19Then he took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
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 formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, iw-are-ru (言われる) or “say” is used.
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (祂) is used.”
In that system, one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and others for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as Indonesian and Malay. In the latter two languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
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 first person singular and plural pronoun (“I” and “we” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. The most commonly used watashi/watakushi (私) is typically used when the speaker is humble and asking for help. In these verses, where God / Jesus is referring to himself, watashi is also used but instead of the kanji writing system (私) the syllabary hiragana (わたし) is used to distinguish God from others.
labōn arton eucharistēsas eklasen ‘when he had taken a loaf of bread he gave thanks and broke it,’ cf. on v. 17 where the semantic structure is the same. klaō also 24.30.
edōken autois ‘he gave it to them,’ i.e. he gave each a piece.
to huper humōn didomenon ‘that is being given for you.’ For the historical and text critical problems of this phrase and the rest of v. 19 and v. 20 cf. commentaries. huper humōn ‘in your behalf,’ not, ‘in your place’ or, ‘as a substitute for you.’ didomenon is best understood in a sacrificial sense, i.e. ‘being offered up as a sacrifice.’ The present tense of didomenon expresses that Jesus’ being offered up is viewed as happening already. The agent may be Jesus himself, or God, preferably the former.
touto poieite eis tēn emēn anamnēsin ‘do this (from now on) in remembrance of me.’ touto refers to the breaking and the eating of the bread. eis tēn emēn anamnēsin is best rendered in such a way that it implies no allusions to a memorial of a dead man.
Translation:
Bread, or, ‘a loaf (of bread),’ cf. on 4.3.
He broke it, or, ‘broke-it-to-pieces,’ ‘divided-it-in-pieces’ (Bahasa Indonesia, Toraja-Sa’dan, Sundanese, using reduplicated form of ‘to break,’ ‘to pinch-off’ and ‘to divide,’ respectively).
This is my body. The verb indicates and equation between two objects; this is often expressed by simple juxtaposition of the two nouns. Such constructions can usually cover some of several kinds of relationship, such as identity, comparison, representation, association, which is all right here, since the rendering should not be unduly interpretative. On the other hand the translator may have to avoid such an equational construction, for instance because it would exclusively indicate identification of two objects; hence e.g. ‘this represents (lit. is a sign of) my body’ (Tzeltal, chosen to avoid the suggestion of identification similar to indigenous ideas of magic).
In remembrance of me, or, ‘in order to remember me, or, to keep me in mind’; and see on 1.54.
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.
In these verses Jesus gave bread and wine from the Passover meal a new meaning. He revealed to his disciples that he would soon sacrifice himself for them and for all the people of the world. This meal began the Christian custom of observing the Lord’s supper regularly.
22:19a
And He took the bread: The clause And He took the bread indicates that Jesus took bread from the table. The verb took was also used in 22:17 of taking the wine. It probably implies that he lifted the bread from the table instead of receiving it from someone. Translate it in a similar way as you translated 22:17a. For example:
Jesus took some bread in his hands (Contemporary English Version) -or-
Jesus took bread ⌊from the table⌋
the bread: In this context the bread was made without yeast, since that was customary at Passover meals. It was flat and round. In some languages it may be necessary to include a word that refers in general to a quantity of bread. For example:
some bread (New Century Version) -or-
a loaf of bread (New Revised Standard Version)
22:19b
gave thanks: The Greek word that the Berean Standard Bible translates as gave thanks is literally “having given thanks.” Here it indicates that Jesus thanked God for the bread. In some languages it may be necessary to make this explicit. For example:
gave thanks to God (Good News Translation) -or-
when he had thanked God for it (New Living Translation (1996))
22:19c
broke it: The Greek verb that the Berean Standard Bible translates as broke refers to dividing or tearing bread into two or more parts. Jesus used his hands to break the bread, rather than a knife. The text does not say whether Jesus broke the flat bread into two parts or into many parts.
gave it to them: After Jesus broke the bread, he distributed it among the disciples so that each of them could eat part of it. In some languages it may be necessary to specify that he gave it to them to eat. For example:
He gave/passed/handed it…to them…⌊to eat⌋ (Translator’s Reference Translation)
22:19d
saying: In some languages it may be necessary to make explicit that Jesus was speaking to the disciples. It may also be more natural to start a new sentence here. For example:
He said to them
This is My body: The word This refers to the bread that Jesus gave to his disciples. Here is another way to translate this:
This ⌊bread⌋ is My body (Translator’s Reference Translation)
Churches have different views about exactly what the words This is My body imply. Because of this, it is probably best to translate in a literal way.
My body, given for you: In this context the term My body refers to Jesus’ living body. It does not refer to his dead body or corpse. The phrase given for you implies that Jesus will sacrifice his life for them by dying for them. In this context of Passover, it implies that Jesus will die so that they can be saved. In some languages there may be a special idiom to use when a person says that he will die a sacrificial death for someone.
Some other ways to translate My body, given for you are:
my body, which is/will-be-offered for you -or-
My body which will be sacrificed for you (Translator’s Reference Translation)
The verb given is passive. In some languages it is necessary to translate the phrase with an active verb. For example:
my body, which I offer as a sacrifice on your behalf -or-
my body, which I will give for your sakes -or-
This bread that I offer to you, this is my body that I offer to redeem you.
for you: The phrase for you means “for your benefit” or “on your behalf.” In this context it has the special meaning “as a sacrifice for you” or “to save/redeem you.” The phrase for you also occurs in 22:20 about Jesus’ blood poured out for them. See the translation examples in the note above.
you: The word you refers to the apostles and also to all people who will trust in Jesus. The apostles represent all of God’s people.
22:19e
do this in remembrance of Me: In this context Jesus used the phrase do this to indicate that his disciples should establish the action in this verse as a custom. They should eat unleavened bread together in a special ceremony to remember Jesus with honor and gratitude. They would especially remember the sacrifice that he made to save them.
Some other ways to translate Jesus’ instruction here are:
Do this to remember me. (God’s Word) -or-
Do this custom in order to remember me.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.