“Sheep are known throughout most of the world, even though, as in Central Africa, they are a far cry from the fleecy wool-producing animals of colder climates. Where such animals are known, even by seemingly strange names, e.g. ‘cotton deer’ (Yucateco) or ‘woolly goat’ (Inupiaq), such names should be used. In some instances, one may wish to borrow a name and use a classifier, e.g. ‘an animal called sheep.’ In still other instances translators have used ‘animal which produces wool’, for though people are not acquainted with the animals they are familiar with wool.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida)
In Dëne Súline, it is usually translated as “an evil little caribou.” To avoid the negative connotation, a loan word from the neighboring South Slavey was used. (Source: NCEM, p. 70)
Note that the often-alleged Inuktitut translation of “sheep” with “seal” is an urban myth (source Nida 1947, p. 136).
The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Saul” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign that depicts “sword in chest” (referring to 1 Samuel 31:4 and 1 Chronicles 10:4) and also “self-centered.” (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “bear” in English is translated in Mungaka and Berom as “leopard” since bears are not known in that culture (see also wolf) (source: Nama 1990 and Andy Warren-Rothlin).
In Vidunda and Kutu it is translated as “lion,” in Kwere as “cheetah” (in Proverbs 17:12) (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext) and in Idakho-Isukha-Tiriki as “jackal” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).
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acceptable during that time frame, but weighed against today’s translation theory and procedures, they appear quite outdated and even questionable.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 bear that was known in biblical times was the Syrian Brown Bear ursus arctos syriacus. The same word in Hebrew refers to either male or female bears, and it is the gender of the associated words that will indicate the gender of the bear in a specific context.
The Syrian brown bear is very large, similar to the North American Grizzly Bear ursus horribilis, or the European Brown Bear ursus arctos. It has a rather doglike face. It has thick fur, and walks on all fours, but may stand up on its back legs to get a better view. When it stands up like this it may be 2 meters (6 feet) or more tall. It may also weigh over two hundred kilos (440 pounds). Like many other bears Syrian brown bears accumulate fat by gorging themselves in the summer and autumn, and then they sleep through the winter in caves or holes they have dug under logs.
Although its basic food is roots, berries, wild fruit, mice, and lizards, occasionally a rogue bear might kill small livestock. Bears are not able to see very well, and this means that often a person gets quite close to a bear before either one sees the other. The bear is then likely to attack, striking out with its strong digging claws and perhaps biting. Female bears are very protective of their young.
In the Bible, bears and lions are often mentioned together, both being symbols of fierce strength and danger. The female bear in particular was viewed as dangerous, especially if she had young.
For translators in the Northern Hemisphere, finding a word for bear is not usually too difficult. The best choice is a generic word for “bear” rather than the specific word for a type of bear. If a specific word must be used, the word for the grizzly bear is suitable in North America, while in Europe and parts of Asia the European brown bear is the closest relative to the Syrian brown bear. In parts of mainland Asia where the brown bear is not known, the word for the Himalayan Black Bear selenarctos thibetanus is the best choice. The word for the sloth bear of India and Ceylon, or for the sun and moon bears of Malaysia, Indo-China, and Indonesia should be avoided, since these bears have small teeth and are not dangerous.
In the higher parts of South America the word for the Spectacled Bear tremarctos ornatus can be used if this animal is known to the readers. For translators elsewhere in the Southern Hemisphere, the problem is more difficult, especially in areas where bears are not known. The use of the name for a local animal is seldom successful, since the more dangerous local animals are usually too different from bears. The only alternative is to transliterate the name from the dominant major or trade language of the area, or from the original biblical language, with a glossary item saying something like: “A bear is a large dangerous animal with big claws and teeth.”
The term that is translated as “lamb” in English is typically translated as “offspring of a sheep” in Ixcatlán Mazatec since there is no specific word for “lamb.” Since this could distract readers with thoughts of God being the sheep when the “lamb” refers to Jesus the translation into Ixcatlán Mazatec chose “little (individual) sheep” for those cases. (Source: Robert Bascom)
In Dëne Súline the native term for “lamb” directly translated as “the young one of an evil little caribou.” To avoid the negative connotation, a loan word from the neighboring South Slavey was used. (Source: NCEM, p. 70)
For the Kasua translation, it took a long process to find the right term. Rachel Greco (in The PNG Experience ) tells this story:
“To the Kasua people of Western Province, every four-legged animal is a pig. They call a horse a pig-horse, a cow, a pig-cow, and a sheep, a pig-sheep, because all of these animals have four legs, which is kopolo, or pig, in their language.
