The Hebrew, Latin, Ge’ez, and Greek that is translated as “bronze” in English is translated in Newari as “bell-metal,” since bells are made of bronze in Nepal (source: Newari Back Translation).
See also bronze vessel.
תַּ֣חַת הַנְּחֹ֜שֶׁת אָבִ֣יא זָהָ֗ב וְתַ֤חַת הַבַּרְזֶל֙ אָ֣בִיא כֶ֔סֶף וְתַ֤חַת הָֽעֵצִים֙ נְחֹ֔שֶׁת וְתַ֥חַת הָאֲבָנִ֖ים בַּרְזֶ֑ל וְשַׂמְתִּ֤י פְקֻדָּתֵךְ֙ שָׁל֔וֹם וְנֹגְשַׂ֖יִךְ צְדָקָֽה׃
17Instead of bronze I will bring gold;
instead of iron I will bring silver;
instead of wood, bronze;
instead of stones, iron.
I will appoint Peace as your overseer
and Righteousness as your taskmaster.
The Hebrew, Latin, Ge’ez, and Greek that is translated as “bronze” in English is translated in Newari as “bell-metal,” since bells are made of bronze in Nepal (source: Newari Back Translation).
See also bronze vessel.
Following is a list of (back-) translations of various languages:
Those who approach the New Testament solely through English translations face a serious linguistic obstacle to apprehending what these writings say about justice. In most English translations, the word “justice” occurs relatively infrequently. It is no surprise, then, that most English-speaking people think the New Testament does not say much about justice; the Bibles they read do not say much about justice. English translations are in this way different from translations into Latin, French, Spanish, German, Dutch — and for all I know, most languages.
The basic issue is well known among translators and commentators. Plato’s Republic, as we all know, is about justice. The Greek noun in Plato’s text that is standardly translated as “justice” is dikaiosunē (δικαιοσύνη); the adjective standardly translated as “just” is dikaios (δίκαιος). This same dik-stem occurs around three hundred times in the New Testament, in a wide variety of grammatical variants.
To the person who comes to English translations of the New Testament fresh from reading and translating classical Greek, it comes as a surprise to discover that though some of those occurrences are translated with grammatical variants on our word “just,” the great bulk of dik-stem words are translated with grammatical variants on our word “right.” The noun, for example, is usually translated as “righteousness,” not as “justice.” In English we have the word “just” and its grammatical variants coming horn the Latin iustitia, and the word “right” and its grammatical variants coining from the Old English recht. Almost all our translators have decided to translate the great bulk of dik-stem words in the New Testament with grammatical variants on the latter — just the opposite of the decision made by most translators of classical Greek.
I will give just two examples of the point. The fourth of the beatitudes of Jesus, as recorded in the fifth chapter of Matthew, reads, in the New Revised Standard Version, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.” The word translated as “righteousness” is dikaiosunē. And the eighth beatitude, in the same translation, reads “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” The Greek word translated as “righteousness” is dikaiosunē. Apparently, the translators were not struck by the oddity of someone being persecuted because he is righteous. My own reading of human affairs is that righteous people are either admired or ignored, not persecuted; people who pursue justice are the ones who get in trouble.
It goes almost without saying that the meaning and connotations of “righteousness” are very different in present-day idiomatic English from those of “justice.” “Righteousness” names primarily if not exclusively a certain trait of personal character. (…) The word in present-day idiomatic English carries a negative connotation. In everyday speech one seldom any more describes someone as righteous; if one does, the suggestion is that he is self-righteous. “Justice,” by contrast, refers to an interpersonal situation; justice is present when persons are related to each other in a certain way. There is, indeed, a long tradition of philosophical and theological discussion on the virtue of justice. But that use of the term has almost dropped out of idiomatic English; we do not often speak any more of a person as just. And in any case, the concept of the virtue of justice presupposes the concept of those social relationships that are just.
So when the New Testament writers speak of dikaiosunē, are they speaking of righteousness or of justice? Is Jesus blessing those who hunger and thirst for righteousness or those who hunger and thirst for justice?
A thought that comes to mind is that the word changed meaning between Plato and the New Testament. Had Jesus’ words been uttered in Plato’s time and place, they would have been understood as blessing those who hunger and thirst for the social condition of justice. In Jesus’ time and place, they would have been understood as blessing (hose who hunger and thirst for righteousness — that is, for personal moral rectitude.
Between the Hebrew Bible and the Greek New Testament there came the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek. (…) One of the challenges facing the Septuagint translators was how to catch, in the Greek of their day, the combination of mishpat (מִשְׁפָּט) with tsedeq (צֶ֫דֶק). Tsedeq that we find so often in the Old Testament, standardly translated into English as justice and righteousness. The solution they settled on was to translate tsedeq as dikaiosunē, and to use a term whose home use was in legal situations, namely, krisis (κρίσις), to translate mishpat. Mishpat and tsedeq became krisis and dikaiosunē. For the most part, this is also how they translated the Hebrew words even when they were not explicitly paired with each other: mishpat (justice) becomes krisis, tsedeq (righteousness) becomes dikaiosunē. The pattern is not entirely consistent, however; every now and then, when mishpat is not paired off with tsedeq, it is translated with dikaiosunē or some other dik-stem word (e.g., 1 Kings 3:28, Proverbs 17:23, Isaiah 61:8).
I think the conclusion that those of us who are not specialists in Hellenistic Greek should draw from this somewhat bewildering array of data is that, in the linguistic circles of the New Testament writers, dikaiosunē did not refer definitively either to the character trait of righteousness (shorn of its negative connotations) or to the social condition of justice, but was ambiguous as between those two. If dikaiosunē had referred decisively in Hellenistic Greek to righteousness rather than to justice, why would the Septuagint translators sometimes use it to translate mishpat, why would Catholic translators [into the 1980s] usually translate it as “justice,” and why would all English translators sometimes translate it as “justice”? (All earlier Latin-based Catholic translations, the New American Bible and the Jerusalem Bible, both of which appeared in the early 1970s have most occurrences of dik-stem words translated with variants on “just.” In subsequent revisions of the New American Bible, and in the New Jerusalem Bible, these translations have been altered to translations along the lines of righteousness. Other translations that use a form of justice or “doing right / rightness” include the British New English Bible [1970] and Revised English Bible [1989] and some newer translations such as by Hart [2017], Ruden [2021] or McKnight [2023]).
Conversely, if it referred decisively to justice, why would the Septuagint translators usually not use it to translate mishpat, and why would almost all translators sometimes translate it as “righteousness”? Context will have to determine whether, in a given case, it is best translated as “justice” or as “righteousness” — or as something else instead; and if context does not determine, then it would be best, if possible, to preserve the ambiguity and use some such ambiguous expression as “what is right” or “the right thing.”
Let me make one final observation about translation. When one takes in hand a list of all the occurrences of dik-stem words in the Greek New Testament, and then opens up almost any English translation of the New Testament and reads in one sitting all the translations of these words, a certain pattern emerges: unless the notion of legal judgment is so prominent in the context as virtually to force a translation in terms of justice, the translators will prefer to speak of righteousness.
See also respectable, righteous, righteous (person), devout, and She is more in the right(eous) than I.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Isaiah 60:17:
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 choice of a first person singular and plural pronoun (“I” and “we” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used watashi/watakushi (私) is typically used when the speaker is humble and asking for help. In these verses, where God / Jesus is referring to himself, watashi is also used but instead of the kanji writing system (私) the syllabary hiragana (わたし) is used to distinguish God from others.
(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
See also pronoun for “God”.
As in verse 15, the Hebrew preposition tachat opens this verse. Here it is rendered Instead of and used four times to mark each of the changes that are to come. In each example a more precious material replaces a less valuable one, symbolizing changes for the better. Some commentators understand these promises in a literal sense. For them this verse refers to the valuable materials that will be used to build a new Temple more grand than Solomon’s Temple that was destroyed. However, the promises here are general and translators should not mention the Temple or its construction.
Instead of bronze I will bring gold, and instead of iron I will bring silver: God will replace less valuable metals with precious ones. As noted above, this symbolizes the better future that God’s people can expect. For bronze and iron, see the comments on 45.2. There is some poetic logic in the replacements, since both bronze and gold are similar in color, and so are iron and silver. If the receptor language does not distinguish bronze and iron, translators may use other common metals if they are of less value than gold and silver.
And instead of wood, bronze, instead of stones, iron: The verb phrase I will bring, which is used twice in the first two lines, is implied in both these lines as well. God will also replace wood and stones with the more valuable materials bronze and iron.
I will make your overseers peace and your taskmasters righteousness is a figurative expression that means God will replace oppression with peace and righteousness. The Hebrew term for overseers can be used in both a positive and negative sense for leaders, but the word for taskmasters always has a negative sense, referring to those who oppress (see 3.12, where it is rendered “oppressors”). The word taskmasters recalls the Exodus story, where it is used to refer to the Egyptians who oppressed the Israelites (see, for example, Exo 3.7). In this context both terms refer to leaders who use their authority to oppress others. The irony in these two lines is obvious: the future oppressive leaders of God’s people will be peace (see 26.12) and righteousness (see 1.21). These positive qualities will be typical of God’s people in place of oppression. Good News Translation renders these two lines nonfiguratively with the future leaders of Judah in focus by saying “Your rulers will no longer oppress you; I will make them rule with justice and peace.” For translators who have difficulty conveying the implications of the figurative language here, Good News Translation is a useful model. Bible en français courant provides another possible model with “The authority and the power that I will establish in your midst, it is peace and justice.”
Translation examples for this verse are:
• Instead of bronze I will bring you gold,
and instead of iron I will bring you silver;
instead of wood you will have bronze,
and instead of stones you will have iron.
Peace will become your overlord,
righteousness will become your master.
• I will bring gold to replace bronze,
and silver to replace iron;
I will give you bronze to replace wood,
and iron to replace stones.
I will make peace and righteousness
to become your masters.
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.