Translation commentary on Mark 1:25

Exegesis:

epetimesēn (3.12; 4.39; 8.30, 32, 33; 9.25; 10.13, 48) ‘he rebuked.’ The verb literally means ‘to lay a timē [price, value] upon’ and originally it had a favorable meaning (cf. Abbott-Smith); in the N.T. however, it has the unfavorable meaning of ‘censure,’ ‘rebuke’ and even ‘punish.’ Moulton & Milligan: ‘censure,’ ‘lay under a penalty.’ This idea of censure, however, disappears in many instances; Arndt & Gingrich remark: “speak seriously, warn in order to prevent an action or bring one to an end,” and Kilpatrick finds this meaning uniformly in Mark; it is a command, rather than a reproof, and is specifically a prohibition, “desist from an action being performed” (cf. Lagrange: “issue a formal command”). In this verse, therefore, ‘prohibit,’ ‘stop,’ ‘command’ is to be preferred to ‘rebuke.’

autō ‘him’ or ‘it’: although, as we saw above, the subject of the verb ‘cried out’ is the man, not the spirit, the pronoun autō in this verse refers to the unclean spirit, as the content of the order which follows shows. A translation should make this clear: “him” (King James Version, American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version, Translator’s New Testament, Manson, Knox) is ambiguous and possibly misleading; ‘it’ (Moffatt) is clear (cf. The Modern Speech New Testament, “the spirit”).

phimōthēti (4.39) ‘be silent!’: the literal meaning of the verb phimoō ‘bridle,’ ‘muzzle’ does not survive in Mark; Moulton & Milligan quote Rohde on the use of this word with the sense of binding a person by means of a spell so as to make him powerless to harm, and give examples from the papyri. Notice that the only other place it is used in Mark (4.39), it is addressed to the storm.

Translation:

The introductory verb in this verse may be translated as ‘rebuke’ (in the sense of ‘scold’ or ‘censure’), but it is probably more accurately rendered as ‘to command sternly.’

The second verb of direct discourse, namely, saying is probably better omitted in most languages.

If the language in question distinguishes in pronominal reference between a demon and a man, one should make certain that the object of the command is the demon. In some instances it may even be wise to introduce the noun object, e.g. ‘sternly commanded the unclean spirit.’

Be silent is in Greek a firm, but not undignified way of demanding silence, equivalent more to English keep quiet than to shut up.

Whether one can translate literally ‘come out’ depends largely upon the manner in which people speak of demon possession. For example, in Yaka demons do not get into people, but are spoken of as ‘grabbing people,’ hence the appropriate term in this case would be ‘let go.’ In Amganad Ifugao the normal way of speaking would be ‘get out,’ not ‘come out.’ The appropriate term in any language will, as in all such types of problems, depend upon the traditional perspective reflected in normal usage.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 2:13

Exegesis:

exēlthen ‘he went out,’ i.e. of the house and town (cf. Swete).

palin ‘again’: probably refers back to 1.16, although Lagrange thinks the reference is to 1.45.

thalassa ‘sea’ is the Lake of Galilee (cf. 1.16).

pas ho ochlos ‘all the crowd’: not the same ‘crowd,’ of course, referred to in 2.4 (for the same expression pas ho ochlos ‘the whole crowd,’ ‘all the people’ cf. 4.1b, 9.15).

ērcheto … kai edidasken ‘came … and he taught’: the imperfect tense of the verbs portrays repeated acts of coming, on the part of groups of people, and of teaching, on the part of Jesus.

ērcheto pros auton ‘was coming to him’: Revised Standard Version “gathered about him” is not quite consistent with the translation of the phrase elsewhere (cf. 1.45 “came to him” and 2.3 “came, bringing to him”), but is not out of keeping in this context.

autous ‘them’: that is, the people who composed ho ochlos ‘the crowd.’

Translation:

It may be necessary to introduce ‘Jesus’ as the subject of this verse, since the immediately preceding third person singular reference is the paralytic who was healed.

One must be consistent in the translating of sea which in most instances will be the equivalent of ‘lake’ (see 1.16).

One must make certain that the translation of all the crowd does not refer to the crowd of 2.4, for although undoubtedly some of the same people were in attendance on the two occasions, this is not the same group of people. It is better to translate ‘all the people.’

It is most important that a word for teach is not such as to imply merely class-room instruction, something which not infrequently happens in translations, since translation helpers assume that the educational processes introduced in mission schools are the only legitimate form of teaching. (We ourselves are often deceived in somewhat the same way, not realizing that the classroom technique, though useful for mass production methods is highly inefficient in essential communication.) One should employ either a descriptive term of common usage, e.g. ‘to give to be learned’ (Tzeltal), or some well-known figurative phrase which will be fully meaningful, e.g. ‘to engrave the mind’ (Ngäbere) and ‘to cause others to imitate’ (Huichol).

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 3:24 – 3:25

Exegesis:

basileia (cf. 1.15) ‘kingdom’: here a political entity, in the sense of a country ruled by a king.

eph’ heautēn ‘upon itself,’ i.e. ‘against itself.’

meristhē (3.24, 25, 26; 6.41) ‘be divided,’ ‘be split,’ ‘be disunited.’

dunatai … dunēsetai ‘it cannot … it will not’: simply a stylistic change from the present to the future tense.

stathēnai … stēnai ‘stand … stand’: the meaning of both infinitives is the same, though one is passive and the other active: ‘stand,’ ‘maintain itself,’ ‘endure’ (the verb histēmi used absolutely, without an object, may mean ‘stand firm’).

oikia ‘house’: not simply a building, but the people who live in it: ‘household,’ ‘family.’ Rawlinson points out that in Aramaic usage the word may be used in a broad sense for a political domain.

Translation:

In some languages one cannot speak of a ‘kingdom’ as ‘being divided against itself.’ This type of passive is especially complex because there is no agent, other than the kingdom itself. Therefore, one must often render this passage in terms of ‘the people of a kingdom’ causing this type of division.

The division spoken of in this verse is essentially a state of enmity and war among the people of a region, not an actual division of a territory. Accordingly, this clause must often be translated as ‘if the people of a kingdom fight against each other’ (Mitla Zapotec, Central Tarahumara). However, this division may also be spoken of in terms of antipathy, e.g. ‘hate one another’ (Copainalá Zoque).

Cannot stand is rendered in some languages as ‘cannot continue to exist,’ ‘cannot remain,’ or ‘cannot be any longer.’

A literal rendering of verse 25 can also be interpreted in a completely materialistic manner, thus missing the significance of the passage. As in the case of verse 24, one may translate ‘the people of a family fight among themselves’ (Copainalá Zoque). Since clan squabbles are not at all uncommon in many societies, this reference to the family, especially in its extended clan form, can be very meaningful (cf. Toraja-Sa’dan ‘the members of a family,’ Indonesian ‘the inmates of the house’).

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 4:33 – 4:34

Exegesis:

toiautais parabolais pollais ‘with many parables such as these.’

toioutos (6.2; 7.13; 9.37; 10.14; 13.19) ‘such,’ ‘of this kind,’ ‘of this sort.’

elalei autois ‘he was speaking to them (all)’: autois ‘them’ includes the crowd (4.1) and the disciples; only to the disciples was the explanation given (cf. parallel Mt. 13.34).

kathōs ēdunanto akouein ‘as they were able to hear,’ ‘in proportion to their ability to hear’ (cf. Jn. 16.12, 1 Cor. 3.2).

chōris (only here in Mark) ‘apart from,’ ‘without.’

kat’ idian (6.31, 32; 7.33; 9.2, 28; 13.3) ‘privately,’ ‘alone.’

tois idiois mathētais ‘to his disciples’: although idios is properly ‘one’s own’ (as distinct from ‘another’s own’) it is often used simply as a synonym of the possessive pronoun ‘his’ – and that would appear to be its meaning in this passage.

epeluen (only here in Mark) ‘he interpreted,’ ‘he explained.’

Translation:

For parables see 3.23.

Spoke the word is the equivalent of ‘to preach,’ ‘to announce,’ or ‘to tell them the message.’ For preach see 1.4.

Because of the double reference in this verse, first to the people in general, identified as them, and later to the disciples, it may be necessary in some languages to translate as ‘Jesus told the good news to the people by means of many likeness-stories such as these.’ In Central Tarahumara this passage is rendered as ‘when he spoke … he only told them stories.’

As they were able to hear involves a rather complex type of proportion, rendered in Tzeltal as ‘as much as they could put in their hearts,’ in Inupiaqas ‘just as long as they could understand,’ and in Indonesian ‘according as they could understand.’

The double negative not … without must in some languages be rendered in a positive form: ‘he only spoke to them with parables.’

Privately is translatable as ‘when he was alone with his disciples.’

Explained everything maybe translated as ‘he told them what the stories meant.’

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 6:8 – 6:9

Exegesis:

kai parēggeilen autois hina ‘and he commanded them that…’: as in previous cases (cf. 5.18) hina ‘that’ does not indicate purpose, but the content of the command.

paraggellō (8.6) ‘give orders,’ ‘command.’

eis hodon ‘in the road,’ i.e. ‘for the journey.’

ei mē rabdon monon ‘except a staff only,’ not ‘except (for) one staff’: monon ‘only’ is an adverb (cf. 5.36), not an adjective, and modifies ei mē ‘except,’ ‘but.’

rabdos (only here in Mark) ‘staff,’ ‘rod’ used in traveling.

pēran (only here in Mark) ‘knapsack,’ ‘traveler’s bag’: here, more explicitly, a beggar’s bag. Lagrange points out it would be pointless to prohibit taking a bag for provisions when the taking of bread had already been forbidden.

mē eis tēn zōnēn chalkon ‘no money in their belts.’

zōnē (cf. 1.6) ‘girdle,’ ‘belt.’

chalkos (12.41) ‘copper,’ ‘brass’; ‘copper coin’; ‘money.’

In verse 9 the construction changes: instead of clauses governed by hina ‘that’ as in v. 8, there is one participial clause which is the direct object of the verb ‘he commanded,’ and one clause which is in the form of direct speech. For purposes of translation, however, there is no need literally to reproduce the Greek grammatical constructions; the content, not the form, is what matters.

alla hupodedemenous sandalia ‘but to wear sandals’ (i.e. rather than go barefooted).

hupodeomai (only here in Mark; cf. hupodēma 1.7) ‘bind under’: of sandals, ‘to put on,’ ‘to wear.’

sandalion (only here in Mark) ‘sandal’ (a synonym of hupodēma in 1.7).

kai mē endusēsthe duo chitōnas ‘and do not wear two tunics.’

enduō (cf. 1.6) ‘put on,’ ‘wear.’

chitōn (14.63; cf. himation 2.21) ‘tunic,’ ‘shirt,’ worn next to the skin: the command not to wear two tunics meant that one only was sufficient.

Translation:

Verses 8 and 9 present serious problems for translators because (1) the grammatical form shifts in the middle of the passage, from an indirect to a direct form, and (2) there are two awkward exceptions: the staff is an exception in what should be carried, and the extra tunic is forbidden in an otherwise positive command, i.e. to wear sandals and one tunic. This means that in a number of translations this passage must be recast to fit the requirements of the receptor language.

Charged them to take … may be altered in many languages into a form of direct command, for this greatly simplifies the syntactic problems in the rest of the passage, e.g. ‘he commanded them, Do not take….’

In verse eight there is a shift from negative to positive and again to negative in the Revised Standard Version order: nothing … except a staff; no …. In many languages this would be clearer if the exception to the negation were placed at the end, e.g. ‘do not take anything for your journey: do not take bread, a bag, or money in your girdles, take only a walking stick.’ In some languages (Southern Bobo Madaré), however, the positive would normally precede the negative, e.g. ‘take a stick in your hand, do not take anything else….’

Put on two tunics is equivalent in many instances to ‘wear two shirts.’ As Arndt and Gingrich point out the wearing of two tunics was a sign of effeminacy.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 6:49

Exegesis:

edoxan (10.42) ‘they thought,’ ‘they supposed.’

phantasma (only here in Mark) ‘apparition,’ ‘ghost.’

anekraxan (cf. 1.23) ‘they cried out,’ ‘they screamed’ in terror.

Translation:

Ghost is usually quite easily translated, for most peoples claim to have seen apparitions of dead people moving in shadowy forms, and for such spectres they usually have a name. In fact, in some languages there are several different names, depending upon the size and definiteness of form of the object in question.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 7:29 – 7:30

Exegesis:

dia touton ton logon ‘on account of this saying (of yours),’ ‘because of your reply’: a word of praise.

exelēluthen ‘it has (already) gone out’: the verb exerchomai ‘go out’ is used in connection with unclean spirits (or demons) in 1.25, 26; 5.8, 13; 7.29, 30; 9.25, 26, 29.

beblēmenon ‘lying’: either in repose, as an indication of normal health, or exhausted as a result of a final paroxysm caused by the demon’s withdrawal (cf. 9.20).

epi tēn klinēn (cf. 4.21) ‘on the bed.’

Translation:

Go your way may need to be shifted to ‘return’ or ‘go to your home,’ since a literal translation may imply setting out for a further destination.

Demon has left must be translated in conformity to regular idiomatic ways of describing this type of event (see 1.26).

In some languages one must be careful to avoid making the child lying in bed parallel with the demon gone. The first is a very logical object of the verb ‘to find,’ for she actually found the child in this state. However, she did not ‘find the demon,’ but simply discovered that he had left. This difference in the nature of the objects of the verb may be rendered as ‘saw the child lying in bed and realized (or, ‘learned’) that the demon had gone.’

One must make certain that the entire clause does not seem to be a rebuke, e.g. ‘because you said this, get out,’ an interpretation which has been implied in a number of translations.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Translation commentary on Mark 8:26

Text:

Instead of mēde eis tēn kōmēn eiselthēs ‘do not even enter the village’ of the great majority of modern editions of the Greek text, Taylor and Kilpatrick have mēdeni eipēs eis tēn kōmēn ‘do not tell anyone in the village.’

At the end of the verse Textus Receptus adds mēde eipēs tini en tē kōmē ‘nor tell (it) to anyone in the village,’ which is omitted by all modern editions of the Greek text; cf. Taylor and Kilpatrick, however, above.

Exegesis:

The words in this verse have already been dealt with: apostellō (1.2) ‘send,’ ‘send away’; eis oikon autou (8.3) ‘to his home,’ ‘home’; kōmē (6.6) ‘village.’

The ‘village’ is Bethsaida (v. 23): the man did not live in the village, however (v. 22).

Translation:

He sent him away must be rendered in some instances as ‘Jesus sent the man away,’ since there is again a shift of subjects from the preceding clause.

Sent him away must not contain the connotation of rejection. An equivalent may be ‘told him, Go to your home and do not go right back into the village.’

Do not even enter the village must not be translated by a verb form which would imply a permanent prohibition of such an action. What Jesus evidently wished to avoid was the man’s immediate return to the waiting crowd.

Negative commands, such as contained in the expression occurring in the Textus Receptus and the Kilpatrick text, may contain several negatives, depending of course upon the grammatical constructions of the receptor language in question. The following rendering in Copainalá Zoque is not unusual, ‘nor do not say nothing to nobody,’ in which the negatives reinforce, rather than cancel out, each other.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .