alabaster

In the Fuyug culture, stone-working is unknown and “alabaster” was therefore translated into Fuyug as “a nice jar shaped like a . . . ” with the next word indicating a gourd container of a particular shape.

fat, oil

The different Hebrew and Greek terms that are translated as “(olive) oil” and “(animal) fat” in English are translated in Kwere with only one term: mavuta. (Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)

complete verse (Matthew 26:7)

Following are a number of back-translations of Matthew 26:7:

  • Uma: “While he was there, a woman came bringing a bottle full of fragrant oil that was very expensive. While Yesus was eating, the woman came and poured that fragrant oil on his head her sign/way of honoring [him].” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “a woman arrived there carrying fragrant oil. It’s container was made of alabaster stone. While Isa was eating the woman went there and poured the fragrant oil on Isa’s head.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “A woman came near to him who had a flash of alabaster stone that was filled with sweet smelling perfume which was very expensive. And she poured the perfume on the head of Jesus while Jesus was still eating.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “When they were eating, a woman approached Jesus carrying a bottle made of alabaster alabastro (Ilo. loan) containing a most-expensive perfume, and she poured it on Jesus’ head.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Wneh they were now eating, a woman approached bringing a far-from-ordinary container which was full of most-expensive perfume for it was first-class. She poured it on the head of Jesus.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Jesus was now at the table to eat. At that time a woman entered carrying an oil container made from alabaster. It was filled with an oil which smelled beautiful and was very expensive. She poured the oil on Jesus’ head.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

location (of God) (Japanese honorifics)

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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) can be used, as in mi-moto (みもと) referring to the location (of God) in the referenced verses. (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 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 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 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

Honorary are / rare constructs denoting God (“arriving”)

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 show 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, tsuiteo-rare-ru (着いておられる) or “arriving” is used.

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

Translation commentary on Matthew 26:7

The him refers to Jesus, not to Simon, although Simon was the last person referred to in the Revised Standard Version text.

Came up to will have to be “went up to” in many languages.

Alabaster flask translates a Greek noun which has as its first meaning “alabaster” (a soft stone of creamy color), and as a secondary meaning “container made of alabaster.” The stone itself was imported from Egypt, and thousands of small alabaster perfume flasks have been excavated by archaeologists in Palestine. Most translators render this as “a small container made of a stone called alabaster.” They may even describe the container as “a container for oil (or, ointment).”

Very expensive translates a different adjective from that used by Mark (14.3), which there probably has the meaning “genuine” or “pure.” Moreover, Mark identifies the perfume in more detail, indicating the substance from which it was made (“nard”).

The Greek word translated ointment may also be rendered “perfume” (Good News Translation); it is used again in verse 12, though nowhere else in the Gospel. If neither of these terms is well known, translators may have “oil that smells good (or, sweet)” or “oil to make the skin smell good.” That which is called ointment today is more like a cream than oil, and it cannot be poured. Good News Translation‘s “expensive perfume” means an expensive kind of perfume.

As he sat at table (Good News Translation “While Jesus was eating”) may need to be stated earlier in the narrative, as in Good News Bible. If this suggestion is adopted, one may then translate verses 6 and 7 as “In the meanwhile Jesus had gone to the village of Bethany and was eating a meal in the house of Simon….” Other translators will want to keep the verses separate and say “Jesus had gone to the village of Bethany and was at the house of Simon who had had a serious skin disease. While he was at the table eating….”

For modern readers it may seem strange that the woman would apparently burst into Simon’s home without any invitation. But as one commentator has suggested, the gesture of the woman would not be extraordinary in a Jewish home of that time; it could have been dictated by love, joy, or recognition, although neither Mark nor Matthew say anything about the sentiments which provoke the action. What the woman did was important, not why she did it.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1988. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .