Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 27:7:
Kupsabiny: “God has not punished the Israelites like when he punished their enemies. And they did not lose people as many as their enemies lost.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “What! He has not struck Israel like he struck their enemies, has he? What! He has not killed them like he killed their enemies, has he?” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “God did- not -punish and kill Israel like the punishment and killings he did to its enemies.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “But now I ask, has Yahweh punished us Israelis like he punished our enemies? Has he punished us as much as he punished them?” (Source: Translation for Translators)
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (祂) is used.”
In that system, one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and others for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, koros-are-ru (殺される) or “kill” is used.
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, ut-are-ru (打たれる) or “strike” is used.
This verse has two primary literary features. First, it uses two parallel rhetorical questions. Second, each question uses one root word three times. The root words are “smite/strike” and “slay/kill.” The first question has active verbs, with Yahweh as the subject for the first two verbs. In the second question the verbs are passive, with Yahweh as the implied agent. The pronouns them, they and their refer to Israel, while those points to its enemies.
There are several possible interpretations for this verse. The rhetorical questions ask whether Yahweh dealt with the Israelites in the same way as he dealt with those who attacked them. According to Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, Bible en français courant and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, the implied answer to these questions is “No!” For these versions Yahweh punished them less than their enemies by sending them into exile. There is another possible sense with “No” as the implied answer, but it is less likely: Yahweh punished the Israelites more by sending them into exile. For some commentators the implied answer is “Yes!” The exile of the Israelites proves that Yahweh punished them and their enemies in the same way. Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, and Revised English Bible keep the ambiguity of this verse, since there is no scholarly consensus concerning its meaning. If translators cannot do this, they may follow Good News Translation as a model.
Has he smitten them as he smote those who smote them?: Good News Translation makes the pronouns he and them explicit with “the LORD” and “Israel” respectively, which we recommend at the beginning of this subsection. Alternative verbs for “smite” are “punish” (so Good News Translation) and “strike.” For this verb see the comments on 5.25. Revised Standard Version repeats it three times to reflect the Hebrew text. If such verbal repetition is awkward or unclear in the receptor language, translators may use synonymous verbs where available. This is also true for the next line.
Or have they been slain as their slayers were slain?: Dead Sea Scrolls uses active verbs here to balance the verbs in the previous question, saying “Has he slain them as he slew those who slew them?” Languages that prefer active verbs may use this as a model.
Some translation examples for this verse are:
• Has Yahweh struck the Israelites as he struck those who struck them?
Or have they been killed as he killed those who killed them?
• Has Yahweh struck Israel as much as he struck those who struck it?
Or has he killed its people as much as he killed those who killed them?
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.