The Hebrew, Greek and Latin that is translated as “idol(s)” in English is translated in Central Subanen as ledawan or “images.” (Source: Robert Brichoux in OPTAT 1988/2, p. 80ff. )
In German, typically the term Götze is used. Originally this was used as a term of endearment for Gott (“God” — see here ), later for “icon” and “image, likeness.” Luther started to use it in the 16th century in the meaning of “false god, idol.”
Other terms that are used in German include Götzenbild(er) (“image[s] of idols”) or Bildnis (“image” — Protestant) / Kultbild (“cultish image” — Catholic) (used for instance in Exodus 20:4 and Deuteronomy 5:8). The latest revision of the Catholic Einheitsübersetzung (publ. 2016) also uses the neologism Nichtse (“nothings”) in 1 Chron. 16:26 and Psalm 96:5. (Source: Zetzsche)
The Hebrew, Aramaic, Ge’ez, and Greek that are typically translated as “priest” in English (itself deriving from Latin “presbyter” — “elder”) is often translated with a consideration of existing religious traditions. (Click or tap for details)
Bratcher / Nida (1961) say this:
“However, rather than borrow local names for priests, some of which have unwanted connotations, a number of translations have employed descriptive phrases based on certain functions: (1) those describing a ceremonial activity: Pamona uses tadu, the priestess who recites the litanies in which she describes her journey to the upper or under-world to fetch life-spirit for sick people, animals or plants; Batak Toba uses the Arabic malim, ‘Muslim religious teacher;’ ‘one who presents man’s sacrifice to God’ (Bambara, Eastern Maninkakan), ‘one who presents sacrifices’ (Baoulé, Navajo (Dinė)), ‘one who takes the name of the sacrifice’ (Kpelle, and ‘to make a sacrifice go out’ (Hausa); (2) those describing an intermediary function: ‘one who speaks to God’ (Shipibo-Conibo) and ‘spokesman of the people before God’ (Tabasco Chontal).”
In Obolo it is translated as ogwu ngwugwa or “the one who offers sacrifice” (source: Enene Enene), in Mairasi as agam aevar nevwerai: “religious leader” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Ignaciano as “blesser, one who does ritual as a practice” (using a generic term rather than the otherwise common Spanish loan word sacerdote) (source: Willis Ott in Notes on Translation 88/1982, p. 18ff.), and in Noongar as yakin-kooranyi or “holy worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
For Guhu-Samane, Ernest Richert (in The Bible Translator, 1965, p. 81ff. ) reports this: “The [local] cult of Poro used to be an all-encompassing religious system that essentially governed all areas of life. (…) For ‘priest’ the term ‘poro father’ would at first seem to be a natural choice. However, several priests of the old cult are still living. Although they no longer function primarily as priests of the old system they still have a substantial influence on the community, and there would be more than a chance that the unqualified term would (in some contexts particularly) be equated with the priest of the poro cult. We learned, then, that the poro fathers would sometimes be called ‘knife men’ in relation to their sacrificial work. The panel was pleased to apply this term to the Jewish priest, and the Christian community has adopted it fully. [Mark 1:44, for instance, now] reads: ‘You must definitely not tell any man of this. But you go show your body to the knife man and do what Moses said about a sacrifice concerning your being healed, and the cause (base of this) will be apparent.'”
For a revision of the 1968 version of the Bible in Khmer Joseph Hong (in: The Bible Translator 1996, 233ff. ) talks about a change in wording for this term:
Bau cha r (បូជាចារ្យ) — The use of this new construction meaning “priest” is maintained to translate the Greek word hiereus. The term “mean sang (មាន សង្ឃ)” used in the old version actually means a “Buddhist monk,” and is felt to be theologically misleading. The Khmer considers the Buddhist monk as a “paddy field of merits,” a reserve of merits to be shared with other people. So a Khmer reader would find unthinkable that the mean sang in the Bible killed animals, the gravest sin for a Buddhist; and what a scandal it would be to say that a mean sang was married, had children, and drank wine.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Judges 18:18:
Kupsabiny: “But when that priest saw that those people took all those things from the house of Micah, he shouted, ‘What are you doing?’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “When he saw those five men go into Micah’s house and take the statue, the idol, the ephod, as well as the household gods, that priest asked them — "What are you doing?"” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “When the priest saw at-that-time that the five men entered into the house of Micas and took those things, he asked them, ‘Why are- you (plur.) taking those (things)?’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “When the priest saw them bringing out the idols and the sacred vest and the statue, he said to them, ‘What are you doing?’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
And when these went into Micah’s house and took … renders an independent clause in Hebrew, but it repeats previous events (see verse 18.17), so like Revised Standard Version, many versions cast it as a dependent temporal clause (New Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation). This repetition conveys yet another note of irony. The demonstrative pronoun these refers to the five Danite spies, so we can say “these men” (New International Version) or “these Danites.” The Hebrew verbs rendered went into and took are the same ones translated “entered” and “took” in verse 18.17.
The graven image, the ephod, the teraphim, and the molten image lists the religious items in the same way as in verse 18.17. See verse 17.3, verse 5.
The priest said to them, “What are you doing?”: Micah’s priest sees the Danite spies confiscating the sacred objects, so he protests. Again the mention of the priest instead of “the Levite” may express irony (see verse 18.17). The general verb said may be rendered “protested” in this context. What are you doing? is not a real question, but a cry of distress and protest, so we might say “You can’t do that!” or “Don’t you dare do that!” However, it is clear that the priest can do nothing to prevent the Danites from taking whatever they want. The Hebrew verb rendered are … doing is a participle, so a verb form expressing ongoing action should be used. Contemporary English Version is quite dramatic here: “ ‘Hey!’ the priest shouted. ‘What do you think you’re doing?’ ”
A translation model for this verse is:
• When the spies entered Micah’s house and removed the ephod and other sacred objects, the priest screamed, “You can’t do that!”
Quoted with permission from Zogbo, Lynell and Ogden, Graham S. A Handbook on Judges. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2019. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.