Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 49:2:
Kupsabiny: “He prepared my mouth to be sharp like a sword and he took care of me in his power. He made me sharp like a sharp arrow, and he placed me in his quiver.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “He made my mouth sharp like a sword. He hid me in the shadow of his hand. He made me a sharpened arrow, and he has hidden me in his quiver.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “He made my words like a sharp sword. He protected me by his power. He made me like a polished pointed-arrow which-is ready to use.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) is used here in mi-te (御手) or “hand (of God).”
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, kakus-are-ru (隠される) or “hide” is used.
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 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. ).
He made my mouth like a sharp sword is the result of the servant’s divine call. My mouth stands for “my speaking” or “my words” (Good News Translation). In some languages it will be appropriate to render my mouth as “my tongue.” The simile like a sharp sword pictures the servant’s message as having the ability to cut through things or pierce them. What the servant said was both powerful and convincing as well as sharply critical. This was so because he voiced God’s word. His words had no special power by themselves. For sword see 2.4. If the images of my mouth and like a sharp sword do not convey the right meaning in a language, translators may drop one or both images by saying “He made all my words as cutting / penetrating / striking / effective as a sharp sword/knife would be” or “He made all my words very cutting / penetrating / striking / effective.”
In the shadow of his hand he hid me is a figurative expression that speaks of God’s protection. It is used again in 51.16. The Hebrew noun rendered shadow can also be translated “shade,” namely a place where a person is sheltered from the harsh rays of the sun. Here it is a figure for protection (see the comments on 4.6). This protection is provided by his hand, which is an image for God himself (compare 48.13). God provided his servant shelter like a hand blocking the rays of the sun. God watched over him to ensure that his mission would be accomplished. Most versions modify the figurative language in this line, but they keep the image of his hand; for example, Good News Translation says “With his own hand he protected me,” Bible en français courant has “and he hides me in the protection of this hand,” and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch uses “and he holds his protecting/sheltering hand over me.” (Both Bible en français courant and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch use present tense here, but the Hebrew syntax allows for past tense throughout this verse.) A possible nonfigurative model is “he protected/sheltered/guarded me throughout/always.”
He made me a polished arrow is parallel to the first line. Like the sword, the arrow is also a weapon that pierces an enemy. For arrow see 5.28. The Hebrew phrase rendered a polished arrow is better rendered “a sharpened arrow” (New Jerusalem Bible; similarly Good News Translation) or “a pointed arrow” (Contemporary English Version, Bible en français courant). Translators should not give the impression that God made an arrow for his servant to use. The sense is that God made him to be like an arrow.
In his quiver he hid me away is parallel to the second line. A quiver is a container used for holding arrows before they are shot from the bow (see 22.6). As a figure of speech, quiver can refer to something safe and protective. It also suggests threat, since the arrows kept in it are ready for deadly use (so Good News Translation). Hid … away renders a different Hebrew verb than the one translated hid in the second line, but the sense is clearly the same. Some commentators suggest that, because the arrow is hidden, it indicates that God will keep the servant and his words secret—presumably until the time comes for them to be revealed. However, it seems more likely that the implied sense of quiver here is protection rather than secrecy. Although there is some difference of opinion about what is implied, we recommend that translators use the sense of “hide” in both the second and fourth lines of the verse. If in translation an implied sense needs to be made explicit, it may be best to convey the sense of protection.
For languages where the arrow and quiver do not commonly exist or where they cannot be used easily in a figurative sense, the last two lines of this verse may be rendered “He made me to be a strong/effective weapon, and kept me hidden away, [ready to be used by him].”
For the translation of this verse consider the following examples:
• He made my mouth as sharp as a sword,
he protected me with his own hand.
He made me sharp as an arrow,
hiding me in his quiver.
• He made my words as powerful as a sharp sword,
and his own hand protected me.
He made me become like a sharpened arrow,
hidden in his arrow-container.
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.