daybreak, early in the morning

The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “early in the morning” or “daybreak” in English is translated in Low German as vür Dau un Daak or “before dew and day break” (translation by Johannes Jessen, publ. 1937, republ. 2006).

complete verse (Luke 4:42)

Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 4:42:

  • Noongar: “The sun rose and Jesus left Capernaum, and went alone to the desert. People started looking for him, and when they saw him, they wanted to stop him and they asked him not to go away.” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
  • Uma: “The next day, Yesus went out from that town, going to a deserted place. Many people hunted for him until they found him. They asked that he no longer leave them behind.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “When it was day already, Isa left and went to a place where there weren’t any people. The people looked for him and when they found him they urged him to stay.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And when dawn came, Jesus left that town and separated himself to a place where there were no companions. But the people looked for him, and when they found him, they begged him, that he should not yet leave their village.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “When it was light, Jesus left that town and went to an isolated place. So the people, they went looking for him. When they came-upon him, they urged (lit. hung-onto/restrained) him not to leave them.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “That night, when it was now dawn, Jesus went out and went to a wilderness place. But well, he was searched for by the people. When they had found him, they asked not to leave their place.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)

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 ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (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 systems 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 one 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 in the following way: “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 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, but most translations, especially those published in the 21st century, do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are 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 this chapter in the World Atlas of Language Structures on different approaches to personal pronouns.

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 4:42

Exegesis:

genomenēs de hēmeras ‘when day came.’ The phrase does not necessarily imply that the healing lasted the whole night.

exelthōn eporeuthē ‘he left and went.’ exelthōn probably refers to leaving the town.

eis erēmon topon ‘to a lonely spot.’

kai hoi ochloi epezētoun auton ‘and the crowds searched for him.’ The imperfect tense epezētoun is durative, cf. “kept seeking” (Plummer). For ochlos cf. on 3.7.

epizēteō (also 12.30) ‘to search for,’ ‘to try to find.’

kai ēlthon heōs autou lit. ‘they came as far as him,’ i.e. ‘to where he was.’ ēlthon is aorist because it refers to a punctiliar event as different from epezētoun and kateichon (see next note).

heōs here ‘as far as.’

kai kateichon auton ‘they tried to keep him.’ The imperfect tense is conative.

katechō ‘to hold back,’ ‘to hold up,’ here with the implication of preventing from going away. This implication is explicitly stated in what follows.

tou mē poreuesthai ap’ autōn ‘that he would not leave them.’ Articular infinitive in the genitive after a verb of hindering to indicate the intended result.

Translation:

When it was day, preferably, ‘when day came,’ is rendered by various idiomatic expressions, e.g. ‘when it-sunned’ (Tae’), ‘time of sun-rays’ (Kele), ‘when the sun is coming-out’ (Kituba), ‘when day dawned (lit. sprouted)’ (Marathi), ‘when space (referring to air or land) became white’ (Tzeltal), ‘when it/day became light’ (Cuyono, Batak Toba); other possibilities are, ‘early next morning,’ ‘when darkness had passed.’

Lonely place, or, ‘uninhabited place,’ ‘place where there are no people living,’ ‘place where people seldom come’; in some cases one term covers ‘silent/quiet’ and ‘lonely.’

The people is used here in its generic meaning, see on 1.17; cf. also on “multitudes” in 3.7, and references.

Sought him and came to him, or, ‘went in search of him and (finally) came to where he was,’ cf. also, ‘were-tracking (from a noun meaning ‘footmark’) until they reached him’ (Javanese). Some versions (e.g. The Four Gospels – a New Translation, New English Bible, Bible de Jérusalem, Bahasa Indonesia RC, Sundanese) subordinate the second clause to what follows, ‘and when they came upon him they would have….’ Came to him may better be rendered, ‘encountered him’ (Bahasa Indonesia RC), ‘found him’ (Tae’ 1933).

Would have kept him from leaving them, or, ‘tried to hold Him back that He would not leave them’ (Nieuwe Vertaling), ‘tried to keep him, saying, “Do not leave us” ,’ both reflecting the rather redundant wording of the Greek; or simply, ‘tried to keep him with them,’ “did their best to make him stay with them” (The Four Gospels – a New Translation).

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.