הָרִ֣ינוּ חַ֔לְנוּ כְּמ֖וֹ יָלַ֣דְנוּ ר֑וּחַ יְשׁוּעֹת֙ בַּל־נַ֣עֲשֶׂה אֶ֔רֶץ וּבַֽל־יִפְּל֖וּ יֹשְׁבֵ֥י תֵבֵֽל׃
18we were with child; we writhed,
but we gave birth only to wind.
We have won no victories on earth,
and no one is born to inhabit the world.
The Hebrew, Ge’ez, and Greek that is translated as “bear (a child)” or “give birth to” is translated in Mairasi as “go to the forest,” reflecting the traditional place of childbirth for Mairasi women. (Source: Enggavoter 2004)
In Spanish it is translated as dar a luz, literally “to give to light.” Likewise, in Portuguese (dar à luz) and Italian (dare alla luce). (Source: Mark Terwilliger)
See also in childbirth / travail and birth.
The Greek, Latin and Hebrew that is translated with “salvation” (or “deliverance”) in English is translated in the following ways:
in Mairasi its is translated as “life fruit” or “life fruit all mashed out.” Lloyd Peckham explains: “In secret stories, not knowable to women nor children, there was a magical fruit of life. If referred to vaguely, without specifying the specific ‘fruit,’ it can be an expression for eternity.” And for “all masked out” he explains: “Bark cloth required pounding. It got longer and wider as it got pounded. Similarly, life gets pounded or mashed to lengthen it into infinity. Tubers also get mashed into the standard way of serving the staple food, like the fufu of Uganda, or like poi of Hawaii. It spreads out into infinity.” (See also eternity / forever)
In Lisu a poetic construct is used for this term. Arrington (2020, p. 58f.) explains: “A four-word couplet uses Lisu poetic forms to bridge the abstract concrete divide, an essential divide to cross if Christian theology is to be understood by those with oral thought patterns. Each couplet uses three concrete nouns or verbs to express an abstract term. An example of this is the word for salvation, a quite abstract term essential to understanding Christian theology. To coin this new word, the missionary translators used a four-word couplet: ℲO., CYU. W: CYU (person … save … person … save). In this particular case, the word for person was not the ordinary word (ʁ) but rather the combination of ℲO., and W: used in oral poetry. The word for ‘save’ also had to be coined; in this case, it was borrowed from Chinese [from jiù / 救]. These aspects of Lisu poetry, originally based on animism, likely would have been lost as Lisu society encountered communism and modernization. Yet they are now codified in the Lisu Bible as well as the hymnbook.”
In the Contemporary Chichewa translation (2002/2016) it is translated with chipulumutso which is used to refer to an act of helping someone who is in problems but cannot help him/herself come out of the problems because of weakness. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
See also save and save (Japanese honorifics) / salvation (of God) (Japanese honorifics).
The Greek, Latin and Hebrew that are translated as “(become) pregnant” in English is rendered as “got belly” (Sranan Tongo and Kituba) as “having two bodies” (Indonesian), as “be-of-womb” (Sinhala), as “heavy” (Balinese), and as “in-a-fortunate-state” (Batak Toba). (Source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
In Kafa it is translated as “having two lives” (source: Loren Bliese), in Southern Birifor as tara pʊɔ or “having stomach,” in Kamba as “be-heavy” (source for this and above: Andy Warren-Rothlin), in the Swabian 2007 translation by Rudolf Paul as kommt en andere Omständ, lit. “be in different circumstances,” and in Newari as “have in the womb” (source: Newari Back Translation).
In Mairasi it is translated as “have a soul [ghost].” (Source: Enggavoter, 2004)
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:
With thanks to Mikael Winninge, Director of Translation, Swedish Bible Society
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 the Lord.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 26:18:
The image of a woman in the pains of childbirth continues to be applied to the people of Judah in this verse. In verses 16-17 these pains may have described the way the people prayed, or the way they suffered as a the result of Yahweh’s punishing action. In verse 18 we learn that these childbirth pangs were supposed to end in a real birth, but it never happened.
We were with child is a metaphor rather than simile. It may be better in some languages to use a simile here, as in verse 17; for example, “It is as though we were pregnant.” This will indicate that this is an illustration rather than a fact.
We writhed repeats the verb from the previous verse. If the repetition cannot be kept, this clause may be rendered “we were in severe pain” (similarly Good News Translation).
We have as it were brought forth wind: Instead of giving birth to a child, the people produced nothing but wind. The Hebrew expression rendered as it were introduces a comparison. Here it compares the birth of a real child with producing nothing but wind. The Hebrew phrase rendered brought forth wind is probably a euphemistic expression for “making a bad smell.” Good News Translation says “but we gave birth to nothing,” but this does not convey the line’s irony. What the prophet means here is explained in the last two lines of the verse. Two failures are listed, but the interpretation of the lines is difficult.
We have wrought no deliverance in the earth: There are two terms here that are open to differing interpretations. First, there is the word deliverance, which renders a plural form of the Hebrew word often translated “salvation.” New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, and Bible en français courant say “salvation,” but Good News Translation, New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh use “victory/victories.” The idea of “victory/victories” fits the context better. God’s people were unable to defeat the foreign armies he sent to punish them. The second term rendered in different ways is earth. Usually the Hebrew word for earth is rendered “land.” Revised English Bible and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch have “the land,” referring to the land of Judah. Good News Translation makes this clear by saying “our land.” Most versions, however, have the earth, so that this line has a universal sense like the next one.
And the inhabitants of the world have not fallen: This is the second failure of God’s people. As in verse 9, the inhabitants of the world refer to all who live in the world. There are two possible interpretations for the Hebrew verb rendered fallen. Most translations render it in the sense of “giving birth”; for example, New International Version renders this line as “we have not given birth to people of the world,” and Revised English Bible says “[We have] given birth to no one to inhabit the world.” New Revised Standard Version, Contemporary English Version, New Jerusalem Bible, and Bible en français courant are similar. According to this interpretation of fallen, the prophet laments that he and his people were unable to bear children to populate the world. The other possible sense it can have here is “defeat.” Judah failed to defeat its enemies, causing their downfall. The Revised Standard Version rendering can be understood in this way. Another way to say it is “we did not bring about the downfall of the world’s people.” Some translations avoid the exegetical problem here by rendering this line in a very general way; for example, Good News Translation says “we have accomplished nothing.” This latter sense fits closely with the notion of bringing forth nothing but wind.
Obviously any translation of this verse should provide a footnote indicating that the Hebrew text is difficult to comprehend (see Good News Translation). Translators can consider the following examples for this verse:
• We were pregnant and enduring the pains of childbirth,
but it was as though all we produced was gas/wind.
We have not won any victories in the land,
nor have we defeated the inhabitants of the world [or, nor did we bear children to inhabit the world].
• We were like a pregnant woman in childbirth,
but giving birth to nothing but wind.
We failed to gain victory in the land,
and failed to bring about the downfall of the inhabitants of the world.
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 .
No comments yet.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.