untranslatable verses

The Swedish Bibel 2000 declared the 69 Old Testament verses referenced herein as “untranslatable.” Typically, other Bible translations translate those verses and mention in footnotes that the translation is uncertain or give alternate readings. Christer Åsberg, the Translation Secretary with the Swedish Bible Society at that time, explains why the Swedish Bible Society decided to not translate these verses at all (in The Bible Translator 2007, p. 1ff. ):

“In the new Swedish translation (SB) of 2000, [some verses are] not translated at all; [they are] indicated with three hyphens inside square brackets [- - -] [with a] reference to the appendix, where in the article ‘Text’ one will find a paragraph with roughly the following content:

In some cases the text is unintelligible and the variant readings differing to such an extent, that it is quite impossible to attain a reasonable certainty of what is meant, although some isolated word may occur, whose meaning it is possible to understand.

“If Bible translators find the Hebrew text untranslatable, what kind of text is it that they have produced in the translation into their own language? When a footnote says ‘The Hebrew is not understandable,’ what then is the printed text a translation of? And if the translators prefer to do without footnotes, are they then really released from the responsibility of informing their readers that the text they read is just mere guesswork?

“To leave a blank space in a Bible text seems to be an offensive act for many. (. . . ) To admit that a piece of Holy Scripture makes no sense at all may have been unimaginable in times past. In our enlightened era, an overprotective concern for the readers’ trust in the word of God is apparently a decisive factor when a translator tries to translate against all odds. The verdict ‘untranslatable’ is much more frequent in scholarly commentaries on different Bible books written by and for experts than in the translations or footnotes of the same books designed for common readers.

“Another reason (. . .) is a professional, and very human, reluctance to admit a failure. Also, many Bible translators lack translational experience of other literary genres and other classical texts where this kind of capitulation is a part of the daily run of things. They may have an innate or subconscious feeling that the Bible has unique qualities not only as a religious document but also as a linguistic and literary artifact. Completeness is felt to be proof of perfection. Some translators, and not so few of their clients, are unfamiliar with a scholarly approach to philological and exegetical matters. In some cases their background have made them immune to a kind of interpretative approximation common in older translations, confessional commentaries, and sermons. Therefore, their tolerance towards lexical, grammatical, and syntactical anomalies tends to be comparatively great.

“It is very hard to discern and to define the boundary between something that is extremely difficult and something that is quite impossible. I am convinced that all Bible translators in their heart of hearts will admit that there actually are some definitely untranslatable passages in the Bible, but are there a dozen of them or a score? Are there fifty or a hundred? Not even a group of recognized experts would probably pick out the same ten most obvious cases. (. . .)

“Conclusions:

  1. There are untranslatable passages in the Bible.
  2. How many they are is impossible to say—except for the translation team that decides which passages are untranslatable.
  3. An untranslatable passage cannot and should therefore not be translated.
  4. The lacuna should be marked in a consistent way.
  5. The translating team should stipulate their criteria for untranslatability as early as possible.
  6. It is an ethical imperative that the readers be comprehensively informed.
  7. Untranslatability has been and can be displayed in many different ways.
  8. An explanatory note should not confuse linguistic untranslatability with other kinds of textual or translational difficulties.
  9. The information given should make it clear that the translators’ recognition of untranslatability is a token of respect for the Bible, not a proof of depreciation.
  10. You shall not fear the void, but the fear of the void.”

With thanks to Mikael Winninge, Director of Translation, Swedish Bible Society

wine

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that are translated as “wine” in English is translated into Pass Valley Yali as “grape juice pressed long ago (= fermented)” or “strong water” (source: Daud Soesilo). In Guhu-Samane it is also translated as “strong water” (source: Ernest L. Richert in The Bible Translator 1965, p. 198ff. ), in Noongar as “liquor” (verbatim: “strong water”) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang), in Hausa as ruwan inabi or “water of grapes” (with no indication whether it’s alcoholic or not — source: Mark A. Gaddis), in sar as kasə nduú or “grape drink” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin), or in Papantla Totonac and Coyutla Totonac as “a drink like Pulque” (for “Pulque,” see here ) (source: Jacob Loewen in The Bible Translator 1971, p. 169ff. ).

In Swahili, Bible translations try to avoid local words for alcoholic drinks, because “drinking of any alcohol at all was one of the sins most denounced by early missionaries. Hence translators are uncomfortable by the occurrences of wine in the Bible. Some of the established churches which use wine prefer to see church wine as holy, and would not refer to it by the local names used for alcoholic drinks. Instead church wine is often referred to by terms borrowed from other languages, divai (from German, der Wein) or vini/mvinyo (from ltalian/Latin vino/vinum). Several translations done by Protestants have adapted the Swahili divai for ‘wine,’ while those done by Catholics use vini or mvinyo.” (Source: Rachel Konyoro in The Bible Translator 1985, p. 221ff. )

The Swahili divai was in turn borrowed by Sabaot and was turned into tifaayiik and is used as such in the Bible. Kupsabiny, on the other hand, borrowed mvinyo from Swahili and turned it into Finyonik. (Source: Iver Larsen)

In Nyamwezi, two terms are used. Malwa ga muzabibu is a kind of alcohol that people specifically use to get drunk (such as in Genesis 9:21) and ki’neneko is used for a wine made from grapes (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext).

In some Hindi translations (such as the Common Language version, publ. 2015 ), one term (dākharasa दाखरस — grape juice) is used when that particular drink is in the focus (such as in John 2) and another term (madirā मदिरा — “alcohol” or “liquor”) when drunkenness is in the focus (such as in Eph. 5:18).

In Mandarin Chinese, the generic term jiǔ (酒) or “alcohol(ic drink)” is typically used. Exceptions are Leviticus 10:9, Numbers 6:3, Deuteronomy 29:6, Judges 13:4 et al., 1 Samuel 1:15, and Luke 1:15 where a differentiation between weak and strong alcohol is needed. The Mandarin Chinese Union Version (2010) translates that as qīngjiǔ lièjiǔ (清酒烈酒) and dànjiǔ lièjiǔ (淡酒烈酒), both in the form of a Chinese proverb and meaning “light alcohol and strong drink.” (Source: Zetzsche)

Click or tap here to see a short video clip about wine in biblical times (source: Bible Lands 2012)

See also proceeds from the vine / anything that comes from the grapevine, wine (Japanese honorifics), filled with new wine, and wine (Gen 27:28).

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Hos 7:5)

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 translation uses the inclusive pronoun, including everyone.

king

Click here to view graphically

Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
  • Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))

Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:

“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on Hosea 7:5

On the day of our king: Most translations interpret this phrase as a celebration in connection with the king, although the Hebrew text is not explicit about it. It literally says “Day of our king,” without a preposition or definite article. The context does not make clear what kind of celebration might be intended. It could be his birthday or his coronation (which is very possible within the given historical setting). Good News Translation translates “On the day of the king’s celebration,” which is a good model to follow. Other possibilities include “On their king’s festal day” (New English Bible) and “On the day [or, When] the king prepared a feast.” Bible en français courant (1982) says “When one celebrated their king,” using a French idiom. New Jerusalem Bible is similar: “At the holiday for our king.” The Hebrew text has our king, but since Yahweh is the speaker (through the mouth of the prophet), it may be necessary to say “the king” (Good News Translation). Some scholars claim that the context (with some textual support) leads to the translation “their king” (Contemporary English Version, New English Bible), but the basis for this decision is unconvincing.

The princes became sick with the heat of wine: This line may be understood in two ways, depending upon the meaning given for the Hebrew word rendered heat. Recent studies indicate that it is a northern Israelite term for “poison.” Some may argue that “poison” refers figuratively to the evil effects that result when someone drinks too much of the alcohol found in wine. But there was so much assassination and political fighting going on in the northern kingdom of Israel at the time, that the idea of “poison” added to the wine is a genuine possibility. In any case, two interpretations are possible. According to the first interpretation, which is the usual one, this line means the king’s officials became drunk. The Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Peshitta follow this interpretation. In some cultures the link between heat and “drinking too much” is not uncommon. In that case a more literal translation will do. It is important though to use the right idiom. According to the second interpretation, which is the more recent one, heat should be translated as “poison.” The king’s officials became sick from the poison in the wine.

He stretched out his hand with mockers is rather obscure. The Hebrew here can be understood to say “his hand drew mockers.” Some scholars believe hand refers figuratively to power, in this case the power of the wine; for example, Wolff says “whose power enchants the mockers,” and Mays has “whose power draws the scorners.” Another interpretation is that the officials invite disloyal people to join in the drinking; for example, NET Bible says “they conspire with evildoers.” However, the Hebrew pronouns for he and his are singular, which makes the NET Bible translation less credible. These pronouns probably refer to the king (as made explicit in Good News Translation). He stretched out his hand is then a gesture indicating that the king joined in companionship with mockers. The mockers were people present who spoke in derision about the drunkenness of their leaders, but these people were undoubtedly the very ones who plotted to overthrow the king when he and his officials were drunk. New Jerusalem Bible says “while he accepts the homage of people who laugh at him,” and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has “He gave his hand to the traitors.” A translation that makes clear the probable meaning of this line is “the king included in his celebration those mockers who plotted against him.”

The Hebrew text separates what happened to the princes from what the king did. Good News Translation joins them, assuming that became sick … wine implies drunken celebration, and that stretched out his hand similarly refers to joining in that celebration. Good News Translation says “they made the king and his officials drunk and foolish with wine.” This model misses the idea that the king extended his friendship to traitors, so we do not recommend it.

In this verse many translations use the present tense (New International Version, New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible), either to indicate the historic present, or to indicate that this is what regularly occurs. Other translations use the past tense, relating a specific incident in the past (Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Assassinations did occur regularly, and this account can be understood as referring to either repeated incidents or a single past incident. Translators are free to select the tense that is appropriate for their own language.

Translation models for this verse are:

• During the festivities of the king
they fired up the officials with wine,
while the king joined those who laughed at him.

• During the coronation of the king
they made the officials sick with wine,
and the king colluded with his mockers.

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

SIL Translator’s Notes on Hosea 7:5

Paragraph 7:5–7

7:5a

The princes are inflamed with wine:
In Hebrew, this clause is literally “⌊the ⌋ princes became sick ⌊with ⌋ heat from wine.” This clause describes the effects of drinking a lot of wine.

The words “became sick” may imply that the princes were so drunk that they vomited (see the description in Isaiah 28:7–8). The word “heat” may also imply that their faces were flushed. However, it is more likely that these two descriptions are simply figurative ways to indicate that the princes were very drunk. English versions that use words such as inflamed or “heat” may do so to fit the simile of a hot oven in 7:4 and 7:6.

Here are some other ways to translate this clause:

• Use a natural way in your language to describe the effect of drunkenness. For example:

The rulers became crazy with wine (New Century Version)
-or-
The leaders were overcome with wine.

• Translate the idea of drunkenness directly. Leave the effects of drunkenness implied. For example:

the princes get drunk. (New Living Translation (2004))

on the day of our king: This refers to a celebration of some kind. The celebration may have been the king’s coronation day, his birthday, or some other special day to honor him. Many versions do not specify the kind of celebration it was.

Here are some other ways to translate this phrase:

On the day of the king’s celebration (God’s Word)
-or-
At the holiday for our king (New Jerusalem Bible)

7:5b

so he joins hands with those who mock him: This clause probably means that the king participated with his officials and other wicked people in showing scorn and mockery for God or for other people. The historical context is not known, so it is not possible to determine who the mockers were or what they were saying or doing to show their scorn.

Here are some other ways to translate this clause:

the king joins mockers. (God’s Word)
-or-
the king joined in with others who were showing their scorn

those who mock him: The Hebrew word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as those who mock him refers to people who are arrogant as well as scornful. But the focus of this word is on the disdainful way that mockers treat others rather than their feelings of pride. In the context of 7:1–4, they are people who reject God and refuse to follow his wise commands.

Here are some other ways to translate this word:

scoffers (New American Standard Bible)
-or-
arrogant people who show their scorn/contempt for others

© 2021 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.