untranslatable verses

The Swedish Bibel 2000 declared the 69 Old Testament verses referenced herein as “untranslatable.” Typically, other Bible translations translate those verses and mention in footnotes that the translation is uncertain or give alternate readings. Christer Åsberg, the Translation Secretary with the Swedish Bible Society at that time, explains why the Swedish Bible Society decided to not translate these verses at all (in The Bible Translator 2007, p. 1ff. ):

“In the new Swedish translation (SB) of 2000, [some verses are] not translated at all; [they are] indicated with three hyphens inside square brackets [- - -] [with a] reference to the appendix, where in the article ‘Text’ one will find a paragraph with roughly the following content:

In some cases the text is unintelligible and the variant readings differing to such an extent, that it is quite impossible to attain a reasonable certainty of what is meant, although some isolated word may occur, whose meaning it is possible to understand.

“If Bible translators find the Hebrew text untranslatable, what kind of text is it that they have produced in the translation into their own language? When a footnote says ‘The Hebrew is not understandable,’ what then is the printed text a translation of? And if the translators prefer to do without footnotes, are they then really released from the responsibility of informing their readers that the text they read is just mere guesswork?

“To leave a blank space in a Bible text seems to be an offensive act for many. (. . . ) To admit that a piece of Holy Scripture makes no sense at all may have been unimaginable in times past. In our enlightened era, an overprotective concern for the readers’ trust in the word of God is apparently a decisive factor when a translator tries to translate against all odds. The verdict ‘untranslatable’ is much more frequent in scholarly commentaries on different Bible books written by and for experts than in the translations or footnotes of the same books designed for common readers.

“Another reason (. . .) is a professional, and very human, reluctance to admit a failure. Also, many Bible translators lack translational experience of other literary genres and other classical texts where this kind of capitulation is a part of the daily run of things. They may have an innate or subconscious feeling that the Bible has unique qualities not only as a religious document but also as a linguistic and literary artifact. Completeness is felt to be proof of perfection. Some translators, and not so few of their clients, are unfamiliar with a scholarly approach to philological and exegetical matters. In some cases their background have made them immune to a kind of interpretative approximation common in older translations, confessional commentaries, and sermons. Therefore, their tolerance towards lexical, grammatical, and syntactical anomalies tends to be comparatively great.

“It is very hard to discern and to define the boundary between something that is extremely difficult and something that is quite impossible. I am convinced that all Bible translators in their heart of hearts will admit that there actually are some definitely untranslatable passages in the Bible, but are there a dozen of them or a score? Are there fifty or a hundred? Not even a group of recognized experts would probably pick out the same ten most obvious cases. (. . .)

“Conclusions:

  1. There are untranslatable passages in the Bible.
  2. How many they are is impossible to say—except for the translation team that decides which passages are untranslatable.
  3. An untranslatable passage cannot and should therefore not be translated.
  4. The lacuna should be marked in a consistent way.
  5. The translating team should stipulate their criteria for untranslatability as early as possible.
  6. It is an ethical imperative that the readers be comprehensively informed.
  7. Untranslatability has been and can be displayed in many different ways.
  8. An explanatory note should not confuse linguistic untranslatability with other kinds of textual or translational difficulties.
  9. The information given should make it clear that the translators’ recognition of untranslatability is a token of respect for the Bible, not a proof of depreciation.
  10. You shall not fear the void, but the fear of the void.”

With thanks to Mikael Winninge, Director of Translation, Swedish Bible Society

complete verse (Job 22:24)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Job 22:24:

  • Kupsabiny: “and throw your gold to the dunghill
    or where there are plenty of stones in a valley/ravine.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “If you discard a small lump of gold in the dust,
    if you consider the gold of Ophir to be like the stones found in the river,” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Do- not -give value to your (sing.) gold; consider that as-if-like just sand or as-if-like just rocks in the river.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “if you throw away your gold,
    even the fine gold from the dry stream beds in Ophir land,” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Job 22:24 - 22:25

Verses 24-25 are clearly linked in grammar and sense. If you lay gold in the dust: the Hebrew text of this verse has had two major interpretations. The first is “You will gather gold in the dust,” in which Eliphaz is promising Job that he will be rich again. In 5.17-27 Eliphaz told Job that he would be restored to greatness. The other major understanding of the verse is that Eliphaz is urging Job to renounce wealth, and the consequence in verse 25 is that Shaddai, “Almighty God” (Good News Translation), will take the place of his wealth. As Rowley points out it would be strange for Eliphaz to urge Job to get rid of gold when everything but his life has been taken from him. However, it is unfair to impose too much logic and too many demands for consistency on the ancient poet. In addition to these two interpretations, the ancient Syriac modified the Hebrew to get “You will count gold as dust,” which makes a simile and means that Job will value gold no more than dust, or as Dhorme translates, “Then you will esteem gold as though it were dust.” Among all the translations of this passage, only King James Version views Eliphaz’s words as a promise for the future, “Then shalt thou lay up gold as dust.” In other words, to Job gold will be as common as dust. Most modern translations understand verse 24 to mean that Job is told to get rid of his gold. Good News Translation and others have “Throw away your gold.”

The advantage of understanding verse 24a to mean the renouncing of wealth is that it seems to make the best sense in the context and leads in smoothly to verse 25. New English Bible follows Syriac’s simile and translates “If you treat your precious metal as dust….” Verse 24 has poetic alliteration, that is, similar sounds that recur. For example, the word ʿaphar “dust” in line a is echoed by ʾOphir in line b. Betzer, a rare word for “gold” in line a, is matched in line b by betzur “rocks.”

And gold of Ophir among the stones of the torrent bed: gold of Ophir translates the Hebrew proper noun Ophir, which is an unknown place famed for its gold. (See Psa 45.9; Isa 13.12.) Only here and in 28.16 is gold described by giving it this place name. Good News Translation translates “finest gold.” The verb in this line is to be understood from line a or supplied as a word of similar meaning, so Good News Translation “dump.” For torrent bed see 6.15. Verse 24 may be rendered, for example, “Get rid of your gold; throw your best gold among the rocks in the dry bed of the river,” or somewhat differently and as an “if” clause, “If you will consider the most precious gold as if it were dust and nothing more than the stones of a river bed….”

And if the Almighty is your gold: in Revised Standard Version verse 25 contains two more “if” clauses, which Good News Translation renders as “let” commands. Gold translates the same rare word used in verse 24a. This line may also be expressed, for example, “If you will accept Almighty God as your gold,” “If you will let Almighty God be like gold to you,” or “Let Almighty God be like gold to you.”

And your precious silver: the meaning of the word translated precious is uncertain. It occurs elsewhere only in Numbers 23.22; 24.8 (“horns”), and in Psalm 95.4, where it is translated “heights” in contrast with “depths of the earth.” In the present context the sense suggested by Dhorme is “heaped up piles” of silver, which is nearly equivalent to Good News Translation “silver piled high.” This line is an example of parallelism in which line b goes beyond, or carries the thought of line a, to a more intense level. In translation it will be necessary in some languages to shift to a simile and say, for example, “and let him be like piles of silver” or “let God be like silver that is heaped up.”

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 .