tribe

The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “tribe” in English when referring to the “12 tribes of Israel” is translated in some East African languages, including Taita and Pökoot, with the equivalent of “clan” instead.

Aloo Mojola explains (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 208ff. ) (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight):

“A number of Bible translation teams in East Africa have been baffled and intrigued by the use of the term ‘tribe’ in the English translations of the Bible. The usage employed in these translations does not reflect any of the popular meanings associated with the term ‘tribe’ in present-day English. Neither does it reflect popular conceptions of the meaning of this term in East Africa or in other parts of Africa and elsewhere. This raises the question: is the term tribe the best translation of the Hebrew terms shebeth and matteh or the Greek term phyle? What is a tribe anyway? Are the twelve tribes of Israel tribes in the sense this term is currently understood? How can this term be translated in East African languages?

“It is easy to see that there is no consistent definition of the term tribe which applies exclusively and consistently to the communities to which it is currently applied. Why, for example, are the Somali or the Baganda called a tribe, but not the Irish or the Italians? Why do the Yoruba or Hausa qualify, but not the Portuguese or the Russians? Why the Bakongo and the Oromo, but not the Germans or the Scots? Why the Eritreans, but not the French or Dutch-speaking Belgians? Why the Zulu or the Xhosa, but not the South African Boers (Afrikaners) or the South African English? The reason for the current prejudices, it would seem, has nothing to do with language, physical type, common territory, common cultural values, type of political and social organization or even population size. Ingrained prejudices and preconceived ideas about so-called “primitive” peoples have everything to do with it.

“The term ‘tribe’ is used to refer to a universal and world-wide phenomenon of ethnic identification which may draw on any of the following bases: identification in terms of one’s first or dominant language of communication (linguistic), in terms of one’s place of origin (regional), in terms of one’s presumed racial, biological or genetic type (racial), or in terms of one’s ideological or political commitments (ideological), and so on. Communities may choose one or more of these bases as criteria for membership. Any of these may change over time. Moreover forms of ethnic identification are dynamic or in a state of flux, changing in response to new environments and circumstances. Essentially forms of ethnic association reflect a people’s struggle for survival through adaptation to changing times. This is inextricably intertwined with the production and distribution of vital resources, goods and services as well as the distribution of power, class and status in society.

“At the base of any ethnic group is the nuclear family which expands to include the extended family. The extended family consists of more than two families related vertically and horizontally: parents and their offspring, cousins, uncles, aunts, nephews, and others, extending to more than two generations. A lineage is usually a larger group than an extended family. It includes a number of such families who trace descent through the male or female line to a common ancestor. A clan may be equivalent to or larger than a lineage. Where it is larger than a lineage, it brings together several lineages which may or may not know the precise nature of their relationships, but which nevertheless claim descent from a common ancestor. A clan is best thought of as a kind of sub-ethnic unit whose members have some unifying symbol such as totem, label, or myth. In most cases the clan is used to determine correct marriage lines, but this is not universally so. Above the clan is the ethnic group, usually referred to inconsistently as the tribe. Members of an ethnic group share feelings of belonging to a common group. The basis of ethnic identity is not always derived from a common descent, real or fictional; it may draw on any of the bases mentioned above.

“The Israelites identified themselves as one people sharing a common descent, a common religious and cultural heritage, a common language and history. There is no doubt that they constitute what would nowadays be called an ethnic group, or by some people a tribe. The twelve subunits of the Israelite ethnic group or tribe, (Hebrew shebeth or matteh, or Greek phyle) are clearly equivalent to clans. In fact this is what seems to make sense to most African Bible translators in the light of their understanding of these terms and the biblical account. Referring to a shebeth as a tribe or an ethnic group and to Israel as a collection of twelve tribes creates unnecessary confusion. Translating each of the terms shebeth, matteh, and phyle as clan seems to solve this problem and to be consistent with current usage in African languages.”

See also family / clan / house.

complete verse (Numbers 2:7)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Numbers 2:7:

  • Kupsabiny:

    Three clans shall set up on the East side, and the clan of Judah is to be in charge. Those clans are these:

    Clan Leader How many soldiers
    Judah Nahshon son of Amminadab 74,600
    Issachar Nethanel son of Zuar 54,400
    Zebulun Eliab son of Helon 67,400

    When they are all put together they are 186,400, and the community of Judah shall be leading (them) when they are migrating.

    (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)

  • Newari: “Alongside them was the tribe of Zebulun. The leader of the tribe of Zebulun is Eliab son of Helon.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon:

    The tribes of Juda, Issachar, and Zebulun are-to-camp on the east, under the banner of their own/[lit. each] tribe. These (are) the names of their leaders/[lit. heads] and the numbers of their people/men:

    Tribe Leaders/[lit. Heads] Number
    Juda Nashon son/[child] of Aminadab 74,600
    Issachar Nethanel son/child of Zuar 54,400
    Zebulun Eliab son/[child] of Helon 57,400

    (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)

  • English: “Eliab, the son of Helon, will be the leader of the 57,400 men of the tribe of Zebulun.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Numbers 2:3 - 2:9

The numbers here and in the rest of the chapter correspond exactly with those in chapter 1. See the comments on 1.20-46.

Those to encamp on the east side toward the sunrise shall be of the standard of the camp of Judah means Judah and the other tribes in its group must camp on the east side of the Tent of Meeting. The phrase toward the sunrise seems superfluous and unnecessary after the east side. Probably for this reason Good News Translation has omitted it. But toward the sunrise (“where the sun rises” in De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling) is crucial information. Although Reuben was Israel’s firstborn son, it is not the banner of Reuben’s camp (located on the south) but the banner of Judah’s camp that must be on this side, which was the side of the entrance to the Tent of Meeting (see 3.38). The position of Judah’s camp at this privileged side underlines how important the tribe of Judah was. If a literal rendering of toward the sunrise poses a problem, this phrase may be translated “on the front side [of the tent]” or even “on the side of the [tent’s] entrance.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh renders on the east side toward the sunrise as “on the front, or east side.” In some languages the directions of sunrise and sunset are culturally significant (for instance, in burial rituals) and there may be particular technical or idiomatic ways of expressing them; for example, Chewa expresses sunrise as “where the sun comes out.” The camp of Judah refers to the tribes of Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun.

By their companies is literally “by their troops” (see the comments on 1.3). The Israelites were a well-organized army.

The leader of the people of Judah being Nahshon the son of Amminadab: See 1.7. The Hebrew word for leader is nasiʾ (see 1.16), which is better rendered “chief” (Revised English Bible) or “Chieftain” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) in this context.

His host as numbered …: Host renders the same Hebrew word (tsavaʾ) as companies, but in the singular. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh renders it “troop.” Numbered renders the same Hebrew verb (paqad) translated “number” in 1.3 (see the comments there). It is better rendered “registered” (New Living Translation), “enrolled” (New Revised Standard Version), or “recorded.”

Those to encamp next to him shall be the tribe of Issachar: The pronoun him refers to the tribe of Judah. Contemporary English Version makes this clear by rendering this clause as “On one side of Judah will be the tribe of Issachar.”

The leader of the people of Issachar being Nethanel the son of Zuar: See 1.8.

Then the tribe of Zebulun: Nothing in the Hebrew text corresponds with the conjunction Then; the Hebrew only has “The tribe of Zebulun” and seems like a list at this point. This sentence is not grammatically complete. Perhaps the target language has a special conjunction or transitional term to indicate the last item in a list, whether short (as this one) or long. In some languages (for example, Albanian) it will be more natural and seem less repetitive if this first sentence about Zebulun is moved to the beginning of verse 5, combining it with the tribe of Issachar as follows: “Those to camp next to the tribe of Judah shall be the tribes of Issachar and Zebulun….”

The leader of the people of Zebulun being Eliab the son of Helon: See 1.9.

The whole number of the camp of Judah is literally “All those enrolled of the camp of Judah.” Number renders the Hebrew verb paqad again (see 1.3), so it is better translated “enrolled” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). The King James Version (King James Version) renders this whole phrase as “All that were numbered in the camp of Judah,” but the Hebrew here shows no indication of any past tense at all (so also in verses 16, 24, and 31).

They shall set out first on the march: This clause refers to repetitive action; not just one change of camp is in view here but many. Chewa provides a good model for this clause, saying “Those ones [tribes] should be out in front as they move/travel.” The pronoun They refers to the three tribes under the banner of Judah. The Hebrew verb rendered set out … on the march can mean “move off,” “set out,” “journey further,” or “march.” The translation of it here should fit the context of a (military) camp.

We recommend Good News Translation‘s list layout for verses 3-9, 10-16, 18-24, and 25-31. Bible en français courant has lists as well, but without headings such as “Tribe.” This does not make the translation unclear, because Bible en français courant introduces the lists with “under a chief of their tribe” instead of “under their leaders” (Good News Translation). In any case, whether there is a list layout or not, the verses about each group of three tribes may be put in a separate paragraph (so Good News Translation), or may even be preceded and followed by a blank line (so New International Version). The numbers may be printed in figures, not only because it will make the translation easier to read but also because figures are more fitting in lists of this kind.

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .