Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Job 36:16:
Kupsabiny: “God wants to save you to come out of trouble and give you to live a good life, where there is enough food until the end.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “God, having removed you from trouble, with no hinderances He will cause you to arrive in a safe place. Your table will be filled with [lit.: will become full of] delicious food to eat. ” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “‘God has-led- you (sing.) -away from disaster and has-given freedom and prosperity, and your (sing.) table will-be-filled again with delecious food.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “‘And Job, I think that God wants to bring you out of your troubles and allow you to live without distress; he wants your table to be full of very nice food.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (祂) is used.”
In that system, one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and others for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, michibik-are-ru (導かれる) or “lead/guide” is used.
There are three lines in verse 16 instead of the usual two, and the division between the first two is uncertain.
He also allured you out of distress has no specific subject, but Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version are no doubt correct in making God the subject. Allured translates a verb whose tense does not make clear whether Elihu is describing Job’s past experience, as in Revised Standard Version, or some future possibility, as in New International Version, “He is wooing you from the jaws of distress.” Allured translates the same verb used in 2.3, where God says that Satan “moved me” (Revised Standard Version), “persuaded me” (Good News Translation). In Deuteronomy 13.6 the same verb is translated by Revised Standard Version as “entices.” Some interpreters consider it unlikely that God is the subject if this verb is used in its usual sense of “entice.” Some take the subject to be a broad place in line b. Accordingly Moffatt translates “your wide freedom has beguiled you.” Out of distress is literally “from the mouth of distress.” Some change this to get “wealth,” and so “wealth has enticed you” or “riches have seduced you.” Dhorme understands the verb rendered allured to mean “remove,” and regards it as a movement to a more specific term than the general verb “delivers” in verse 15a. He translates “and similarly he will remove you from the jaws of trouble.” This is similar to Good News Translation “God brought you out of trouble” and is recommended.
Into a broad place translates a single Hebrew word which has been rendered “expanse, freedom, abundance, amplitude” and is followed by where there was no cramping, which is literally simply “no cramping” and has the apparent sense of “unconfined, without restriction.” Then the Hebrew adds “instead of it” or “beneath it.” Dhorme transfers “instead of it” to the beginning of line b and makes line b contrast with distress: “instead of it (trouble), you will enjoy unrestricted abundance.” Good News Translation understands a broad place to refer to security and translates “and let you enjoy security.” This is as good a guess as any, and far better than referring to unlimited space, as in Revised Standard Version and others. This line may also be rendered “and takes good care of you” or “and provides for your needs.”
And what was set on your table was full of fatness: set is uncertain. The word is used in Isaiah 30.15, where it means “quietness or resting.” Dhorme gives it the meaning of “filled,” “And your table will be filled….” Good News Translation has “Your table was piled high….” Fatness in this context refers to rich food, as in Isaiah 55.2, where Good News Translation translates “the best food of all.” Although Good News Translation is recommended as a suitable model for translating verse 16, Rowley offers a different one in which wealth is the subject in line a: “Wealth hath enticed thee, unlimited abundance behind thee, thy table loaded with rich food.” Another possibility is “God took away your misfortune; in its place he gave you all you could want, and even your table was loaded with the richest foods.”
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.