The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “thirst” or “thirsty” in English is translated in Kituba as “hungry for water” (source: Donald Deer in The Bible Translator 1973, p. 207ff. ) and in Mairasi as “water pain” (source: Enggavoter 2004).
Kölsch translation (Boch 2017): nix zo Käue han or “have nothing to chew on” and singe Mage hät geknottert wie ne Hungk or “his stomach growled like a dog” (source: Jost Zetzsche)
German New Testament translation by Berger / Nord (publ. 1999): Hunger überfiel ihn or “Hunger overtook (lit.: “attacked”) him” (in Matthew 4:2)
Kupsabiny: “hunger ate him” (source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Mairasi: “feeling tuber pains” (tubers are the main staple) (source Enggavoter 2004)
The following is a stained glass window showing some of the works of mercy by Lavers, Barraud and Westlake, 1884 for the All Saints’ church, Mountfield, England:
Photo by Julian P Guffogg, hosted by Wikimedia Commons under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-alike license 2.0 license
Stained glass is not just highly decorative, it’s a medium which has been used to express important religious messages for centuries. Literacy was not widespread in the medieval and Renaissance periods and the Church used stained glass and other artworks to teach the central beliefs of Christianity. In Gothic churches, the windows were filled with extensive narrative scenes in stained glass — like huge and colorful picture storybooks — in which worshipers could ‘read’ the stories of Christ and the saints and learn what was required for their religious salvation. (Source: Victoria and Albert Museum )
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 Translator2002, 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, Jesus is addressing his disciples, individuals and/or crowds with the formal pronoun, showing respect.
In Nepali translations, Jesus addresses his disciples and other people with the medium honorific pronoun timīlē (तिमीले) or timīlēharū (तिमीलेहरू). This disciples respond with a high honorific pronoun. (Source: Chitra Chhetri in The Bible Translator 2009, p. 73ff. )
In most Dutch translations, Jesus addresses his disciples and common people with the informal pronoun, whereas they address him with the formal form.
Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 25:37:
Uma: “‘The ones on my right side will answer, they will say: [NOTE: more accurate translation: Those people with upright behavior will answer like this:] ‘Lord, when did we see you (sing.) hungry and we gave you (sing.) food, or thirsty and we gave you (sing.) water?” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Then the straight/righteous people there on my right side will say, ‘Sir, when did we see you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you drink?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then the righteous who are on my right side will ask me, ‘When did we see you hungry and thirsty and we fed and gave you drink?” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “‘Then the righteous people will say, ‘Lord, when perhaps did we (excl.) see you (sing.) hungry and we (excl.) fed-you (sing.), and you (sing.) were thirsty and we (excl.) gave-you (sing.)-a-drink?” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Those people answer who are straight/righteous in the sight of God, ‘Lord, when did we find (lit. whatever) you hungry and we fed you, or thirsty and we caused you to drink?” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “These people who have had their sins acquitted will say to the Lord: ‘Listen, Lord, when did we see that you were hungry and we gave you food to eat? When did we see that you were thirsty and we gave you water to drink?” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed.
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or modern 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 Translator2002, 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.
In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.
Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”
In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.
Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking.” (Source Philip Noss)
In the most recent Manchu translation of 1835 (a revision of an earlier edition from 1822), God is never addressed with a pronoun but with “father” (ama /ᠠᠮᠠ) instead. Chengcheng Liu (in this post on the Cambridge Centre for Chinese Theology blog ) explains: “In Manchu tradition, as in Chinese etiquette, second-person pronouns could be considered disrespectful when speaking to superiors or spiritual beings. Manchu Shamanist prayers avoided si [‘you’] and sini [‘your’] for this very reason. To use them for God would be, in Lipovzoff’s [one of the two translators] words, ‘the most uncouth and indecent way to speak to the Almighty — as if He were a servant or slave.’ There was also a grammatical problem. In Manchu, si and sini could refer to both singular and plural subjects. For a faith that insisted on the singularity of God, this was potentially confusing. By contrast, repeating ama removed any ambiguity.”
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
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 the Lord).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.