inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Job 18:3)

Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)

The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).

For this verse, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the exclusive pronoun, excluding Job.

complete verse (Job 18:3)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Job 18:3:

  • Kupsabiny: “Hey, Job, what is wrong with you so that you compare us with cows?
    Or are we fools, hey?” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “Why do you deal with us like animals?
    Why do you think of us as fools?” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Do- you (sing.) -consider us (excl.) like cows that have no understanding?” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)

formal 2nd person plural pronoun (Japanese)

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 choice of a formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

Translation commentary on Job 18:3

Why are we counted as cattle?: the reason for Bildad’s question probably arises from Job having said in 12.7 “Ask the beasts and they will teach you.” There Job declared that even dumb animals know as much as his friends. The two lines of this verse are parallel rhetorical questions which Good News Translation reduces to one. The thought of the verse is echoed in Psalm 73.22: “I was stupid and ignorant, I was like a beast toward thee” (Revised Standard Version). Counted does not refer to numbering but rather translates a verb meaning “consider, look upon, think of as”: “Why do you think of us as animals?” Cattle translates a collective noun meaning animals in general, including wild and domestic animals as well as cows, but in the present context the reference is to a dumb beast symbolizing stupidity. Cattle is perhaps more specific than the context requires, unless the translator’s language uses “cattle” in that rhetorical manner. So the question of this line is “Why do you consider us like beasts?” or “What makes you think of us as dumb animals?”

Why are we stupid in your sight?: the meaning of the Hebrew word translated stupid is uncertain, and some interpreters connect it with a root meaning “to be unclean.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project says the word may have either meaning, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch gives both meanings by adding a line: “Are we dumb as cattle, as he (Job) asserts? Is he of the opinion that we are unclean?” It is better to select one meaning and to place the other in a footnote, as in New Jerusalem Bible. In your sight translates the Hebrew “in your (plural) eyes.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project suggests that in your sight refers to the other two friends, and so Bildad is asking “Are we (all three of us friends of Job) stupid like animals in your (you two others’) eyes?” or, Bildad addressing the two friends, “Friends, do you think we are stupid as cattle, as Job has said?” In your sight implies “in Job’s sight” but does not make it specifically so. Bible en français courant follows Hebrew Old Testament Text Project “Do you (plural) have the impression that we (all three friends of Job) are stupid?” In languages in which “we” and “us” must be either inclusive or exclusive, translators should use the form of we that means the speaker and others, but excludes Job, the one addressed. In some languages this may have to be expressed differently; for example, “Job, why do you think of us, who are your friends, as dumb animals? Why do you consider us stupid?”

It is also possible that Bildad addresses Job in the plural as a respectful or honorific way of speaking to him. In this case there is probably a strong note of irony, that is, meaning to be less than respectful. In that case we may translate “Job, do you, sir, really think we are stupid as cattle?” or “Job, your honor, …?”

Quoted with permission from Reyburn, Wiliam. A Handbook on Job. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .