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 18:20:
Kupsabiny: “Then that priest became very happy and went with them. He went with all the idols and the ceremonial cloth.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Then that priest rejoiced. He went with them, taking that ephod, the carved image and the household gods.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “The priest was-pleased with what was-said to him, so he helped them in taking the special cloth, the image that was-overlayed/coated with silver and the other little-gods, and he went-with them.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “The priest liked what they were suggesting. So he took the sacred vest and the idols, and he prepared to go with the men from the tribe of Dan.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
The irony continues here since the Levite forgets what Micah has done for him and willingly goes off with the Danites.
And the priest’s heart was glad: This is the Levite’s reaction to the proposal of the Danites. It pleases him, so he immediately accepts it. And renders well the Hebrew waw conjunction, which introduces the Levite’s reaction here. However, in many languages it may be necessary to begin with “At this proposal” or “Hearing this.” The priest’s heart was glad is literally “the heart of the priest was good,” so this clause links back to the Danites’ question at the end of 18.19, where the Hebrew root meaning “good” is rendered “better.” The narrator again calls the Levite a priest, continuing the irony. In Hebrew the heart is the seat of thought, will, and emotions (see verse 5.9). In this context, however, it is used as the seat of emotions. Translators can use any idiomatic expression to describe the Levite’s joy. We might say “the priest was [very] happy” or “the priest was overjoyed.” If at one point the Levite feared for his life, he is now happy to learn that he will not be killed. Many scholars note how quickly his decision was made. Obviously he is an opportunist, as his loyalty to Micah quickly fades.
He took the ephod, and the teraphim, and the graven image: This clause begins with the Hebrew waw conjunction, omitted by Revised Standard Version, but which some languages may prefer to express. For example, Good News Translation uses the connector “so.” Once again the verb took is in focus (see verse 18.17). However, now it is not the Danites who are removing the sacred items but the priest! If possible, the same verb took should be used throughout this passage. To convey some of the irony, we might say “the priest himself took [or, picked up]….” For the ephod, and the teraphim, and the graven image, see verse 17.3, verse 5. Note that here “the molten image” is missing, but this does not seem to have great significance.
And went in the midst of the people is literally “and he came in the middle of the people,” that is, the Levite joined the Danites. The Hebrew word for people (ʿam) is often used to refer to all the people of Israel (see verse 2.4), but here it refers to a part of the tribe of Dan, intent on stealing from a fellow Israelite. Translators will have to decide whether they can keep this ironic reference to the people, or whether they have to specify “the Danites.” New Jerusalem Bible says “and went off among the people,” but New International Version expresses a slightly different nuance: “and went along with the people.” In any case, this clause underlines the Levite’s willingness to leave Micah to now serve the Danites.
Translation models for this verse are:
• Hearing this, the priest was very happy, and he took the ephod, the household gods and the carved image, and joined the Danites.
• At this, the priest was overjoyed, so he took the ephod, the household gods and the carved image, and left with the Danites.
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.