10See now, the people of Ammon, Moab, and Mount Seir, whom you would not let Israel invade when they came from the land of Egypt and whom they avoided and did not destroy,
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of 2 Chronicles 20:10:
Kupsabiny: “God, when the people of Israel came from Egypt, you did not allow them to fight the Ammonites, Moabites and the people who lived in the mountain of Seir. So, the people of Israel did not destroy those people.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “When [they] came from the land of Egypt you did not allow the Israelites to enter the lands of the Ammonites, the Moabites and the peoples of Mount Sier. The Israelites left them just like that without destroying them. Now these countries have come to attack us.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “‘Now we are being-attacked by people who came from Ammon, Moab, and Mount Seir. Long-time-ago you did- not -allow their territories to be-invaded by the Israelinhon when they came-out of Egipto. So the Israelinhon avoided them and they did- not -destroy them.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “You would not allow our Israeli ancestors to enter the countries of Ammon and Moab and Edom when they were traveling from Egypt to Canaan. So our ancestors turned away from those areas and did not attack the people there and did not destroy them. But now they are coming here to attack us.” (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 way to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
The Hebrew that is translated as “let” or “allow” in English is translated in the Shinkaiyaku Bible as o-yurushi (お許し), combining “allow/permit” (yurushi) with the respectful prefix o-. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
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 way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. Here, goran (ご覧) or “see/behold/look” (itself a combination of “behold/see” [ran] and the honorific prefix go- — see behold / look / see (Japanese honorifics)) is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).”
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or modern English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.
As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.
In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.
Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”
In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.
Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking.” (Source Philip Noss)
In the most recent Manchu translation of 1835 (a revision of an earlier edition from 1822), God is never addressed with a pronoun but with “father” (ama /ᠠᠮᠠ) instead. Chengcheng Liu (in this post on the Cambridge Centre for Chinese Theology blog ) explains: “In Manchu tradition, as in Chinese etiquette, second-person pronouns could be considered disrespectful when speaking to superiors or spiritual beings. Manchu Shamanist prayers avoided si [‘you’] and sini [‘your’] for this very reason. To use them for God would be, in Lipovzoff’s [one of the two translators] words, ‘the most uncouth and indecent way to speak to the Almighty — as if He were a servant or slave.’ There was also a grammatical problem. In Manchu, si and sini could refer to both singular and plural subjects. For a faith that insisted on the singularity of God, this was potentially confusing. By contrast, repeating ama removed any ambiguity.”
And now behold: The Hebrew focusing particle rendered behold is intended to concentrate God’s attention on what Jehoshaphat is about to say. Like Good News Translation, many modern versions leave it untranslated.
The men of Ammon and Moab and Mount Seir: The men (literally “the children/sons”) may be rendered “the armies” (Contemporary English Version, New Living Translation) or “the soldiers.” Several Old Testament passages show clearly the relationship between Seir and Edom (see Gen 32.3; 36.8-9, 21; Num 24.18; Jdg 5.4; 2 Chr 25.14). Therefore it is not surprising that several modern versions translate Mount Seir as “Edom” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, New Century Version) or “Edomites” (Bible en français courant, Parole de Vie, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente). Even where this identity with Edom is not made, other versions show clearly that Mount Seir does not refer to a mountain but to people by saying “the people of the hill-country of Seir” (Revised English Bible) or “the inhabitants of the mountains of Seir” (La Bible du Semeur). See the comments on 1 Chr 4.42.
Whom thou wouldest not let Israel invade when they came from the land of Egypt, and whom they avoided and did not destroy: The nations that God protected when the Israelites came to possess the land are now the very nations that are threatening Judah. See Num 20.14-21 and Deut 2.4-19. Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version both make it clear that the term Israel refers to “our ancestors,” that is, the ancestors of Jehoshaphat and his people. In the Hebrew text the word Israel is a collective noun in the singular, but the verbs rendered came, avoided, and destroy are plural. When they came from the land of Egypt refers to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. New Century Version provides a helpful model for the last half of this verse, saying “You wouldn’t let the Israelites enter their lands when the Israelites came from Egypt. So the Israelites turned away and did not destroy them.”
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Ellington, John E. A Handbook on 1-2 Chronicles, Volume 1. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2014. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.