The Greek that is translated as “world” in English is translated as “all the people who sleep in all the places of the earth” in Samo (source: Shaw / Van Engen 2003, p. 178) or “world people” in Lisu (source: Cooke 1947, p. 29).
Following are a number of back-translations of John 1:10:
- Uma: “He is the one who was-used-as-a-hand by God to create this world. But when he arrived in the world, the people in the world did not know him.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
- Yakan: “But even though the Word is already here in the world and the world hep was created by him, the Word was not known/recognized by the people in the world.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
- Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Now Christ arrived on the earth. By means of him the earth was created; but mankind did not recognize who he was.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
- Kankanaey: “But even though he was in this world and God created all that is here through him, people nevertheless didn’t recognize him.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
- Tagbanwa: “Well he truly came, and he lived here on earth. But well, even though he was the one who created people, yet they didn’t recognize/acknowledge him.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
- Tenango Otomi: “This one, the Son of God, lived here on the earth. Even though he made the earth, the people didn’t know who he was.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
- Aguaruna: “He made the world. Having done that, he lived here in this world, but the ones from this world didn’t recognize him as Christ.”
- Yatzachi Zapotec: “The person who is the Word was present in the world; and even though he made the world, the people in the world didn’t realize who he was.”
- Lalana Chinantec: “He was living in the world but the people of the world never came to know who he was, even though he is the one who made the world.” (Source for this and two above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
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” in many English Bible translations when referring to the persons of the Trinity with the capitalized “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Chinese, however, offers another possibility (click or tap here to read more):
In modern Chinese, 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, many other Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. (Source: Zetzsche)
Early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970) also used 祂 to refer to “God.” Kramers points out: “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 ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (祂) is used.”
Source: R. P. Kramers in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff.
In Kouya, Godié, Northern Grebo, Eastern Krahn, Western Krahn, and Guiberoua Béte, all languages of the Kru family in Western Africa, a different kind of systems of pronouns is used (click or tap here to read more):
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one 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 in the following way: “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.)
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,” “kind,” 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.
Translator: Simon Wong