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.

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Num 36:3)

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, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the exclusive pronoun, excluding Moses and the leaders.

complete verse (Numbers 36:3)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Numbers 36:3:

  • Kupsabiny: “But if those daughters/girls are married by (a man from) another clan, that farm will come to belong to the people of that clan. This means that the farm will be removed from the people of our house and added to the clan that has married/taken her. So, it is clear that land will be taken from us.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
  • Newari: “If they marry young men from other tribes, their inheritance will also go to the inheritance of the tribe into which they marry. In this way the inheritance of our tribe would be decreasing.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon: “But for-example they will-marry the other tribe, and because of this their land will- now -be-with the tribe of the one they marry. So, the land which is the portion/share of our (excl.) tribe, will- now -be-with to other/different (people).” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • English: “But if his daughters marry men from the other Israeli tribes, that land will no longer belong to our tribe. People of other tribes will get it. So some of our land will no longer belong to us.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

Translation commentary on Numbers 36:3

But is literally “And,” which introduces a contrast here. Good News Translation helpfully adds the verb “remember” to indicate that the speakers are not giving Moses some new information here. Another possible connector here is “But as you know.”

If they are married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the people of Israel then their inheritance will be taken from the inheritance of our fathers …: The pronouns they and their refer to the daughters of Zelophehad. The pronoun they may need to be rendered “his [Zelophehad’s] daughters” (New Century Version) for clarity. Chewa says “our children.” If they are married to … is literally “if they become wives of…,” which may be more natural in some languages. In Chewa men “marry” while women “are/get married.” In this context inheritance (nachalah in Hebrew) refers specifically to inherited land, as in 35.2. Our fathers may be rendered “our ancestors” (New Revised Standard Version).

And added to the inheritance of the tribe to which they belong: Through their marriages, Zelophehad’s daughters will belong to their husbands’ tribes. New Revised Standard Version and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh render the tribe to which they belong as “the tribe into which they marry.” For the Hebrew term rendered tribe (matteh), see 1.4. There may be some subtle cultural issues that translators will have to carefully investigate before translating verses 2-4; for example, Chewa society is matrilineal, and therefore wives do not “belong to” their husband’s tribe. Furthermore, in a traditional (rural) setting a woman does not “own property”; rather, it belongs to her clan if she dies. In a patrilineal society, on the other hand, any property or possessions belong to her husband and his clan. La Biblia: Traducción en Lenguaje Actual provides a helpful model for the first half of this verse, saying “However, we are concerned that they will marry men from another tribe. Because then the land of them and our tribe will become the land of the tribe of the men they marry.”

So it will be taken away from the lot of our inheritance: Although lot translates the same Hebrew term (goral) as in 26.55-56, here the lot of our inheritance may be rendered “the allotted portion of our inheritance” (New Revised Standard Version). The pronoun our refers to the family leaders of the clan of Gilead (verse 1), who are still speaking. In some languages it will be helpful to make the speakers the subject of this sentence; for example, La Biblia: Traducción en Lenguaje Actual says “We would lose part of the territory that you [Moses] gave us.” Other possible models are “In this way, the total area of our tribal land will be reduced” (Good News Translation) and “thus our allotted portion will be diminished” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh; similarly Bible en français courant, Parole de Vie). Other (patrilineal) cultures, however, may use expressions similar to that of the Hebrew text.

New Living Translation provides the following helpful model for this verse:

• But if they marry men from another tribe, their grants of land will go with them to the tribe into which they marry. In this way, the total area of our tribal land will be reduced.

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 .