15They cried out, “Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!” Pilate asked them, “Shall I crucify your King?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.”
In American Sign Language it is translated with the sign for “government/governor” plus the sign for “P” with a circular movement. The reference to government indicates Pilate’s position of authority in the Roman Empire. (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Pilate” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “chief priest” in English is translated in Muyuw as tanuwgwes lun or “ruler-of peace offering.” (Source: David Lithgow in The Bible Translator 1971, p. 118ff. )
The Greek that is translated into English as “crucify” is translated in various ways:
Naro: xgàu or “to stretch” (as is done with a skin after slaughtering in order to dry it. The word is also widely accepted in the churches.) (Source: Gerrit van Steenbergen)
Yatzachi Zapotec: “fasten him to the cross” (source for this and two above: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125)
Noongar: “kill on a tree” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Apali: “nail to a tree piece put cross-wise, lift up to stand upright (for the crucified person) to die (and in some contexts: “to die and rise again”)” (source: Martha Wade)
In British Sign Language it is signed with a sign that signifies “nails hammered into hands” and “arms stretched out.” (Source: Anna Smith)
“Crucify” or “crucifixion” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
Following is a painting by Wang Suda 王肅達 (1910-1963):
Housed by Société des Auxiliaires des Missions Collection – Whitworth University
(click image to enlarge)
Image taken from Chinese Christian Posters . For more information on the “Ars Sacra Pekinensis” school of art, see this article , for other artworks of that school in TIPs, see here.
Click or tap here to see a short video clip showing how crucifixion was done in biblical times (source: Bible Lands 2012)
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.
As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.
Here, the crowd and Pilate address each other with the formal, respectful pronoun.
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, translators typically select the exclusive form (excluding Pilate).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of John 19:15:
Uma: “They made a great noise jeering, they said: ‘Kill him! Kill him! Crucify him!’ Pilatus said: ‘What? Do you ask that I crucify your king?’ The leaders of the priests retorted: ‘Only Kaisar is our (excl.) king.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “But the people shouted, they said, ‘Kill now. Kill now. Nail onto the post.’ Pilatus said to them, ‘What? You want that I command your king to be nailed on the post?’ The leaders of the priests answered, they said, ‘We (excl.) have no other king than the Leader King/Emperor.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then the Jews began to shout again, ‘Kill him! Nail him to the cross!’ And Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I nail your king to the cross?’ And the chief priests answered, ‘Our only king is Caesar!'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “But they were-shouting, ‘Remove (sing.)-him, kill (sing.)-him! Nail (sing.)-him to the cross!’ Pilato said, ‘And there-you-are wanting me to nail your king?’ Whereupon the leaders of the priests answered and said, ‘The Emperor only is our (excl.) king, no other.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Those Judio again shouted out, saying, ‘Don’t let him live! Kill him! Nail him to a cross!’ ‘What,’ said Pilato, ‘will I cause this King of yours to be nailed to a cross?’ ‘We (excl.) have no other king, but on the contrary the Impiradur only,’ said those chiefs of the priests.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “But the Jews shouted saying, ‘Let him be killed. Let him be killed. Let him be put on the cross.’ Pilate said to the people, ‘Then do you want me to put your ruler on the cross?’ But the chief priests said, ‘We have no ruler except the ruler in Rome.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
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 second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used anata (あなた) is typically used when the speaker is humbly addressing another person.
In these verses, however, omae (おまえ) is used, a cruder second person pronoun, that Jesus for instance chooses when chiding his disciples. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))
Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:
“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.