The Hebrew terms that are translated as “family” or “clan” or “house” or similar in English are all translated in Kwere as ng’holo or “clan.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
In the English translation by Goldingay (2018) it is translated as “kin-group.”
The town name that is transliterated as “Bethlehem” in English is translated in Finnish Sign Language with the signs signifying “manger + town” (referring to Luke 2:7). (Source: Tarja Sandholm)
In American Sign Language it is translated with the signs for “bread” and “house,” referring to the original meaning of “Bethlehem” as “house of bread.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Bethlehem” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
The name that is transliterated as “Judah” or “Judea” in English (referring to the son of Jacob, the tribe, and the territory) is translated in Spanish Sign Language as “lion” (referring to Genesis 49:9 and Revelation 5:5). This sign for lion is reserved for regions and kingdoms. (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff. and Steve Parkhurst)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Micah 5:2:
Kupsabiny: “God is saying, ‘Bethlehem, Ephrathah, you are one of the small cities in Judah. But a seed shall sprout from you who shall rule Israel for me. His family line hails from people of old.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “But you, Oh Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among all the clans of Judah, For me, out of you a person will come who will rule the Israelites. His beginnings were in ancient times, from old times.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “The LORD said, ‘You (sing.), Betlehem Efrata, (is) the smallest town in Juda. But the man who will-serve me as leader of Israel, whose ancestors/[lit. old ones] (are) famous people from ancient times, will-come-from you (sing.).’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
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. Two 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.
Because the town of Bethlehem is addressed in the second person singular in verse 2, Good News Translation treats the verse as a direct quotation and identifies the speaker as The LORD. In some languages it may not make sense to address a town as though it were a person. In such cases a translator may need to express the whole verse in indirect speech and in the third person: “The Lord says that though Bethlehem Ephrathah is only one of the smallest towns in Judah, yet out of it he will bring a ruler for Israel….”
Bethlehem is a town about nine kilometers (six miles) south of Jerusalem. It is important in this context because it was the place which the family of King David came from (1 Sam 16.1-13). Later generations looked back to the reigns of King David and his son King Solomon as a golden age. So when the prophets began to speak of an ideal king who would come to restore God’s people and rule over them, they often expressed their messages in terms drawn from the days of David, or in terms associated with him. It is in keeping with this way of thinking that Micah sees Bethlehem, David’s home, as the town from which the ideal king will come.
Ephrathah is a term added perhaps to distinguish David’s Bethlehem from other towns or villages bearing the same name. Probably Ephrathah is a name for the district in which Bethlehem was located. It comes from the name of Ephrath, one of the clans that made up the tribe of Judah (Ruth 1.2). David’s family were members of this clan (1 Sam 17.12). It is probably best to translate Bethlehem Ephrathah as the name of the town. If this seems too long for a name in some languages, then it is all right to translate as “Bethlehem in the region (or, district) of Ephrathah” (see New English Bible).
The Hebrew word translated “clans” in Revised Standard Version is a word with a very wide area of meaning. It is the numeral for “a thousand” and is also a term for a military unit consisting of a certain number of soldiers, probably considerably less than a thousand. Here it refers to a social unit, the clan. This is why Revised Standard Version translates “little to be among the clans of Judah.” But by a figure of speech called metonymy, the clan in this context stands for the town where the clan members lived. So Good News Translation drops the figure of speech and gives the plain meaning, you are one of the smallest towns in Judah. Smallest probably refers both to size and to importance.
Some translators understand the Hebrew here to say that Bethlehem is so small that it does not deserve to be considered as one of the clans of Judah (this seems to be the meaning of Revised Standard Version and New English Bible, among others). This is, of course, only an emphatic way of stating how unimportant the town is, and the plain meaning is still what Good News Translation has. However, in some languages it may be quite effective to use the more emphatic way of expressing the idea. In some languages it may be very difficult to talk about “one of the smallest towns,” and some similar expression may be used to give the same meaning, such as “a very small town.”
However, though the town was insignificant in itself, this was no barrier to God. Out of it he would in the future bring a ruler for Israel, just as he had once brought David. Translators may need to use different ways of showing the contrast between the small town and the great ruler to come from it. Some languages may use a word like but or “however.” In other languages it may be better to say something like “even though you are small.” Out of you or “from you” (Revised Standard Version) means that the ruler will be one of the citizens of Bethlehem, but that God will bring him from Bethlehem to be the ruler, as he brought David.
Revised Standard Version says that the ruler will “come forth for me.” This “for me” refers of course to God and means that the ruler will be acting in accordance with God’s will. Good News Translation felt that is was clearer to state plainly that God was the one who caused this to happen: I will bring a ruler. Some translations may prefer to say something like “a ruler who will act on my behalf” or “a ruler who will truly obey me.” It is possible that the term ruler is used here in order to avoid the usual word for king, since the people of Micah’s day were disillusioned with the kings whom they knew. If a language has one word for “king” and a different word such a “ruler” that can also refer to the king, it may be good to use the second word here. But in many languages this may not be possible, and if not, the usual word for king is acceptable.
The family line of this ruler is described in two phrases in Revised Standard Version. It is “from of old” and “from ancient days.” Good News Translation puts these two phrases together and says that the family line goes back to ancient times. This is to be understood as a description of the family of David. By Micah’s time there had been kings of Judah for about 300 years, and all of them had been descendants of David. (The older translation, “from everlasting” of King James Version and Revised Version [rv], is improbable in this context.) Micah thus implies that the ideal ruler who was to come was also to be a member of David’s family.
All of the concepts in Good News Translation‘s last clause could be difficult for some translators. Family line refers to the long line of ancestors from whom the ruler is descended. Goes back suggests that this line is being traced back from the present into the past. Ancient times means simply “long ago,” or more precisely, “from the early history of the country.” In other languages it may be necessary to look at these ideas from quite a different point of view. For example, this could be expressed as “he will be descended from men who were famous in the earliest days of the country” or “long ago his ancestor was an important man.” It is of course true that everyone’s family line goes back to ancient times. What is meant here is that these ancestors are people whose names are still remembered, and this suggests that they were famous or important people.
This verse is quoted in Matt 2.6, but translators who have already finished Matthew should note that there are a number of differences between the Old Testament verse and the New Testament quotation. One should not try to make them more alike than they really are.
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. et al. A Handbook on Micah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1982, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.