spirit/demon comes (out)

The Greek that is translatede as “spirit/demon comes (out)” in various forms in English is translated in
Izii as “spirit/demon pour (out),” because “ephe (‘come’), sounds as if the demons are human beings. We use only ephe for human beings.” (Source: Samuel Iyoku in The Bible Translator 1977, p. 404ff. )

unclean spirit / evil spirit

The Hebrew and Greek that is typically translated/transliterated in English as “unclean spirit” or “evil spirit” is translated in Paasaal it is translated as gyɩŋbɔmɔ, which is also the term used for “demon.” Wyɩŋbɔmɔ are “beings that are in the wild and can only be seen when they choose to reveal themselves to certain people. They can ‘capture’ humans and keep them in hiding while they train the person in herbalism and divination. After the training period, which can range from a week to many years, the ‘captured’ individual is released to go back into society as a healer and a diviner. The gyɩŋbɔmɔ can also be evil, striking humans with mental diseases and causing individuals to get lost in the wild. The Pasaale worldview about demons is like that of others of the language groups in the area.” (Source: Fabian N. Dapila in The Bible Translator 2024, p. 415ff.)

Note that often the words for “demon” “unclean spirit” are being used interchangeably.

complete verse (Luke 4:36)

Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 4:36:

  • Noongar: “All the people were amazed and said to each other, ‘What are these words of his? The man speaks with power and the evil spirits go out!'” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
  • Uma: “All the people who saw were surprised, and they talked to one another, they said: ‘No kidding the power of his words! He used his power to cause-to-come-out an-evil-thing, they really came out.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “All the people were amazed and they spoke together, they said, ‘What sort of words are these? He has power (supernatural) and he has authority to command the demons. They obey his command and come out.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And all the people there were very much surprised, and they asked each other, saying, ‘Where does Jesus get this power to control, because He commands the demons with very great power, and they leave, and they obey him!'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “The eyes of those who were there widened (in surprise) and they said-to-one-another, ‘Wey! That’s really something what he said! Even evil-spirits and he (admiration particle) has the authority/rule and power to command them and they leave.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “They were all amazed. They were saying, ‘Whatever speech is that? For look-at-that, he has authority and far from ordinary power/strength to rebuke even evil spirits and then they leave the ones they were possessing.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)

Honorary "rare" construct denoting God ("order/command")

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 morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are 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, meiji-rare-ru (命じられる) or “order/command” is used.

(Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )

pronoun for "God"

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 Kouya, Godié, Northern Grebo, Eastern Krahn, Western Krahn, and Guiberoua Béte, all languages of the Kru family in Western Africa, a different kind of system of pronouns is used (click or tap here to read more):

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. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both 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. ).

See also first person pronoun referring to God.

Learn more on Bible Odyssey: Gender of God .

Translation: Chinese

在现代汉语中，第三人称单数代词的读音都是一样的（tā），但是写法并不一样，取决于性别以及是否有生命，即男性为“他”，女性为“她”，动物、植物和无生命事物为“它”（在香港和台湾的汉语使用，动物则为“牠”）。这些字的部首偏旁表明了性别（男人、女人、动物、无生命事物），而另一偏旁通常旁提示发音。

到1930年为止，基督教新教《圣经》经过整整一百年的翻译已经拥有了十几个译本，当时的一位圣经翻译者王元德新造了一个“神圣的”代词“祂”，偏旁“礻”表示神明。一般汉语读者会立即知道这字的发音是tā，而这个偏旁表示属灵的事物，因此他们明白这个字指出，三位一体的所有位格都没有性别之分，而单单是上帝。

然而，最重要的新教圣经译本（1919年的《和合本》）和天主教圣经译本（1968年的《思高圣经》）都没有采用“祂”；虽然如此，许多其他的圣经译本采用了这个字，另外还广泛出现在赞美诗和其他基督信仰的书刊中。（资料来源：Zetzsche）

《吕振中译本》的几个早期版本也使用“祂”来指称“上帝”；这个译本的《新约》于1946年译成，整部《圣经》于1970年完成。克拉默斯（Kramers）指出：“‘他’的这种新写法（即‘祂’）产生了一个小问题，就是在指称耶稣的时候，是否一律使用这个敬语代词？《吕振中译本》遵循的原则是，在称呼耶稣这个人的时候，用一般的‘他’，而在称呼耶稣神性的时候，特别是升天之后的耶稣，则用尊称‘祂’。”

Translator: Simon Wong

Translation commentary on Luke 4:36

Exegesis:

kai egeneto thambos epi pantas ‘and astonishment came upon all.’ For a similar phrase cf. 1.65.

thambos (also 5.9) ‘astonishment,’ ‘awe,’ in the New Testament always of the feeling that comes over people when they witness an act of divine power.

kai sunelaloun pros allēlous ‘and they talked to one another.’ The imperfect tense has durative aspect.

sullaleō ‘to talk,’ ‘to talk with.’

tis ho logos houtos ‘what is this word?’ logos is best understood as referring to the imperatives of v. 35, ‘be silent and get out of him.’ This is supported by the fact that the subsequent clause introduced by hoti refers unequivocally to Jesus’ power over the unclean spirits.

hoti introducing a clause which describes what ho logos houtos refers to, either ‘because,’ ‘for’ (cf. Revised Standard Version, Translator’s New Testament, An American Translation, Brouwer, Nieuwe Vertaling) or ‘that,’ preferably the former.

en exousia kai dunamei ‘with authority and power.’ The former refers to what cannot be contradicted, the latter to what cannot be resisted (cf. Bengel quoted by Plummer).

epitassei tois akathartois pneumasin, kai exerchontai ‘he orders the unclean spirits and they come out.’ The latter of the two co-ordinate clauses describes what is the result of the former.

epitassō ‘to order,’ with the dative. Except 14.22 always of giving orders to more than human powers.

Translation:

For amazed see also above, on “wondered at” in 1.21.

Said to one another. Luke uses various phrases with reference to discussion or consultation taking place among Jesus’ general audience and/or his opponents (4.36; 5.21; 6.11; 20.5, usually in reaction to what they hear him say or see him do), or among the disciples (9.46; 22.23), or between the two men on the way to Emmaus (24.14f), or among the tenants in 20.14 and the shepherds in 2.15. The particular nuance of the discussion may be that of wonder or questioning (4.36; 22.23), indignation (5.21), controversy (9.46), planning (for arrest or murder, 6.11; 20.14), deliberation (20.5; 22.4; 24.14). Some languages possess various specific terms for some or all of these nuances, cf. English “discussion”, “dispute”, “debate”, “consultation”, “planning”, “argument”, “questionings” etc., but elsewhere one may have to use a more generic rendering, i.e. a reciprocal expression derived from or built upon ‘to say’ or ‘to ask,’ leaving the specific nuance to be expressed by the following indication of the contents of the discussion (often given in direct discourse) or to be inferred from the context. A corresponding reflexive expression (e.g. ‘to ask-one-self,’ ‘to say to the heart’) is in some of these languages used for inward reasoning and thought.

What is this word, or, ‘how can he speak like that.’ The interrogative clause has the force of an exclamation, cf. Bible de Jérusalem, quelle parole! and Balinese, which adds the exclamatory particle that indicates wonder.

One may have to make explicit that the relationship between the two next clauses is a consecutive one, e.g. ‘with such authority and power he commands … that they come out,’ or transposing the prepositional phrase, ‘he commands … with the result that they come out; so great is (or, that shows) his authority and power.’

With authority and power, or, ‘with (or, as one who has) the right and power (to speak).’ Sranan Tongo combines the two terms in one expression, cf. ‘in the was-of-a-boss he masters the bad spirits.’

He commands. If the verb must be rendered analytically and the contents of the command has to be specified, this may result in something like, ‘he tells the unclean spirits to come out (or, in direct discourse), and they do so.’

Unclean spirits, see references on “demon” in v. 35.

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.