Amen

If the Hebrew and Ge’ez or (the transliterated) Greek “Amen” (as part of a prayer) is not transliterated, it can also be translated into expressions such as “That is just the way it is” (Huichol), “That’s it” (Shilluk), “May it be thus” (Tzeltal) (source: Bratcher / Nida), “Let those things thus be” (Kituba) (source: Donald Deer in The Bible Translator 1973, p. 207ff. ), “It’s true” (Bariai) (source: Bariai Back Translation), or “so be it” (T’áá ákót’ée doo) ( Navajo (Dinė)).

In Nias, it is translated as Yaduhu (likewise: Jadoehoe) or “Yes, that’s true.” This goes back to culturally customary interruptions of sermons to verify the content of the message. Also, “a key characteristic of the Nias language is its consistent tendency to end words with a vowel sound. This presented a significant challenge for ‘amen,’ as its pronunciation would unavoidably become ‘ami.’ Crucially, ‘ami’ already carries the distinct meaning of ‘delicious’ in the Nias language, which would have led to an unintended and incongruous meaning in a liturgical context. (Source: Rebecca Evelyn Laiya / Merri Anna Kristina Laia in Konferensi Linguistik Tahunan Atma Jaya 23 [2025] ).

In Mairasi the translation is aniaut aug or “it’s a tuberful dig.” The preface to Enggavoter 2004 explains: “Truth is like a tuber [sweet potatoes, taro, cassava, yams]. We Mairasi have tubers as our standard food. The leaves are visible above ground. But we planted the plant so that it would produce tubers, but those are beneath the ground. So the vocabulary about ‘truth’ and ‘produce’ or ‘fruit’ is based on words for ‘tubers.’ For example: the word for ‘Amen’ ‘it’s a tuberful dig’ [also used for ‘verily’ or ‘definitely’] has its story like this: We see the leaves of the sweet potato but we do not know: the question is ‘Are there tubers or not?.’ So we dig then we see tubers. Therefore we say that ani ‘dig’ was aut ‘with tubers,’ which is ‘Aniaut!‘ ‘Definitely true!'”

In Huba it is translated as Aɗǝmja or “let it be so.” David Frank (in this blog post ) explains: “Whenever there were persistent problems such as a drought, or a rash of sickness or death, the king (or his religious advisor) would set aside a day and call on everyone to prepare food, such as the traditional mash made from sorghum, or perhaps even goat. The food had to be put together outside. The king or his religious advisor would give an address stating what the problem was and what they were doing about it. Then an elder representing the people would take a handful of that food and throw it, probably repeating that action several times, until it was considered to be enough to atone for all the misfortune they had been having. With this action he was ‘shooting (or casting off) misfortune’ to restore well-being to his people. As he threw the food, he would say that this is to remove the misfortune that had fallen on his people, and everybody would respond by saying aɗǝmja, ‘let it be so.’ People could eat some of this food, but they could not bring the food into their houses, because that would mean that they were bringing misfortune into their house. There is still a minority of people in this linguistic and cultural group that practices the traditional religion, but the shooting of misfortune is no longer practiced, and the term ‘shoot misfortune’ is used now in Bible translation to refer to offering a sacrifice. Aɗǝmja is how they translate ‘amen.'”

In American Sign Language, “Amen” is translated with a sign that means “it is established.”


“Amen” in American Sign Language (source )

See also truly, truly I tell you

addressing God

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 Translator 2002, 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.”

In Dutch, Afrikaans, Gronings, and Western Frisian translations, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.

See also formal pronoun: disciples addressing Jesus, female second person singular pronoun in Psalms.

Translation commentary on The Prayer of Manasseh 1:15

And I will praise thee continually all the days of my life: This line is part of the previous sentence, and may easily be connected to it saying “and I will praise you as long as I live.” Or it may be translated as a separate sentence, as in Good News Translation. A slight problem may lurk in Good News Translation‘s use of “go on praising” to express the idea of praise … continually. It may suggest that the speaker has been praising God in the past, and will go on doing so. He has not been doing this in the past; he has been too busy committing wicked acts. He can only start praising God when he has assurance of forgiveness. It may then be a shade safer to say “and I will constantly praise you as long as I live” or “Then I will praise you every hour of every day” (Contemporary English Version).

For all the host of heaven sings thy praise: Now the speaker has returned to the point where he started, with God as the God of the universe. All the host of heaven could refer to the stars (Psa 33.6; Dan 8.10) or to angels (1 Kgs 22.19), if the author even made a distinction. Good News Translation‘s translation “All the heavenly powers” allows for either. Technically Good News Translation is even a bit more literal than Revised Standard Version here. The text reads “all the power of heaven”; this is not the expression used for the heavenly host of Luke 2.13. Sings thy praise will need to be expressed in some languages as “sing praises to you” or even “sing songs telling you how great you are.”

And thine is the glory for ever: The prayer ends with a short doxology, an ascription of glory (compare 1 Chr 29.11). This form is of course reminiscent of the doxology to the Lord’s Prayer found in late manuscripts of Matt 6.13. Glory here refers to “honor” that God receives. So we may also express this clause as “And you will be honored forever” (Contemporary English Version). In languages that do not have the passive voice, we may say “and they [the heavenly powers] will honor you forever.”

Amen is an expression of affirmation used in closing prayers.

Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on The Shorter Books of the Deuterocanon. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2006. For this and other handbooks for translators see