“When the translation team would translate the word, ‘sheep’ in the New Testament, they would translate it as ‘pig-sheep’. So when Jesus is referred to as the ‘Lamb,’ (John 1:29; Rev. 12:11; Rev. 17:14), they translated as ‘pig-sheep’ so that in John 1:29 it would read: ‘Behold, the pig-sheep of God.’
“When some members of the translation team attended the Translators Training Course, they had the opportunity to observe and study sheep for the first time. As they watched and learned more about the animals’ behavior, their understanding of these creatures—and God’s Word—rotated on its axis.
“Once during the course, Logan and Konni — the translation team’s helpers — were driving with the team to a Bible dedication when Amos, one of the team members, said passionately, ‘We can’t use the word kopolo in front of the word, ‘sheep’! Pigs know when they’re about to die and squeal and scream.’ The team had often watched villagers tie up pigs so they wouldn’t escape.
“’But,’ Amos said, ‘Jesus didn’t do that.’ The team had learned that sheep are quiet and still when death walks toward them. They had observed, as they translated the New Testament, the words of Isaiah 53 fulfilled: ‘Like a lamb led to the slaughter, he did not open his mouth.’ And now they understood what it meant. For this reason, the team decided not to put pig-sheep in the New Testament for the word ‘sheep,’ but used sheep-animal or, in their language, a:pele sipi.
“The Kasua translation team also chose to discard the word ‘pig’ before sheep because pigs are unclean animals to the Jews. The team knew that Jesus was called the ‘Lamb of God’ in the New Testament to show that he is unblemished and clean. Hopefully the Lord will open up the Kasua villagers’ eyes to these same truths about Jesus as they read of Him in their own language.”
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 1 Samuel 17:34:
Kupsabiny: “David told him that, ‘I look after my father’s sheep. If any lion or any other wild animal would come to take a sheep,” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “But David said to Saul, "Look, at times when a bear or a lion would come to snatch sheep from the flock, at that time your servant would be the one who was caring for his father’s sheep,” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “But David answered, ‘Sir, from time-past I (was) one-who-watches-over the sheep of my father. When a lion or a bear would-catch-in-its-mouth a sheep,” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “David replied, ‘I have been taking care of my father’s sheep for many years. Whenever a lion or a bear came and carried away a lamb,” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One important aspect of addressing someone else in one’s or someone else’s family is by selecting the correct word when referring to them. One way to do this is through the usage of an appropriate title within a conversation as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
When the speaker humbly refers to his or her father in the presence of respected interlocutor(s), chichi (父) is often used as in the case of Jacob’s sons referring to their father before Joseph (in Genesis 43:28). This form is very appropriately chosen as they refer to their father as “your servant” and bowed down before Joseph the prime minister.
In some conversations, archaic honorific forms for “father” are chosen that also contain chichi (父) and typically indicate a greater level of respect. These are o-chichi-ue (お父上) (only in Genesis 48:1), and chichi-gimi (父君) in few occasions (2 Samuel 10:3, 2 Samuel 13:5, and 1 Chronicles 19:3).
Yet another, ore often-used term is chichi-ue (父上) (see addressing one’s or someone else’s father respectfully in Japanese (父上)). An interesting contrast can be found in the message sent from Asa the king of Judah to Ben-hadad the king of Aram (1 Kings 15:19). In this utterance, commonly translated as “my father and your father” in English, Asa humbly refers to his father as chichi (父) but respectfully refers to Ben-hadad’s father as chichi-ue (父上). Similar contrasts can be found in 1 Kings 20:34 and 2 Chronicles 16:3 as well.
While chichi can carry this humbling effect in reference to the speaker’s father, in some types of dialogues/utterances such as in poetry, including prayers (e.g. Jesus teaching how to pray in Matthew 6:9) and proverbial teachings (e.g. “honor your father and mother” in Exodus 20:12, Deuteronomy 5:16 et al.), chichi is used without the humbling effect. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.