tribe

The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “tribe” in English when referring to the “12 tribes of Israel” is translated in some East African languages, including Taita and Pökoot, with the equivalent of “clan” instead.

Aloo Mojola explains (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 208ff. ) (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight):

“A number of Bible translation teams in East Africa have been baffled and intrigued by the use of the term ‘tribe’ in the English translations of the Bible. The usage employed in these translations does not reflect any of the popular meanings associated with the term ‘tribe’ in present-day English. Neither does it reflect popular conceptions of the meaning of this term in East Africa or in other parts of Africa and elsewhere. This raises the question: is the term tribe the best translation of the Hebrew terms shebeth and matteh or the Greek term phyle? What is a tribe anyway? Are the twelve tribes of Israel tribes in the sense this term is currently understood? How can this term be translated in East African languages?

“It is easy to see that there is no consistent definition of the term tribe which applies exclusively and consistently to the communities to which it is currently applied. Why, for example, are the Somali or the Baganda called a tribe, but not the Irish or the Italians? Why do the Yoruba or Hausa qualify, but not the Portuguese or the Russians? Why the Bakongo and the Oromo, but not the Germans or the Scots? Why the Eritreans, but not the French or Dutch-speaking Belgians? Why the Zulu or the Xhosa, but not the South African Boers (Afrikaners) or the South African English? The reason for the current prejudices, it would seem, has nothing to do with language, physical type, common territory, common cultural values, type of political and social organization or even population size. Ingrained prejudices and preconceived ideas about so-called “primitive” peoples have everything to do with it.

“The term ‘tribe’ is used to refer to a universal and world-wide phenomenon of ethnic identification which may draw on any of the following bases: identification in terms of one’s first or dominant language of communication (linguistic), in terms of one’s place of origin (regional), in terms of one’s presumed racial, biological or genetic type (racial), or in terms of one’s ideological or political commitments (ideological), and so on. Communities may choose one or more of these bases as criteria for membership. Any of these may change over time. Moreover forms of ethnic identification are dynamic or in a state of flux, changing in response to new environments and circumstances. Essentially forms of ethnic association reflect a people’s struggle for survival through adaptation to changing times. This is inextricably intertwined with the production and distribution of vital resources, goods and services as well as the distribution of power, class and status in society.

“At the base of any ethnic group is the nuclear family which expands to include the extended family. The extended family consists of more than two families related vertically and horizontally: parents and their offspring, cousins, uncles, aunts, nephews, and others, extending to more than two generations. A lineage is usually a larger group than an extended family. It includes a number of such families who trace descent through the male or female line to a common ancestor. A clan may be equivalent to or larger than a lineage. Where it is larger than a lineage, it brings together several lineages which may or may not know the precise nature of their relationships, but which nevertheless claim descent from a common ancestor. A clan is best thought of as a kind of sub-ethnic unit whose members have some unifying symbol such as totem, label, or myth. In most cases the clan is used to determine correct marriage lines, but this is not universally so. Above the clan is the ethnic group, usually referred to inconsistently as the tribe. Members of an ethnic group share feelings of belonging to a common group. The basis of ethnic identity is not always derived from a common descent, real or fictional; it may draw on any of the bases mentioned above.

“The Israelites identified themselves as one people sharing a common descent, a common religious and cultural heritage, a common language and history. There is no doubt that they constitute what would nowadays be called an ethnic group, or by some people a tribe. The twelve subunits of the Israelite ethnic group or tribe, (Hebrew shebeth or matteh, or Greek phyle) are clearly equivalent to clans. In fact this is what seems to make sense to most African Bible translators in the light of their understanding of these terms and the biblical account. Referring to a shebeth as a tribe or an ethnic group and to Israel as a collection of twelve tribes creates unnecessary confusion. Translating each of the terms shebeth, matteh, and phyle as clan seems to solve this problem and to be consistent with current usage in African languages.”

See also family / clan / house.

Joseph

The term that is transliterated as “Joseph” in English is translated in American Sign Language with a sign that relates to a) the coat he wore (see Gen 37:3), b) the holding of his clothes by Potiphar’s wife (see Gen 39:12), and c) the many times Joseph experienced grief. (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Joseph” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

In Spanish Sign Language it is translated with a sign that signifies “dream,” referring to Jacob’s dream at Bethel (see Genesis 28:10 and the following verses). (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Joseph” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Joseph .

For more information on translations of proper names with sign language see Sign Language Bible Translations Have Something to Say to Hearing Christians .

Ephraim

The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Ephraim” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign for “palm tree” referring to the palm of Deborah in the land of Ephraim (see Judges 4:5. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Ephraim” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

For more information on translations of proper names with sign language see Sign Language Bible Translations Have Something to Say to Hearing Christians .

For Deborah, see here.

More information about Ephraim and the Tribe of Ephraim .

Levite

The Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Latin that is transliterated “Levites” in English (only the Contemporary English Version translates it as “temple helpers”) is translated in Ojitlán Chinantec as “temple caretakers,” Yatzachi Zapotec as “people born in the family line of Levi, people whose responsibility it was to do the work in the important church of the Israelites,” in Alekano as “servants in the sacrifice house from Jerusalem place,” and in Tenango Otomi as “helpers of priests.” (Source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)

In American Sign Language with a sign that combines “temple” + “servant.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Levite” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

For the sign in Spanish Sign Language, see Levi.

More information about Levites .

complete verse (Joshua 14:4)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Joshua 14:4:

  • Kupsabiny: “Moses had given to the two and a half clans the land which was east of the river Jordan. The clan of Joseph had branched into two. Those were the clan of Manasse and that of Ephraim. The clan of Levi had not been given any land, but they were only given the cities where they live and where they graze their animals.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “The descendants of Joseph had become two tribes — Manasseh and Ephraim. The Descendants of Levi were not given any fields of that land but only cities to live in and places for their flocks and herds to graze.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “Moises had- already -given to the two and a half tribes their portion/part/share to the east of Jordan. (The descendants of Jose were- divided between two tribes — the tribe of Manase and the tribe of Efraim.) The descendants of Levi were- not -given land, but they were- given towns/cities where they would-dwell/live and farms for their animals/livestock.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “Yahweh had told Moses many years previously in what way he wanted the division of the land to be decided. Moses had already declared that two and a half tribes would be allotted land on the east side of the Jordan River. Joseph had two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim. Half of the tribe descended from Manasseh was allotted land on the east side of the Jordan, along with the tribes of Reuben and Gad. The people belonging to the nine and a half other tribes on the west side of the Jordan River threw lots/stones that had been marked to decide which land each tribe would receive. The tribe of Levi was not allotted any land. They received only towns that already existed, towns in which to live, and pastures/fields of grass for their animals.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Joshua 14:3 - 14:4

In verses 3-4 the Hebrew states twice that no territory was assigned to the tribe of Levi (see 3b, 4b, Revised Standard Version): they received cities and also fields for their cattle and flocks (see chapter 21).

The repetition of the Hebrew accounts for the reason that Good News Translation places verses 3-4 together. But the statement about the descendants of Joseph (placed in parentheses by Good News Translation) interrupts the flow of the narrative, and for many readers the inclusion of parentheses is difficult. It may be to the benefit of the reader if the first half of 3-4 is translated:

• The descendants of Joseph were divided into two tribes, the tribe of Manasseh and the tribe of Ephraim. And Moses had already assigned the land east of the Jordan to the tribe of Reuben, to half of the tribe of Manasseh, and to the tribe of Gad.

The word translated flocks (Revised Standard Version “substance”) refers to movable personal property. If the interpretation of Good News Translation is followed, then some languages will need to combine cattle and flocks as “herds.”

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .