The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin that is often translated as “gentiles” (or “nations”) in English is often translated as a “local equivalent of ‘foreigners,'” such as “the people of other lands” (Guerrero Amuzgo), “people of other towns” (Tzeltal), “people of other languages” (San Miguel El Grande Mixtec), “strange peoples” (Navajo (Dinė) (this and above, see Bratcher / Nida), “outsiders” (Ekari), “people of foreign lands” (Kannada), “non-Jews” (North Alaskan Inupiatun), “people being-in-darkness” (a figurative expression for people lacking cultural or religious insight) (Toraja-Sa’dan) (source for this and three above Reiling / Swellengrebel), “from different places all people” (Martu Wangka) (source: Carl Gross).
Tzeltal translates it as “people in all different towns,” Chicahuaxtla Triqui as “the people who live all over the world,” Highland Totonac as “all the outsider people,” Sayula Popoluca as “(people) in every land” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), Chichimeca-Jonaz as “foreign people who are not Jews,” Sierra de Juárez Zapotec as “people of other nations” (source of this and one above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.), Highland Totonac as “outsider people” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), Uma as “people who are not the descendants of Israel” (source: Uma Back Translation), “other ethnic groups” (source: Newari Back Translation), and Yakan as “the other tribes” (source: Yakan Back Translation).
In Chichewa, it is translated with mitundu or “races.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 30:28:
Kupsabiny: “His anger is like a river that bursts its banks and reaches to the neck of a person. He sifts communities in order to punish them and he pulls people along towards disaster/death.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “His breath is like a flood that covers, reaching [up] to the neck. He will winnow the nations with the winnowing tray of destruction, and a bridle that will take the people down [lit.: on] the road of evil he will put in their mouths.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “His breath is like a flood which reaches up to the neck. He destroys the nations as-if-like wheat being-sifted. They are like animals which are muzzled and dragged/pulled-away.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “His breath is like a flood that covers his enemies up to their necks. He will separate the nations in order to destroy some of them; it is as though he will put hooks in their mouths and take them away.” (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 Indonesian and Malay. In the latter two 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. ).
His breath is like an overflowing stream that reaches up to the neck: His breath is another figure of speech for Yahweh’s anger (compare Exo 15.8; Psa 18.15). Good News Translation renders the Hebrew word for breath as “wind,” which is a possible meaning for this word, but most versions prefer “breath.” Here the prophet says Yahweh’s anger will be destructive like an overflowing stream that reaches up to the neck, which is a flooded river about to drown a person since it has reached the person’s neck (compare the use of same imagery in 8.8). Good News Translation says “a flood that carries everything away” (similarly Bible en français courant).
To sift the nations with the sieve of destruction changes the imagery radically. Here the prophet uses the metaphor of sifting with a sieve. A sieve is an instrument with a mesh bottom that is shaken to separate fine material from coarser worthless material, such as grain from pebbles. Yahweh will destroy his enemies like someone sifting worthless material from good material and destroying the worthless part. The nations does not refer to any specific enemy (see the comments on the Hebrew word here at 2.2). New International Version provides a helpful model here with “He shakes the nations in the sieve of destruction.” If translators find the image of sifting difficult, a model with an alternative image is “He shakes the nations to destroy them.” Good News Translation provides another possibility: “It sweeps nations to destruction.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh changes the image of the sieve to a “yoke,” saying “To set a misguiding yoke upon nations” (similarly New English Bible). It probably does this to make its translation of this line into more parallel with the next one, which uses the metaphor of a bridle.
And to place on the jaws of the peoples a bridle that leads astray: This line is parallel with the previous one, but it uses the metaphor of a bridle to illustrate the punishment of Yahweh’s enemies. The peoples is synonymous with the nations, not referring to any particular nation (see 2.3). A bridle is a metal bit with reins which is placed in the mouth (jaws) of a horse in order to control it. Leads astray is a literal rendering of the Hebrew verb here. In this context it is better rendered “leads [them] away” since a bridle guides a horse. It implies taking people into exile in this setting of Yahweh punishing his enemies. Although most versions consulted render this verb in a way similar to Revised Standard Version, we suggest that translators adopt this view (see the examples below); for example, Bible en français courant translates this line as “a bridle to lead them where they do not want to go.” Contemporary English Version is similar with “Then he puts a bridle in every foreigner’s mouth and leads them to doom.” Whichever option translators choose, they should have a footnote giving the other one. Cultures that do not use bridles could say “he places a rope in the mouths of peoples to lead them away.” But it may be better to drop the imagery of horses completely by saying “he ties the peoples with a rope to lead them away.” Good News Translation simply has “and puts an end to their evil plans,” but this is not recommended.
For the translation of this verse consider the following examples:
• His breath is like a flooded river whose waters reach up to the neck.
He shakes nations in a sieve to destroy them,
he places a bridle in the mouths of peoples to lead them away.
• His anger pours out like a river overflowing its banks,
its waters threaten the lives of people.
He sifts the nations in a sieve to destroy them,
he places a bridle in their mouths to take them into exile.
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.