“In Genesis 31:15, Rachel and Leah complain that their father has been using up ‘the money given for us’. in Bari a phrase for dowry was used and (…) a phrase that is often heard, that ‘he has eaten our dowry.’ This quite often happens to a girl who is in the process of betrothal; if her father is unscrupulous he will arrange a marriage and receive and use up the dowry without giving the girl a proper chance to refuse, unless she is able to repay the money herself. (…) This parallel does not go the whole way, I know, but the idea behind the complaint is similar and very real in Bari.”
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “sell” in English is translated in Noongar as wort-bangal or “away-barter.” Note that “buy” is translated as bangal-barranga or “get-barter.” (Source: Bardip Ruth-Ang 2020)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the exclusive pronoun, excluding Jacob.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Genesis 31:15:
Newari: “Does he not deal with us like outsiders? He has not only sold us, he has even used up the money that was paid for us.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “We (excl.) are now different people in his sight. He sold us (excl.) and he has- now -finished spending our (excl.) price.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “He treats us as though we were foreigners! Your working for him all these years was like a payment that you gave him as a price for us, but we will not inherit any of that money that he got as a price for us. He has spent it all!” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Are we not regarded by him as foreigners?: this question expects a positive answer. Note that Good News Translation renders the question as a statement. Foreigners here means “foreign women,” “outsiders,” “aliens.” The reason they may be looked upon as foreigners is possibly that they have married Jacob, who comes from a foreign land and worships a foreign God, even though he is Laban’s nephew. Another way of understanding the expression regarded … as foreigners is “he treats us as if we were outsiders, not members of his family.” New Jerusalem Bible and Speiser translate the keyword as “outsiders,” while Revised English Bible has “strangers.” One translation expresses this as “women of another tribe”; another says “He now treats us as if we-two were not his children, we-two are just strangers.”
For he has sold us: Speiser says that “sell” used in regard to marriage was the term used in documents from that period and area. Part of the bride price was kept for the woman as her dowry. However, the text does not say that Jacob gave property or money as a bride payment. He gave fourteen years of service in exchange for his two wives. It is probably the case that Rachel and Leah considered the profit Laban made through Jacob’s service as their true bride payment. Instead of giving them some of the money earned from Jacob’s long years of service, Laban used it for himself.
He has been using up the money given for us: using up is literally “he has eaten up our silver.” This money would represent the income produced by Jacob’s ability to increase the flocks. In some languages this thought is expressed very much as in the literal Hebrew; for example, “Our father has eaten the money paid for us” or “Our father has eaten the wealth Jacob paid him to marry us.” In other cases everyday expressions are used, such as “the money he got as a price for us, he has spent it all.”
Quoted with permission from Reyburn, William D. and Fry, Euan McG. A Handbook on Genesis. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
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 show different degree of politeness is through the choice of a third person singular and plural pronoun (“he,” “she,” “it” and their various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. While it’s not uncommon to avoid pronouns altogether in Japanese, there are is a range of third person pronouns that can be used.
In these verses a number of them are used that pay particularly much respect to the referred person (or, in fact, God, as in Exodus 15:2), including kono kata (この方), sono kata (その方), and ano kata (あの方), meaning “this person,” “that person,” and “that person over there.”