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

wild animal

The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated in English as “wild animal” or similar is translated in Newari as “animal that lives in the jungle.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)

hyena

The word tsavu‘a occurs only twice in the Bible one of them being in the phrase ‘ayit tsavu‘a (Jeremiah 12:9). The word ‘ayit is usually taken to mean a screamer and in Genesis 15:11 it is obviously a bird hence the interpretation “bird of prey.” tsavu‘a is taken to mean “speckled blotched”. Thus the “speckled screamer” is taken by some scholars to mean “speckled bird of prey” and by others to mean “hyena.” However, there are also scholars who relate ‘ayit to a different Hebrew root that means “to attack greedily” and take ‘ayit to mean “prey” or even “carrion”. These latter scholars interpret ‘ayit tsavu‘a to mean “prey for hyenas” or “carrion for hyenas.” It is recommended that this exegesis be followed. Another possible rendering of the phrase could even be a place of scavenging hyenas.

There is considerable doubt about the meaning of the Hebrew word tsiyim and different translations have marmots, wild animals, wild cats, desert animals and even sharks and dolphins. It is clear that the word refers to a specific dangerous wild animal (possibly which lives in the desert) often associated with destruction and with jackals. Although not mentioned at all in the English versions there are many scholars zoologists among them who interpret this word as referring to the hyena.

The uncertainty surrounding the word relates to the fact that nobody is sure what other Hebrew words tsiyim is related to. Some relate it to a word for “desert”, thus “desert creature”. This interpretation does not exclude the hyena and in fact since the references seem to be to a specific animal rather than to desert animals in general the contexts would all fit “hyena” well. The trend among scholars today is to associate it with a word that disappeared early from Hebrew meaning “to wail or yelp”. The fairly obvious conclusion from this would be that the word means “the wailer”, that is the hyena.

The Striped Hyena Hyaena hyaena has been a very well-known and common animal in the Middle East since time immemorial. One would expect to find references to it in the Bible.

Hyenas emerge at night from holes and hollows under logs. They are best known as scavengers. They eat carcasses and bones of all kinds and forage in refuse dumps around cities, towns, and villages. However, they also hunt and are opportunistic, killing young goats, sheep, and baby gazelles. They often occupy abandoned houses or tombs.

Their weird calls at night vary from loud whoops and howls when they mark territory and contact family members to moans when they chase away rival scavengers and to yelps and wails when they are frightened away by humans or other predators.

The striped hyena is also found in northeast Africa the Arabian Peninsula and India. Like all hyena species it looks like a big dog with a large head. Its front legs are longer than its back legs and it has a stiff upright mane that stretches from between its ears all the way down its back to the end of its tail. It is a brownish gray color with dark indistinct stripes that become spots and blotches on its neck.

Since we cannot be one hundred percent sure that tsiyim refers to hyenas neither can we be sure of the connotations of the word. However from what is known about hyenas and their significance to other Semitic peoples we can draw some conclusions. As scavengers that eat carcasses hyenas thrive in times of famine or war. They are thus associated with both types of catastrophe. Their weird noises at night are often associated with demons and stories abound of ghosts that return in the form of hyenas. And finally probably because they are known to eat human corpses that have not been properly buried most people view them with repugnance. Anywhere in the Middle East to call someone a hyena is a terrible insult.

A different, but very similar species of hyena, the Spotted Hyena Crocuta crocuta, is found throughout eastern, central, and southern Africa. Another species, the Brown Hyena Hyaena brunnea, is found in southwestern Africa. In these areas, therefore, a word for hyena will be easy to find.

In areas where some kind of wild scavenging dog or wolf is known, the name for this animal can be used. Elsewhere one may use a phrase like “wild dog” or a transliteration and give a fuller description in the glossary or word list.

Striped Hyena, Wikimedia Commons

Source: All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible (UBS Helps for Translators)

Chaldean

The name that is transliterated as “Chaldean” in English means “astrologer,” “wanderers.” (Source: Cornwall / Smith 1997 )

In Libras (Brazilian Sign Language) it is translated with the sign that combines “Mesopotamia” (see here) and “spreading out,” since the Chaldeans originated in southern Mesopotamia and spread out from there. (Source: Missão Kophós )


“Chaldean” in Libras (source )

More information about Chaldea .

For more information on translations of proper names with sign language see Sign Language Bible Translations Have Something to Say to Hearing Christians .

complete verse (Isaiah 23:13)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 23:13:

  • Kupsabiny: “It was not the people of Assyria who destroyed Tyre,
    but those who destroyed (them) were the people of Babylon.
    They laid siege to the walls of that city
    and fought the people in the city.
    They demolished that city
    to belong to animals alone.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “Look at the country of the Babylonians,
    Now there is no account of that nation.
    The Assyrians have made it into a place for wilderness animals.
    They have built siege towers
    and as for its fortresses,
    they have been destroyed and made desolate.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “[You (plur.)] look-at the land of those of/from-Babilonia. Where are now her people? Asiria made Babilonia a dwelling-place of the wild animals. For they have-attacked it, broke-down the strong portions of it, and leave (it) in ruined.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Think about what happened in Babylonia:
    the people who were in that land have disappeared.
    The armies of Assyria have caused that land to become a place where wild animals from the desert live.
    The Assyrians built dirt ramps to the top of the walls of the city of Babylon;
    then they entered the city and tore down the palaces
    and caused the city to become a heap of rubble.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Isaiah 23:13

All the modern versions consulted use a mixture of prose and poetry in verses 13-18. Translators should do what is natural in their languages.

The meaning of this verse 13 in Hebrew is unclear. All major versions have a footnote to that effect. It is literally “Behold land of Chaldea, this the people it is not Assyria, he established her [Tyre] for wild beasts, they [the Chaldeans] set up their siege towers, they razed her [Tyre] palaces, they made her a ruin” or “Behold land of Chaldea, this is the people that is no more, Assyria established her [Chaldea] for wild beasts, they [the Assyrians] set up their siege towers, they razed her [Chaldea] palaces….” There is doubt about the clause breaks in the first half of the verse. The referents for the pronouns are also uncertain. Tyre is not explicitly mentioned in the Hebrew. These are the two main interpretations for this verse:

(1) Tyre was destroyed by Babylonia, not Assyria. This view sees the verse as a parenthetical remark (so Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, Revised English Bible).
(2) Babylonia was destroyed by Assyria. According to this view, Tyre was also attacked by Assyria (so Contemporary English Version, New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

The first interpretation sees Babylonia as the threat to Tyre, while the second one sees Assyria as the enemy. The main cause for this division of opinion is the uncertainty about where to divide the clauses in the first half of the verse (see the literal renderings above). Both interpretations are grammatically possible, so we have no objective way of determining which one is correct. Depending on their interpretation, scholars assign various dates to the possible historical situation alluded to here. Translators will probably not be able to resolve these issues, so they should place one interpretation in their translation, and the other one in a footnote. They should also note that the Hebrew is very unclear. If translators wish to follow the first view, Good News Translation provides a good model. See also the first example below. For the second view Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch has a helpful model, which reads “Think of Babylonia! The people who used to live there don’t exist anymore. The Assyrians erected siege towers, they left the fortresses in ruins, and they abandoned the land to the wild animals.” See also the second example below.

Behold the land of the Chaldeans!: For Behold see the comments on 3.1. Here it calls on the people of Judah as the audience to reflect seriously about the Babylonians. It may be rendered “Just think about the example of.” The land of the Chaldeans refers to the nation of Babylonia. For the Chaldeans, see 13.19.

This is the people; it was not Assyria: For Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, which follow the first interpretation mentioned above, these two clauses continue to place focus on the Babylonians. An alternative model that expresses this for the first half of this verse is “Consider the Babylonians, they are the ones to be concerned about and not the Assyrians.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and the other versions that follow the second interpretation mentioned above have one clause here with Assyria placed in the next clause; for example, New International Version begins this verse with “Look at the land of the Babylonians, this people that is now of no account! The Assyrians….” For Assyria see 7.17.

They destined Tyre for wild beasts is literally “he established her for wild beasts.” As noted earlier, Tyre is not mentioned in the Hebrew text (see the comments above). For wild beasts, see the comments on 13.21. These animals live in desolate places, so this clause is a figure for the devastation caused by the aggressors. Revised English Bible and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh render the Hebrew noun for wild beasts as “ships.” This noun carries both meanings. However, the sense of “wild animals” fits this context better.

They erected their siege towers, they razed her palaces, they made her a ruin: These three actions describe how the aggressors treated the people they attacked. It summarizes a successful attack leading to the destruction of a city. As noted before, the prophet often uses three or four expressions to describe a situation. Their siege towers refers to the towers constructed by the enemy outside the city walls from which to launch an attack, as well as to prevent people from entering or leaving the city. It may be rendered “their towers from which to attack it.” They razed her palaces means they completely destroyed the fortified buildings within the city. The Hebrew word translated palaces is a general word for important buildings in a city. They may include the royal palace and some other fortified buildings (see Amos 1.4 and 3.11, where the same word is rendered “strongholds”). The fortified buildings offered a last line of defense. They were the places where the people could retreat if the city walls were breached or the gates were destroyed. So the prophet notes here that even the safest places in the city were captured and destroyed. As a result, they made her a ruin; that is, they completely destroyed the city.

Since the translation of this verse is so difficult, some translators may decide to follow a standard version in a major language already known to the readers. Two alternative models are:

• (Look closely at the Babylonians. They are the ones to consider, not the Assyrians. Babylonia determined that Tyre become a desolation. They built towers for attacking the city, destroyed her strongholds, and left her in ruins.)

• Look closely at the Babylonians. They are a nation no longer. Assyria destroyed it, setting it up as a haunt for wild animals. They built attack towers against it, destroyed her strongholds, and left her in ruins.

Quoted with permission from Ogden, Graham S. and Sterk, Jan. A Handbook on Isaiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2011. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .