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

snare

The now commonly-used German expression Fallstrick for “snare,” but today only used in German in the sense to cause someone to stumble (“jemandem einen Fallstick legen”), was first coined in 1534 in the German Bible translation by Martin Luther. (Source: Günther 2017, p. 65)

For other idioms or terms in German that were coined by Bible translation, see here.

complete verse (Job 34:30)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Job 34:30:

  • Kupsabiny: “he does not accept sinners to rule over people
    or to cause those people to suffer.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “He prevents the Godless man from ruling,
    so that he may not become a trap for the people.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hausa Common Language Bible: “God can put into power someone who does not fear him, someone who sets traps for the people” (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
  • Hiligaynon: “so-that he could put-an-end the governing of the ungodly men that can-harm the people.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Job 34:29 - 34:30

Revised Standard Version places verse 29 between dashes to show that verse 30 connects in sense with verse 28 and that verse 29 is parenthetical. New English Bible encloses verses 29 and 30 in brackets to show these verses are secondary additions. New Jerusalem Bible connects them closely in thought to verses 27 and 28. Good News Translation and others link these two verses closely together grammatically—a solution that seems best to follow.

The first two lines of verse 29 present few difficulties. They are both parallel rhetorical questions expecting the answer “Nobody.” When he is quiet, who can condemn?: he refers to God. Is quiet translates a verb meaning “to be calm, taking no action,” as used in 3.26. In Isaiah 57.20 and Jeremiah 49.23 it means “to rest” and has the sense of “ceasing to be active” or “doing nothing at all” (Good News Translation). Dhorme and others transpose two letters in the verb translated condemn to get the meaning “stir up,” and this is followed by New Jerusalem Bible. This gives the sense “If God decides to rest, who can stir him up?” It seems best, however, to follow Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version. Condemn here may also be rendered “to accuse of doing wrong,” and so Good News Translation has “criticize,” which is perhaps better than condemn, particularly when God is the object of man’s accusations. Good News Translation expresses the rhetorical question as a negative assertion.

When he hides his face, who can behold him is similar to Job’s question in 13.24, “Why dost thou hide thy face?” Here the poetic heightening takes place with the figurative expression placed in the second line. Behold means “see, perceive,” but the Hebrew has also been changed in many different ways by interpreters. Good News Translation “men would be helpless” is an attempt to give a more specific meaning to the Hebrew, but there is no textual justification for it. It is best to accept the verb as meaning “see,” as Job says in 23.9, “On the left hand I seek him, but I cannot behold him.” We may translate, for example, “If he hid his face, none would be able to see him.”

Whether it be a nation or a man is literally “upon a nation or upon a man together.” Revised Standard Version keeps this oddly worded line within the section marked by dashes. Many translations, however, link it to verse 30. The word in Hebrew translated “together” has been changed in countless ways to obtain a more satisfactory rendering. None of these have met with general acceptance. Good News Translation has translated lines b and c of the verse in its third line. That is, it has kept When he hides his face from line b and then joined the second half of line b with line c. Therefore who can behold him is translated “helpless,” and a man is rendered as “men,” and a nation is shifted to verse 30a. This may require more adjustments than most translators will wish to follow. Dhorme links line c to verse 30 but adjusts the text to get “now he watches nations and persons.” Since most modern translations connect line c to verse 30, it is necessary to look first at verse 30 before completing recommendations regarding verse 29c.

That a godless man should not reign translates the Hebrew closely. The second line, that he should not ensnare the people, is literally “from the snare of the people.” Hebrew Old Testament Text Project sets out the problems of verse 29c and verse 30 in four stages: (1) verse 29c should be linked to verse 30; (2) the word translated man in verse 29c probably means “humanity” as a collective noun; (3) “from the snares of the people” designates those who ensnare the people and so should be as in Revised Standard Version; (4) and so the translation of verses 29c and 30 can be “And over a nation and over humanity alike, he makes king a godless man from among the seducers (those who ensnare) of the people.” As a translation model this can be improved by saying, for example, “God chooses a man from among the deceivers of the people and makes him rule over their nations” or “God chooses godless men who lead the people astray, and he makes them rulers over nations.”

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 .