Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 18:28:
- Uma: “From there, Petrus said: ‘But us (excl.), we (excl.) left-behind our (excl.) goods and followed you (sing.).'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
- Yakan: “Then Petros spoke. ‘Look at us,’ he said, ‘We (excl.) have already left our (excl.) houses and we (excl.) are following you.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
- Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then Peter said, ‘As for us, we have abandoned all of our possessions so that we might be your disciples.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
- Kankanaey: “Then Pedro said, ‘And us (excl.) now? Because we (excl.) have left everything so-that we (excl.) would become your (singular) disciples.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
- Tagbanwa: “Pedro spoke, saying, ‘Well as for us (excl.) here, Master, isn’t it so that we have left everything to go around with you now?'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). 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 Jesus).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
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 Translator 2002, 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, individual or several disciples address Jesus with the formal pronoun, expressing respect. Compare this to how that address changes after the resurrection.
In most Dutch translations, the disciples address Jesus before and after the resurrection with the formal pronoun.