The Hebrew that is translated as “stork” in English is translated in Maan as “big water bird,” as the stork is not locally know. (Source: Don Slager)
In the Contemporary Chichewa translation (2002/2016) with mulungu wachilendo it is translated as kakowa or “egret.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
There is almost complete agreement that chasidah is the stork. There are two species of stork that pass over Israel, where they stay for a few days as they migrate from Europe to Africa and vice versa. These are the White Stork Ciconia ciconia and the Black Stork Ciconia nigra.
Both of these storks are large birds with long legs and long necks. They are heavier than most herons or cranes. The white stork has a white body, black wings, and a red beak and legs. The black stork is a glossy brownish black color with a white belly. It also has a red beak and legs. These storks migrate from central and eastern Europe to East and Central Africa, occasionally reaching Zimbabwe and parts of South Africa in good rainy seasons. Both types spend most of the time on the ground or in shallow water searching for food. The white stork eats mainly locusts, grasshoppers, and other insects, as well as frogs, lizards, and the chicks of ground-nesting birds. The black stork prefers fish and frogs but also eats the same things as the white stork.
When storks are about to move to another feeding ground, they usually soar around in upward currents of air called thermals, reaching great heights, and then they soar off in the direction they have chosen, conserving their energy by only occasionally beating their wings.
It is possible that the name chasidah is derived from the word chesed, meaning “kindness” or “faithfulness”, perhaps a reference to the fact that they seem to take especially good care of their young when nesting.
Storks of various species are found in most parts of the world, and many of them have migrating habits. There are species of stork that migrate from Europe to India and the Far East, some that migrate from Southeast Asia to Australia, and one, the Abdim’s Stork Ciconia abdimii, which migrates from Ethiopia to Zimbabwe and Botswana, signaling the arrival of the rainy season wherever it goes.
In the few areas where storks are not known, a borrowed word or a transliteration can be used, perhaps with a footnote to indicate that this is a big bird that migrates long distances over Israel.
The occurrence of this word in Isaiah 38:14 is problematic, where it appears in the phrase sus ‘agur, which looks like a head noun followed by a qualifying noun, so it is the name of a single bird (a type of swift) rather than of two. The phrase is thus translated as “swallow” by some English versions, but as two birds by others. In Jeremiah 8:7, however, all versions treat the word as a common noun, although interpreting it differently.
The interpretation in Jeremiah of ‘agur as “crane” has quite good support. For one thing the crane is one of the most obvious of the migrating birds passing over Israel, and thousands can be seen passing noisily overhead each year as they move from Europe and Asia to Africa for the summer and return again in March. They stay in Israel only for a few days and then move on. Second, the translation “crane” neatly preserves the structure and the images of the Hebrew poem. The structure here is what is referred to as a chiasmus. In this chiasmus four items are mentioned, with the first and last forming one pair and the middle two forming another: stork, dove, swift, crane. This is a common feature of Hebrew poetry. Here “stork” and “crane” are paired, and since both are passing migrants and both have long necks and legs and are about the same size, the pairing is well motivated. Third, but perhaps less important, ‘agur is the modern Hebrew word for crane. Some Hebrew scholars relate the word to the verb ga‘ar, “to cry”, a reference to the noisy call of the crane.
Cranes are large long-legged, long-necked birds, which are best known for their dancing displays. At breeding time especially, but at other times too, a small group of cranes will start “dancing” together, bobbing up and down, jumping into the air, and turning around. The crane mentioned in Jeremiah 8:7 is most likely the Eurasian or Common Crane Grus grus. This is a large gray bird with a trace of red on the top of its head, and whitish cheeks. It has a wingspan of over two meters (6 feet), a long neck, and long bare legs. It behaves very much like a stork, spending most of its time walking on the ground in search of frogs, lizards, grasshoppers, and other insects.
It is one of the birds noted in the Bible for its migrating habits.
It is better to translate sus ‘agur in Isaiah 38:14 as one bird only, namely the swift.
Cranes are found worldwide except in South America, New Zealand, and small island localities. In most parts of the world then, it will not be difficult to find a word for one of the local cranes. However, in most parts of the world the local cranes are not migrating birds, but permanently resident. In these cases it may be good to have a footnote indicating that in Israel cranes migrate in large numbers over the land in spring and autumn, moving from Europe and Asia to Africa and back again. Alternatively, in places where two types of migrating stork are known, as in many parts of central, eastern, and southern Africa, the name of one type can be used to translate ‘agur in Jeremiah 8:7.
African cranes include the Blue Crane Anthropoides paradisea, the Wattled Crane Grus carunculata, and the Crested Crane (also called the Crowned Crane) Balearica regulorum. Australian cranes include the Brolga Grus rubicunda and the Sarus Crane Grus antigone.
Among the Asian cranes is the red-headed Siberian crane, which nests in Siberia and migrates to Iran, Pakistan, India, and China.
In Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, and southeastern Europe, it should be possible to find a local word for the Common Crane Grus grus.
Elsewhere the best solution is a word for crane borrowed from English, Spanish, or Portuguese, or a transliteration of the scientific name Grus.
Swallows, martins, and swifts are birds that look and behave in very similar fashion, and in many places where they are found, all are popularly known by one name only. This is true in English too, since all three types of bird are usually referred to as “swallows” by people who are not expert bird-watchers. Scientifically, swallows and martins are related, but the swifts are birds of a completely different family.
The fact that most English versions translate all three Hebrew words as “swallow” reflects the usage of the average person. However, it is likely that deror is strictly speaking the swallow and the martin, while sus and sis (differently pronounced forms of the same word) indicate the swift. In modern Hebrew sis is the name for the swift, and deror is the name for the sparrow, not the swallow.
The Greek word chelidōn refers to either swallows or swifts.
Four species of swift, three species of martin, and two species of swallow are common in Israel. The Common Swift Apus apus, the Pallid Swift Apus pallidus, the Alpine Swift Apus melba, and the Little Swift Apus affinis are all migrant birds that spend the whole summer in Israel. This is also true of one type of swallow, the Red-rumped Swallow Hirundo daurica, and the House Martin Delichon urbica. Another species of martin, the Pale Crag Martin Hirundo obsolete is permanently resident there. The remaining species of martin and swallow are passing migrants that stay only a few days, although a few individual birds may stay all summer in Israel while the majority passes on.
Swallows, martins, and swifts are all small birds with long slender wings and short legs. They fly at great speed for long periods on end, twisting and turning, usually in fairly large groups. They catch insects in the air as they fly. The Hebrew name deror is derived from a word meaning “free,” probably a reference to this wonderful ability to fly freely at speed, swooping, diving, and turning, with no need to stop for a rest. The name sus or sis refers to the swishing sound the fast-flying swifts make in the air as they pass.
The common swift makes a noise described in many bird books as a “high-pitched scream”, especially in the breeding season, but it also keeps up a noisy twittering almost constantly, especially near the places where it roosts. This is also a common feature of some other types of swift and many types of martin.
The common swift, house martin, European swallow, red-rumped swallow, and pale crag martin all make their nests under overhangs on rock faces, in caves, or in human structures, such as buildings and the underside of bridges. (Psalms 84:4 speaks of the deror making its nest in the Temple.) The swifts make their nests out of grass and leaves cemented together with their saliva (it is the nest of a swift that is collected by Chinese people for the famous bird’s nest soup). The swallows and martins make their nests out of small pellets of mud mixed with grass. Both types of nest are bonded to a rock or wall, usually close to an overhanging projection such as a roof.
Swallows and swifts are amazing migrants. Some species migrate from central Africa to the Far East and to parts of southwestern China, others move from northern Russia and Scandinavia to South Africa. One group of swallows is known to have covered more than 12 ,000 kilometers (7,500 miles) in thirty-five days. When gathering for migration, or when stopping briefly on their way, they can often be seen in the hundreds of thousands. In Bangkok in one night, university students counted nearly two million migrating swallows roosting on the telephone and power lines in the city. They were gone the following day.
These birds were noted for a) their regular migration, b) their unending flight, c) the fact that they build nests in human dwellings, and, in the case of the swift, d) their unending, and perhaps sad-sounding noise.
Swifts, swallows, and martins are found worldwide. If the local language makes a difference between swifts and swallows, then deror should be translated as “swallow” and sus and sis as “swift”. In most languages, however, both families of bird are called by the same name, so that only one word will be used to translate the three Hebrew words. Proverbs 26:2 makes reference to the fact that swallows can fly the whole day without stopping once.
The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated as “dove” or “pigeon” in English is translated in Pijin with the onomatopoeia kurrukurru. (Source: Bob Carter)
In Matumbi is is translated as ngunda, a kind of dove that has the reputation to be monogamous. (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext)
In the fifteenth century the English word “pigeon” meant a young dove, the word “dove” being reserved for the adult birds. In modern English the words are used almost interchangeably. As a general rule, “pigeon” is used for domesticated forms of these birds, and for the larger variety of wild forms, while “dove” is used mainly for wild varieties. However, there are many exceptions to this general rule.
Pigeons and doves are both included in a bird family known scientifically as the Colombidae, consisting of well over two hundred species. In Israel and the Middle East are found the true Colombidae, which are easily distinguished from the genus Stretopelia, that is, the turtle doves.
The most common of the true Colombidae in the Middle East is most certainly the Asiatic Rock Dove Columba livia. This bird was first domesticated around 4500 B.C. in Mesopotamia. By 2500 B.C. it was kept as a domestic bird in Egypt, and by 1200 B.C. there is evidence that its homing abilities were already well known. It is this bird that is the ancestor of the domestic homing pigeons that people keep, some of which have escaped, returned to the wild, and now populate city streets all over the world. The ledges of modern buildings are a good substitute for the rock ledges that were its original nesting sites. It is likely that the Canaanites and the Israelites also kept these birds for both food and sacrifice. It is this bird that is called yonah in the Hebrew Bible and peristera in the Greek New Testament.
There are also three types of turtledove found in the land of Israel, two of which are resident species; the third is a migrant that arrives in spring and spends the summer in Israel. This migrant, the true Turtle Dove Streptopelia turtur, and one of the species now resident, the Collared Dove Streptopelia decaocto, are what the Bible writers called tor in Hebrew and trugōn in Greek. (Both the Hebrew and Greek names are based on the sound the turtledove makes.)
In biblical Hebrew the word gozal generally refers to a nestling of any bird species. In Genesis 15:9 it obviously refers specifically to a young pigeon. Nestling rock pigeons were collected from the rock ledges. Pigeons and doves were kept in cages and dovecotes, and wild ones were trapped in nets. This enabled the Jews to have a handy stock of birds for sacrificial purposes.
The rock pigeon is a blue-gray color with a pinkish sheen to the neck feathers. It has a black tip on its tail. Its call is a repeated moaning oom (the Hebrew name yonah is related to a verb meaning “to moan”) or a rapid cooing coo-ROO-coo-coo, usually repeated two or three times. The call is uttered with the beak closed, into the chest. The male’s sexual display starts with flying wing claps, and then when it lands next to the female, it begins bowing and turning with chest puffed and tail spread.
This type of pigeon lives in large colonies, and when a group is in flight, they maneuver as a single unit, often gliding short distances together with their wings held in a V shape.
The turtledove is a smaller blue-gray bird with a pinkish chest. It arrives in Israel in April, and its rhythmic call yoo-ROO-coo, yoo-ROO-coo, yoo-ROO-coo, repeated for two or three minutes at a time on sunny days, can be heard all over.
Doves are seed eaters, and this fact may be significant in the Flood narrative. The raven, a carrion eater, does not return to the ark, since food is available. The dove returns at first, and when it finally stays away, this is an indication that seeds of some sort are once again available to it, and the earth is again dry.
As seed-eaters, doves and pigeons are ritually clean birds for Jews. Their swift flight means that they are symbolic of speed in some biblical contexts, especially in Psalms. The fact that these birds court, mate, and nest repeatedly throughout the year resulted in their being a symbol of affection, sexuality, and fertility in the ancient Egyptian, Canaanite, and Hebrew cultures. This symbolism is important in the Song of Solomon.
A very ancient belief that the dove has no bile and is therefore devoid of anger led to its becoming a symbol of peace and gentleness. (In actual fact doves and pigeons are aggressive, often attacking other birds, especially at food sources.)
The name yonah for the pigeon and dove is associated with moaning and groaning in pain or sorrow. This is often the symbolism in prophetic poetry.
Pigeons and doves are found worldwide, except in some snow-bound regions and on some remote islands. Almost everywhere they live there is more than one species, and in almost all locations the domestic pigeon is one of these species. As a general rule, the word for the smaller wild dove should be used wherever possible, but in those contexts where both pigeons and doves are mentioned in connection with sacrifices, the word for the domestic pigeon can be used as well as the one for the wild dove.
In 2 Kings 6:25 there is a Hebrew expression that literally means “dove’s dung”. This seems to be a reference to some kind of food that is eaten only in emergencies. Suggestions about what this may refer to have varied from “chickpeas” (which do look somewhat like a dove’s droppings) to “locust-beans”, “wild onions”, and the roots of certain wild flowers. In view of the lack of certainty, it is probably best to translate it literally as “dove’s dung” and include the footnote, “This is probably some kind of wild food eaten only in emergencies.”
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Jeremiah 8:7:
Kupsabiny: “Even a stork knows the day to migrate the dove, the swallow and crane also know its day. Yes, what is wrong with my people that they do not know what I God want?” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “The a-sort-of-white-heron, the dove, the swallow, and the stork know when to fly going-to other place(s) and when to return, but you (plur.) on-the-other-hand my people do not know what are my statutes/rules.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “All the birds that fly south for the winter/cold season know the time that they need to fly south, and they all return at the right time the following year. But my people are not like those birds! They do not know what I, Yahweh, require them to do.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
The translation of the tetragrammaton (YHWH or יהוה) is easily the most often discussed issue in Bible translation. This is exemplified by the fact that there is virtually no translation of the Bible — regardless of language — where the position of the respective translator or translation team on how to translate the name of God into the respective language is not clearly stated in the preface or introduction.
Click or tap here to read about the different ways the tetragrammaton is and has been translated
The literature on this topic is overwhelming, both as far as the meaning of YHWH and the translation of it by itself and in combination with other terms (including Elohim and Adonai). There is no reason or room to rehash those discussions. Aside from various insightful translations of YHWH into various languages (see below), what’s of interest in the context of this tool are official and semi-official statements regarding the translation by Bible translation agencies and churches. These include the 1992 statement by United Bible Societies’ “Names of God” Study Group (see The Bible Translator 1992, p. 403-407 ) or the “Letter to the Bishops’ Conference on ‘The Name of God'” by the Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Discriplina Sacramentorum of 2008 (see here et al.).
In summary, the UBS study group gives six different options on how to translate YHWH: 1) transliterate (some form of “Yahweh” or “Jehovah” if this is an already established term); 2) translate (along the lines of kurios — κύριος in the Septuagint); 3) translate the meaning of YHWH; 4) use a culture-specific name; 5) translate Elohim and YHWH in the same way; or 6) use a combination of any of these options.
The official Catholic directive states that for liturgical purposes YHWH is to be translated as an equivalent of Kurios (“Lord”) unless when appearing in combination with Elohim (“God”) or Adonai (“lord”), in which case it’s to be translated with “God.”
In the following collection of examples, any of the above-mentioned strategies are used.
Use of Typographical Means to Offset the Name of God
A large number of Bible translations in many Western European languages have used a similar strategy to translate YHWH as an equivalent of Kurios or Adonai (“lord” in Greek in Hebrew) but have used either small caps or all caps to denote these occurrences as an equivalent to a proper name. Here are some examples:
None of the European languages have found a “cultural-linguistic equivalent” with the possible exception of Eternal or l’Éternel (see below).
The rendering of the translation of YHWH in bold (and uppercase) characters is for instance used in Guhu-Samane: QOBEROBA (a term of address for a respected person and also connotes “forever”) (for “forever”, see below under Translations of the Name of God) and the upper-casing in Bible translations in several other languages in Papua New Guinea:
In Cebuano (Ang Pulong sa Dios edition, 2010) and Hiligaynon (all versions), Ginoo, a typographical variant of Ginoo (“Lord”) is used. Bible translation consultant Kermit Titrud (SIL): “‘Yahweh’ is too close to Yahwa, their word for ‘Satan.’ We were afraid that in the pulpits readers might misread ‘Yahweh’ and say ‘Yahwa.’ So we went with the tradition found in most English translations. Ginoo for ‘Yahweh’ and Ginoo for ‘adonai.'”
In languages where capitalization is not a typographical option, other options are available and used, such as in Japanese, where the generic term shu 主 for “Lord” is bolded in some translations to offset its meaning (Source: Omanson, p. 17).
In Pattani Malay, the word for “Lord” is underlined: ربي. (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
A graphical way of representation beyond typography was used by André Chouraqui in his French La Bible hebraique et le Nouveau Testament (publ. 1974-1977) for which he superimposed adonai and Elohim over (the French rendition) of the tetragrammaton:
(Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff.; see also tempt God / put God to the test)
Translations of the Name of God
A translation of YHWH with a rendering of the meaning of “Eternal” was done in English by James Moffatt (between 1926 and 1935) with Eternal, The Voice translation with Eternal One (2012), in French versions as L’ÉTERNEL by J. F. Ostervald in 1904 or l’Éternel by L. Segond (1910-1938, not in more recent revisions) and Zadoc Kahn (1964) (for the French translation, see also LORD of hosts), in Esperanto as “la Eternulo,” and in Obolo as Okumugwem: “The Ever-Living” (source: Enene Enene). In francophone Africa, translations of l’Éternel are widely used, due to the wide use of Segond’s early editions (see above). Examples include Nancere (Nandjéré) with Kumuekerteri, Ngambay (Ngambaï) with Njesigənea̰, Sar with Kɔ́ɔ̄ɓē, Mbay (Mbaï) with Bïraþe, Kim with Bage ɗiŋnedin, or Lélé uses Gojɛnɛkirɛkindiy (verbatim: “who remains for his eyes”). (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Similarly and at the same time expanding its meaning, the Nzima translation of 1998 translated YHWH as Ɛdεnkεma, the “Eternal All-Powerful Creator and Sustainer” (Source: David Ekem in The Bible Translator 2005, p. 72ff. ).
“Creator” is also used in Kazakh (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан]), Karakalpak (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан], sometimes in combination with Iyeg [Ийег] — “Master”), and Kirghiz (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан], likewise in combination with “Master” or Ege [Эге]). (Source: David Gray).
Nepali, Bengali, and Hindi are all derived from Sanskrit and have (eventually) all found similar translations of YHWH. In Bengali “God” is translated as Ishwar (ঈশ্বর) (widely used in Hindu scriptures, where it’s used as a title, usually associated with “Siva”) and YHWH as Shodaphrobhu (সদাপ্রভু) — “Eternal Lord”; in Nepali and NewariYHWH is translated as Paramaprabhu (परमप्रभु)– “Supreme Lord”; and Hindi translates YHWH as Phrabu (प्रभु) — “Lord.” In earlier translations all three languages used transliterations of Jehovah or Yahweh. (Source: B. Rai in The Bible Translator 1992, p. 443ff. and Barrick, p. 124).
The influential German Jewish translation of Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig (between 1925 and 1961) translates YHWH in Exodus 3:15 with “Ich bin da” (“I exist” or “I am”) and in all other instances with pronouns in small caps (Er, Ihm, Ihn, Ich — “he,” “him,” “his,” “I”).
The Jewish orthodox English ArtScroll Tanach translation (publ. 2011) uses Hashem or “The Name”
In the Bavarian translation by Sturmibund (publ. 1998), it is translated as Trechtein or “Sovereign, Lord.” “Trechtein” is related to the obsolete English “drighten.” (Source: Zetzsche)
In Ge’ez, Tigrinya, and Amharic it is translated with Igziabeher (እግዚአብሔር) or “Ruler/Lord of the Nations/Peoples.” In Ge’ez Igziabeher is used for “God” as well, whereas in Tigrinya and Amharic it is often, but not always used for “God.” In a recent revision by Biblica (see here ), an attempt was made to use Igziabeher exclusively for occurrences of the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Bible, but after strong responses by the Christian community, a compromise was found by using Igziabeher in the first chapter of Genesis and changing it according to the Hebrew text elsewhere. (Source: Zetseat Fekadu)
Warlpiri uses Kaatu Jukurrarnu (Kaatu is a transcription of “God” and Jukurrarnu means “timelessness” and shares a root with jukurrpa — dreamings) (Source: Stephen Swartz, The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. ).
The translation of YHWH into Weri with Aniak Tupup or “man of the holy house” intends “to maintain the Jewish practice of not uttering God’s name [with] the use of another vernacular phrase that signals that a ‘taboo’ name is being referred [which] could give a cue that would be recognizable in written or oral communication” (Source: P. King, The Bible Translator 2014, p. 195ff. ).
Aruamu translates it as Ikiavɨra Itir God or “Ever Present God” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Idakho-Isukha-Tiriki: Nyasaye Wuvunyali Muno or “God powerful great” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Ruund uses Chinawej, a term that is otherwise used as a response of approval. Anna Lerbak (in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 84ff. ) tells the genesis of this term (click or tap to see an explanation):
“The name ‘Jehovah’ had been used in some contexts, but I had the feeling that it did not mean much to the people, and when I asked the pastors they all said it didn’t, and worse, it very often confused people, especially in the villages. During the conversation it was suggested that the name Chinawej be used in the place of ‘Jehovah’, and this met with immediate approval. A few days later I was working on a Psalm in which ‘Jehovah’ was used frequently, so I wrote Chinawej in its place and then read the Psalm to them. The response was about like this: “That is it, now people will understand, that is how Chinawej is. The Jews call God ‘Jehovah’, we call Him Chinawej, it is the same God. but we know Him as Chinawej as the Jews know Him as ‘Jehovah’ “. They often call God Chinawej in prayer, it seems to indicate warmth and intimacy.
The same word is used in two other ways. It is the name of a snake which never attacks human beings. And it is used as a response of approval. When told of something they are pleased to hear, something they find good, just, helpful, generous, they often respond by saying, Chinawej. When they call God Chinawej, it indicates that they think of Him as One Who is good and just and generous towards them. When it was suggested at the committee that we use Chinawej in place of ‘Jehovah’ it was accepted immediately and unanimously.
Ebira has Eneyimavara. Eneyimavara was created by merging a praise phrase that was only used for the traditional deity Ohomorihi (see here), that had become the word for the Christian God: ene e yi ma vara or “the one that never changes.” “The translators came to the agreement that this praise name that describes the unchangeableness of God is very close in meaning to the probable meaning of YHWH.” (Source: David O Moomo in Scriptura 88 (2005), p. 151ff. )
The Uzbek Bible uses the term Ega (Эга) — “master, owner” in various forms (including Egam / Эгам for “my Owner” or Egamiz / Эгамиз for “our Owner.” (Click or tap to see an explanation):
Jim Zvara (2019, p. 6) explains: “The Uzbek term ega means owner or master (‘master,’ in the historical context of an owner-slave relationship). By extension, it is natural for an Uzbek to speak to or refer to God as Egam (‘my owner’/’master’). In the Uzbek context to be God’s slave is a positive way of understanding one’s relation to him. It suggests that one is in a dependent and obedient relationship to God. The team felt that this relational connection and what it implies fits well with the concept of YHWH as the God who is in a covenant relationship with his people. In the Uzbek context, the choice of Ega was deemed to be the best balance of natural language with meaningful translation.”
The Seediq Bible translation team chose Utux Tmninun (“the weaving god”) for their translation of YHWH. (Click or tap to see a retelling of the process of how that decision was reached):
“(…) The Seediq team requested that we spend time with them on key terms. They had compiled a list of key terms that they wanted input on, and we went through the list item by item. The most important item was how to deal with the divine name. They had tentatively translated it as Yehoba, transliterated from Jehovah, but they were also aware that this transliteration may not be accurate, and they were keen to explore other options.
“We explored various alternatives. Were they interested in following the ancient Jewish practice of substituting ‘Lord’ for the divine name? Would capitalising the letters help? Would they be bold enough to use ‘Yahweh,’ following the opinion of most Old Testament scholars who regard this as the correct pronunciation? Was it feasible to adopt a mixed approach in dealing with the divine name (…)? Each option had its advantages as well as disadvantages.
“In the midst of the discussion, a participant said, ‘Our ancestors, as well as we today, always call God by the term Utux Tmninun. I suggest we use this term.’ The term Utux Tmninun in the Seediq culture means ‘the weaving God.’ In their culture, God is the weaver, the one who weaves life together. All the participants were excited about this proposal. They tried this term with all the composite terms that involve the divine name, and it seemed to work well, so they decided tentatively to adopt this term. After the workshop, the participants went back to their villages and sought feedback from the wider community, and eventually they confirmed the use of the term Utux Tmninun as the rendering of the divine name.
Translating the divine name as Utux Tmninun, the weaving God, is a creative solution. This term is viewed very positively in the Seediq community. It also correlates well with the concept of God as the creator (Gen. 1-2) and as the weaver who formed our inward parts and knit us together in our mothers’ wombs (Ps. 139:13). It also has the advantage of portraying God beyond the traditional masculine form.
“Some may argue that since names are usually transliterated, we should do the same with YHWH, most likely pronounced ‘Yahweh.’ Unfortunately, due to the influence of Chinese Union Version for almost one hundred years now, Chinese Christians only know God as Yehehua. Attempts to change the term Yehehua to Yahweh have not been successful. This is a reality that the Seediq Christians have to live with.
“Others may argue on theological grounds that YHWH is not only the creator, but also the God of the covenant, hence any attempt to substitute another term for YHWH will not do justice to the Hebrew text. In the case of the Seediq translation, there are significant similarities between Utux Tmninun and YHWH, though the terms are not identical. This is a reality translators often have to struggle with. Exact correspondence is hard to come by. Often it is a matter of approximation, give and take. Besides theological considerations, one has to deal with the constraints of past traditions (‘Jehovah,’ in this instance), the biblical cultures and one’s own culture, and audience acceptance. Hopefully, by using Utux Tmninun for YHWH, the Seediq term will be transformed and take on the aspect of the covenant God as well.” (Source: Yu Suee Yan, The Bible Translator 2015, p. 316ff. )
Nyankore: Nyakubaho or “the one who is from within itself” (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 146)
‘One local dialect of Carpathian Romani: Drágon Dél or “Beloved/Dear God.” In most Romani dialects, the word Rai (Lord/Boss/landlord/shopkeeper) is sort-of acceptable, but in one particular subgroup of Carpathian Romani they said it only meant shopkeeper and ‘everyone knows that [majority term for YHWH] means God, and why can’t we translate it that way?’ We tried to explain, but they weren’t keen on anything but Dél (‘God’). We eventually compromised with Drágon Dél, a common expression for YHWH, and Dél for Elohim, but it took quite a lot of convincing them that there was any theological point there.
For the interconessional translation into Chichewa (publ. 1999) the term Chauta (“Great-One-of-the-Bow”) was chosen for YHWH (Click or tap to see the detailed story):
“The name Chauta, literally ‘Great-One-of-the-Bow’, i.e. [is] either the rainbow (descriptively termed uta-wa-Leza ‘the-bow-of-God’) or, less likely, the hunter’s bow. And yet Chauta was also distinct from Mulungu [“God”] in that it has reference to the specific tribal deity of the Chewa people — the God who ‘owns’ yet also ‘belongs to’ them — and hence it carries additional positive emotive overtones. Although research indicated that in an ancient traditional setting, Chauta too was probably associated with the indigenous ancestral rain cult, in the Christian era it has been progressively generalized to encompass virtually all religious contexts in which God may be either appealed to, proclaimed, or praised. After prolonged deliberation, therefore, the translation committee determined Chauta to be the closest functional equivalent to YHWH of the Hebrew Scriptures. The choice of this name is not without its difficulties, however, and these were carefully considered by the Chewa committee. For example, the use of a more specific local term, as opposed to the generic Mulungu, carries a greater likelihood of bringing along with it certain senses, connotations, and situations that were (and no doubt still are) associated with the indigenous, pre-Christian system of worship. If these happened to remain strong in any contemporary sacred setting, then of course the dangers connected with conceptual syncretism might well arise. In the case of Chauta, however, it appeared that the process of positive Christian contextualization had already reached an advanced stage, that is, judging from the widespread use of this name in all aspects of religious life and practice. A more scholarly argument against Chauta takes the position that there is too great a female component associated with this term because it was traditionally applied (by figurative metonymy) to refer also to the ritual ‘wife of God’, i.e. the chief officiant at a traditional rain shrine and worship sanctuary. However, this usage seems to be quite remote, and most people questioned do not even recognize the connection anymore. Besides, in a matrilineal society such as the Chewa, it does not seem inappropriate to have this aspect of meaning lying in the background, particularly since it is not completely foreign to the notion of God in the Bible (cf. Ps. 36:7; 73:15; Isa. 49:14-15; Mt. 23:37). In terms of ‘connotative fit’ or emotive identification and appeal, there can be little doubt that the name Chauta is by far the closest natural equivalent to YHWH in the contemporary Chewa cultural and religious environment. This aspect of meaning was probably also utmost from the ancient Jewish perspective as well; in other words, “for them the associated meaning of this special name [YHWH], in terms of their history and culture, far outweighed any meaning it may have suggested because of its form or derivation”. To be sure, this ‘new’ divine name — that is, new as far as the Scriptures are concerned — may take some getting used to, especially in the formal setting of public worship. But this is not a foreign god whom we are talking about; rather, he is certainly by now regarded as the national deity of the Chewa nation. Chauta is the great God who for one reason or another ‘did not make himself known to them by his holy name, the LORD’ (Exod. 6:3), that is, in the prior translations of his Word into Chewa. He is, however, and always has been “a God who saves … the LORD (Chauta), our Lord, who rescues us from death” (Ps. 68:20, Good News Bible)!” (Source: Wendland 1998, 120f.; see also The Bible Translator 1992, 430ff. )
Transliteration of YHWH
A 12th century reading of the Masoretic vowel points around יהוה (יְהֹוָה) was interpreted to be pronounced as Yehowah from which Iehouah and Jehovah were derived. This was reflected in the English versions of Tyndale (publ. 1530) and the Geneva Bible (significantly based on Tyndale and publ. in 1560) and again the King James Version (Authorized Version) (publ. 1611) which all used Iehouah or Jehovah in 7 different verses in the Old Testament. The translators and editors of the American Standard Version (publ. 1901), a review of the King James Version used Jehovah for all appearances of the tetragrammaton something that the Spanish Reina-Valera (publ. 1602) had already done as well.
In English versions, Yahweh as a transliteration of the tetragrammaton is used by the Catholic Jerusalem Bible (publ. 1966), the Protestant Holman Christian Standard Bible (publ. 2004) and the Legacy Standard Bible (publ. 2021). The Catholic translation by Knox (publ. 1949) occasionally uses Javé, “to make it a Latin name, to match all the other names in the Old Testament.” (Source Knox 1949, p. 80)
Mandinka for instance uses Yawe for YHWH. “The use of Yawe for YHWH is good and may be a trendsetter in this part of Africa.” (Source: Rob Koops)
In a group of related languages in another part of Africa an interesting development from a transliteration to a indigenous translation can be shown: In the Nandi Bible (1938) Jehovah was used as a translation for YHWH. Kamuktaindet (“The Powerful One”) was used as a translation for Elohim (“God”). This was taken over by a translation into the macrolanguage Kalenjin (1969) (intended to include the closely related Keiyo, Kipsigis, Markweeta, Nandi, Okiek, Sabaot, Terik, and Tugen). Sabaot, Markweeta, Tugen and Okiek later wanted there own translations. Both Sabaot and Markweeta use the indigenous word for “Creator” (Yēyiin in Sabaot and Iriin in Markweeta) to translate Elohim and YHWH of the Old Testament and Theos of the New Testament. The Kalenjin Bible has recently been revised to cater to Keiyo, Kipsigis, Nandi and Terik, and this revision has completely dropped Jehovah in favour of Kamuktaindet. (Source: Iver Larsen)
Early translations into Gilbertese faced a problem when transliterating “Jehovah” (a form of “Jehovah” was first used in Spanish Bible translations in 1569 and 1602): “There are only thirteen letters in the Kiribati alphabet: A, E, I, O, U, M, N, NG, B, K, R, T (pronounced [s] when followed by ‘i’), W For instance, ‘Jehovah’ is rendered Iehova, but Kiribati speakers can only pronounce it as ‘Iowa,’ since the phonemes [h] and [v] do not exist in Kiribati.” (source: Joseph Hong, The Bible Translator 1994, p. 329ff. .)
In a recent edition of a Thai translation (Thai Standard Version, publ. 2011) a combination of translation and transliteration is used: phra’ ya(h)we (h) (พระยาห์เวห์) (“Divine Yawe”). (Source: Stephen Pattemore)
In Nyarafolo Senoufo the transliteration is Yewe which also means “the being one” or “he that is.” David DeGraaf (in: Notes on Translation 3/1999, p. 34ff.) explains: “Since it is widely recognized that the vowels of the name are uncertain, another possible transliteration is Yewe. This proposal is in accord with the Nyarafolo rules of vowel harmony and is thus open to being understood as a normal nominalization in the language. Second, Yewe is exactly the word that would be formed by nominalizing the verb ‘to be’ in the class that includes sentient beings. Thus, Yewe can be understood as ‘the being one’ or ‘he that is’. This solution accords well with YHWH’s self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3:14, ‘I am who I am.'”
In the Literary and Mandarin Chinese (Protestant) tradition the transliteration of “Jehovah” is historically deeply rooted, even though there are also some historical burdens (Click or tap to see more details):
“YHWH” is rendered in the Chinese Union Version — the most widely used Bible translation in China—as well as most other Chinese Bible translations as yehehua 耶和華. According to Chinese naming conventions, yehehua could be interpreted as Ye Hehua, in which Ye would be the family name and Hehua — “harmonic and radiant” — the given name. In the same manner, Ye would be the family name of Jesus (transliterated as yesu 耶穌) and Su would be the given name. Because in China the children inherit the family name from the father, the sonship of Jesus to God the Father, yehehua, would be illustrated through this. Though this line of argumentation sounds theologically unsound, it is indeed used effectively in the Chinese church.” (see Wright 1953, p. 298, see also Jesus).
“Ye 耶, an interrogative particle in classical Chinese, is part of the same phonetic series as ye 爺, which gives it a certain exchangeability. Ye 爺 carries the meaning “father” or is used as an honorable form of address. The choice of the first Bible translators to use the transliteration yehehua 爺火華 for Jehovah had a remarkable and sobering influence on the history of the 19th century in China by possibly helping to shape the fatal Taiping ideology, a rebellion that ended up costing an estimated 20 million lives.
“The founder of the Taiping rebellion, Hong Xiuquan, was given a tract (…) [that he used to] interpret a nervous breakdown he had had in 1837 as his “call” to be the “Messiah.” This “vision” that Hong experienced is likely to have had a direct correlation with the name of “God” in that tract. Shen yehuohua 神爺火華 (directly translated: ‘God (or: spirit); old man (or: father); fire; bright)” was the term that was used in that tract for ‘God Jehovah,’ but this was not indicated as a (in its second part) transliteration of a proper name. In his vision, Hong saw ‘a man venerable in years (corresponding with ye), with golden (corresponding with huo and hua) beard and dressed in a black robe,’ an image likely to have been inspired by a direct translation from that name for ‘God,’ especially as it appeared at the beginning of the tract. That this term was considered to be a term of some relevance to the Taiping ideology is demonstrated by the fact that both yehuohua 爺火華 as the personal name of God and ye 爺 as “God the Father” later appeared in Taiping writings.” (Source: Zetzsche in Malek 2002, p. 141ff.)
In American Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines the letter Y and a sign that points up and is similar to the sign for “God.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“YHWH” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
In British Sign Language is is translated with a sign that combines the signs for “God” and “name” and the finger-spelling of Y-H-W-H. (Source: Anna Smith)
“YHWH” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
Japanese Sign Language combines the sign for “Lord” with “exist” to make a name sign that technically means “the existent one,” but is close enough to “Lord” that it isn’t too jarring for people in the church who expect to see “Lord” in certain contexts (source: Mark Penner). For a Japanese Sign Language explanation, see here.
“YHWH” in Japanese Sign Language, source: 日本手話訳聖書を
For further reading on the translation of YHWH, see Rosin 1956, p. 89-125 and Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff.
The stork, turtledove, swallow, and crane (Good News Translation “thrushes”) are not known in all parts of the world, and translators may at times need to either substitute a bird from their area, or describe these. The important thing to note about each of these here is that they are migratory, and therefore appear in a region only at certain times of the year. Thus if local birds are used in a translation, they should also be migratory ones. Or translators can transliterate, possibly adding a description, as in “Even birds called storks, turtledoves, swallows and cranes which come only at certain times know when they should return and leave.”
In the heavens or “of the heavens” is frequently used in the Old Testament as a modifier following the noun “bird” or some particular type of bird. It is unnecessary to retain this expression in translation. In fact, to do so may leave the impression that there are two kinds of storks: one in the heavens, and one on the ground.
Knows her times is parallel with keep the time of their coming, and the reference is to the time of migration. Good News Translation renders “… when it is time to return … when it is time to migrate.” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch uses only one verb of all the birds: “All migratory birds keep to the times which I have set for them: the stork, the dove, the swallow, the thrush.”
Since the LORD is speaking, it will perhaps be necessary to shift the ordinance of the LORD to a first person reference: “Only my people do not obey the laws that I have given them” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). The noun ordinance is translated “law” in 5.4-5.
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Jeremiah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2003. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
.jpg){kind=link}
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.