray to him.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “And if we know that he heeds us whatever we ask him, likewise we know that truly he will do what we ask him.”
Eastern Highland Otomi: “And if we know that he hears well, then also we know that he will give us what we ask for.”
Tzotzil: “If we know that he grabs our words, thus we know also that he will give us what we ask him.” (Source for this and two above: John Beekman in Notes on Translation 12, November 1964, p. 1ff.)
Candoshi-Shapra: “Surely we know that concerning all things which we ask for He hears us. If God Himself hears, that which we ask for we will receive.”
Yanesha’: “If we know that he, always he listens if whatever we ask for, we know also that already we receive whatever we ask for.”
Aguaruna: “We know that God hears what we ask for, therefore we know that he will do it like that.” (Source for this and two above: Mildred Larson in Notes on Translation, July 1965, p. 1-15)
Following are a number of back-translations of 3 John 1:13:
Uma: “There is still much I want to say to you, but I don’t want to write it in this letter.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “I would like to say much more to you but I won’t write (it) now.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “There are many things I would like to say to you but I don’t want to write them.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “There is still much that I want to tell you (sing.), but I have not included it in this letter” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “There’s much more which I would like to say to you which I would like to write, but I decided not to write it after all.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “There are more words I want to tell you, but I do not want to write them all here on the paper.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “I thought I would write you many things, but I do not want to write more on paper.”
Eastern Highland Otomi: “There is a lot that I want to tell you, but this is all (only this) I will put on this paper.”
Isthmus Zapotec: “I still have much more to write to you, but I don’t want to write it.” (Source for this and two above: John Beekman in Notes on Translation 12, November 1964, p. 1ff.)
Chicahuaxtla Triqui: “cover over” (a figure of speech which is also employed in Hebrew, but which in many languages is not acceptable, because it implies “hiding” or “concealment”)
Warao: “not being concerned with him clean your obonja.” Obonja is a term that “includes the concepts of consciousness, will, attitude, attention and a few other miscellaneous notions” (source: Henry Osborn in The Bible Translator 1969, p. 74ff. See other occurrences of Obojona in the Warao New Testament.)
Martu Wangka: “throw out badness” (source: Carl Gross)
Kyaka: “burn the jaw bones” — This goes back to the pre-Christian custom of hanging the jaw bones of murdered relatives on ones door frame until the time of revenge. Christians symbolically burned those bones to show forgiveness which in turn became the word for “forgiveness” (source: Eugene Nida, according to this blog )
Koonzime: “remove the bad deed-counters” (“The Koonzime lay out the deeds symbolically — usually strips of banana leaf — and rehearse their grievances with the person addressed.”) (Source: Keith and Mary Beavon in Notes on Translation 3/1996, p. 16)
Ngbaka: ele: “forgive and forget” (Margaret Hill [in Holzhausen & Ridere 2010, p. 8f.] recalls that originally there were two different words used in Ngbaka, one for God (ɛlɛ) and one for people (mbɔkɔ — excuse something) since it was felt that people might well forgive but, unlike God, can’t forget. See also this lectionary in The Christian Century.
Amahuaca: “erase” / “smooth over” (“It was an expression the people used for smoothing over dirt when marks or drawings had been made in it. It meant wiping off dust in which marks had been made, or wiping off writing on the blackboard. To wipe off the slate, to erase, to take completely away — it has a very wide meaning and applies very well to God’s wiping away sins, removing them from the record, taking them away.”) (Source: Robert Russel, quoted in Walls / Bennett 1959, p. 193)
Gonja / Dangme: “lend / loan” (in the words of one Dangme scholar: “When you sin and you are forgiven, you forget that you have been forgiven, and continue to sin. But when you see the forgiveness as a debt/loan which you will pay for, you do not continue to sin, else you have more debts to pay” — quoted in Jonathan E.T. Kuwornu-Adjaottor in Ibadan Journal of Religious Studies 17/2 2010, p. 67ff. )
Kwere: kulekelela, meaning literally “to allow for.” Derived from the root leka which means “to leave.” In other words, forgiveness is leaving behind the offense in relationship to the person. It is also used in contexts of setting someone free. (Source: Megan Barton)
Merina Malagasy: mamela or “leave / let go (of sin / mistakes)” (source: Brigitte Rabarijaona)
Mauwake: “take away one’s heaviness” (compare sin as “heavy”) (source: Kwan Poh San in this article )
In the Yatzachi Zapotec translation of the Gospel of John, any reference to the evangelist and presumed narrator is done in the first person.
The translator Inez Butler explains (in: Notes on Translation, September 1967, pp. 10ff.):
“In revising the Gospel of John in Yatzachi Zapotec we realized from the start that the third person references of Jesus to himself as Son of Man had to be converted into first person references, but only more recently have we decided that similar change is necessary in John’s references to himself as ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’ As I worked on those changes and questioned the informant about his understanding of other passages in the Gospel, I discovered that the reader misses the whole focus of the book as an eyewitness account unless every reference to the disciples indicates the writer’s membership in the group. In view of that we went back through the entire book looking for ways to cue in the reader to the fact that John was an eyewitness and a participant in a many of the events, as well as the historian.
“When the disciples were participants in events along with Jesus, it was necessary to make explicit the fact that they accompanied him, although in the source language that is left implicit, since otherwise our rendering would imply that they were not present.”
In this verse, the Yatzachi Zapotec says: “While the woman was gone we begged Jesus saying . . .”
In the Yatzachi Zapotec translation of the Gospel of John, any reference to the evangelist and presumed narrator is done in the first person.
The translator Inez Butler explains (in: Notes on Translation, September 1967, pp. 10ff.):
“In revising the Gospel of John in Yatzachi Zapotec we realized from the start that the third person references of Jesus to himself as Son of Man had to be converted into first person references, but only more recently have we decided that similar change is necessary in John’s references to himself as ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’ As I worked on those changes and questioned the informant about his understanding of other passages in the Gospel, I discovered that the reader misses the whole focus of the book as an eyewitness account unless every reference to the disciples indicates the writer’s membership in the group. In view of that we went back through the entire book looking for ways to cue in the reader to the fact that John was an eyewitness and a participant in a many of the events, as well as the historian.
“When the disciples were participants in events along with Jesus, it was necessary to make explicit the fact that they accompanied him, although in the source language that is left implicit, since otherwise our rendering would imply that they were not present.”
In this verse, the Yatzachi Zapotec says: “. . . After he gave thanks to God he gave to each of us disciples to give to the people who were sitting down. And he did the same with the fish. We gave them as much as they wanted.”
In the Yatzachi Zapotec translation of the Gospel of John, any reference to the evangelist and presumed narrator is done in the first person.
The translator Inez Butler explains (in: Notes on Translation, September 1967, pp. 10ff.):
“In revising the Gospel of John in Yatzachi Zapotec we realized from the start that the third person references of Jesus to himself as Son of Man had to be converted into first person references, but only more recently have we decided that similar change is necessary in John’s references to himself as ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’ As I worked on those changes and questioned the informant about his understanding of other passages in the Gospel, I discovered that the reader misses the whole focus of the book as an eyewitness account unless every reference to the disciples indicates the writer’s membership in the group. In view of that we went back through the entire book looking for ways to cue in the reader to the fact that John was an eyewitness and a participant in a many of the events, as well as the historian.
“When the disciples were participants in events along with Jesus, it was necessary to make explicit the fact that they accompanied him, although in the source language that is left implicit, since otherwise our rendering would imply that they were not present.”
In this verse, the Yatzachi Zapotec says: “. . . And Lazarus was sitting at the table with Jesus and with us and the other people.”
In the Yatzachi Zapotec translation of the Gospel of John, any reference to the evangelist and presumed narrator is done in the first person.
The translator Inez Butler explains (in: Notes on Translation, September 1967, pp. 10ff.):
“In revising the Gospel of John in Yatzachi Zapotec we realized from the start that the third person references of Jesus to himself as Son of Man had to be converted into first person references, but only more recently have we decided that similar change is necessary in John’s references to himself as ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’ As I worked on those changes and questioned the informant about his understanding of other passages in the Gospel, I discovered that the reader misses the whole focus of the book as an eyewitness account unless every reference to the disciples indicates the writer’s membership in the group. In view of that we went back through the entire book looking for ways to cue in the reader to the fact that John was an eyewitness and a participant in a many of the events, as well as the historian.
“When the disciples were participants in events along with Jesus, it was necessary to make explicit the fact that they accompanied him, although in the source language that is left implicit, since otherwise our rendering would imply that they were not present.”
In this verse, the Yatzachi Zapotec says: “And I stooped and looked into the grave, and I saw the clothes on the ground, but I did not enter.”
Note that the EnglishLiving Bible (publ. 1971) translates the same way.
Following are a number of back-translations of John 11:19:
Uma: “So, there were many Yahudi people who came to comfort Marta and Maria at the death of their relative.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Therefore many Yahudi went to Marta and Mariyam to comfort them because their brother had died.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “There were many Jews from Jerusalem who had gone to Martha and Mary to comfort them because of their dead brother.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “So many Jews had gone to go comfort Marta and Maria.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “and many were the Judio who went there to Marta and Maria’s place, to comfort them because of their brother who had died.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Many Jews had gone to greet Martha and Mary to comfort them about their brother who had died.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Ojitlán Chinantec: “And many Jews came to the house of Martha and Mary to help on the occasion of the death of Lazarus, their brother.”
Huehuetla Tepehua: “Many Israelites had come to see Martha and Mary. They wanted to make them forget their sorrow about their dead brother Lazarus.”
Yatzachi Zapotec: “And many of our fellow Israelites from Jerusalem had arrived where Martha and Mary were to comfort them because their brother had died.” (Source for this and two above: John Beekman in Notes on Translation 12, November 1964, p. 1ff.)
