The Hebrew in Psalm 32:9 that is translated as “without understanding” or similar in English is reinforced in Sar with the ideophone (a word that expresses what is perceived by the five senses) páráńg á (“Do not imitate the horse or donkey which are beasts páráńg á). Páráńg á stands for “‘a lot.’ Examples: a person who smells strongly of beer, being terribly thirsty, words that exasperated a person.” (Source: Ngarbolnan Riminan in Le Sycomore 2000, p. 20ff. )
In Kwere it is translated as “they don’t know anything.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
The Greek and Hebrew that is translated with “mule” in English is translated in Swahili with nyumbu which also is a homonym for “wildebeest,” potentially causing confusion.
In Kutu it is translated with “big donkey” because there is no other adequate term in Kutu. (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
In the HausaCommon Language Bible it is translated jakin-doki or “donkey-horse,” since mules are also not known in Nigeria. (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
The word pirdah refers to the female mule while pered can refer to either the male or the female. In biblical times mules were used for riding and as pack animals while horses were mainly used to pull military chariots. They appear to have been introduced into Canaan much later than horses. Mules are not mentioned in the Bible until the time of David while horses are mentioned in the Joseph story and in Deuteronomy 17:16 where the king is forbidden to acquire them. Technically the owning of mules was not prohibited although the breeding of them would have fallen under the prohibition of Leviticus 19:19, which forbade the cross-breeding of animals. The Israelites thus seem to have relied on mules imported from neighboring countries.
The mule is not an animal found naturally anywhere, but is the result of people breeding male donkeys with female horses. It is also possible to breed male horses with female donkeys, but the offspring, technically called “hinnies”, not “mules”, are usually smaller than mules. Mules are bigger and stronger than donkeys and are much more resistant to disease than either horses or donkeys. They are usually dark brown with bigger ears than the parent horse.
Although there are male and female mules they are infertile and not able to breed. This makes the stronger males much easier to handle than stallions.
Although the mule in English is associated with stubbornness this is not usually the case in other cultures since mules are very easy to handle if treated properly. In Psalms 32:9 the mule is linked to the horse as both being animals that lack sufficient understanding and need to be guided in the right direction.
Even in languages of societies that know mules, they are often referred to as “horse-donkeys”, or “donkey-horses”. This seems to be a good translation solution even in languages that have no word for mule.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Psalm 32:9:
Chichewa Contempary Chichewa translation, 2002/2016:
“Do not be like a horse or a donkey,
which have no wisdom,
but they are supposed to be controlled for direction by the metals of the mouth and on the head,
if you don’t do that they will not come to you.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Newari:
“Don’t be senseless like a horse or a donkey
who needs a bit and bridle to control them.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon:
“Do- not -be-like a horse or mule which has-no understanding,
which still needs first to-be-muzzled and bridled in-order to-obey.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Eastern Bru:
“Don’t you become ignorant like a horse that doesn’t have an understanding gall bladder. That animal must have a bit and bridle, then it will obey you."” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
Laarim:
“You (plur.) do not be like horse or like a donkey
which does not has thinking,
but instead, the rope and small metal on its mouth rule it,
or it will not come to you.’” (Source: Laarim Back Translation)
Nyakyusa-Ngonde (back-translation into Swahili):
“Msiwe kama vile falasi au punda,
hawana na hekima,
mpaka waongozwe na lijamu na kamba,
ili zikukubalie.” (Source: Nyakyusa Back Translation)
English:
“Do not be stupid like horses and mules that do not have understanding;
they need bits/pieces of metal put in their mouths and bridles/ropes fastened to their head
so they will go in the direction you want them to go.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
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 Translator2002, 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.”
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 formal plural suffix to the second person pronoun (“you” and its various forms) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. In these verses, anata-gata (あなたがた) is used, combining the second person pronoun anata and the plural suffix -gata to create a formal plural pronoun (“you” [plural] in English).
Good News Translation, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Bible en français courant, and others (Kirkpatrick, Dahood, Anderson) take these two verses to be Yahweh’s words to the psalmist; this assumes that the singular “you” in verse 8 is the psalmist being addressed by Yahweh. And in verse 9a, instead of the Masoretic text plural “you,” the singular “you” in two Hebrew manuscripts is preferred. Others, however (Briggs, Oesterley, Taylor, Weiser), take the verses to be the psalmist’s instructions to his fellow worshipers; in this case the singular “you” in verse 8 is taken to be generic, and the Masoretic text plural “you” in verse 9 is preferred. The statement my eye upon you in verse 8 seems to favor Yahweh as the speaker.
Three verbs are used in verse 8: instruct … teach … counsel. In languages which do not have more than one word for teaching, it is sometimes possible to say, for example, “I will show you the way you should go; I will teach you and tell you how to do.”
The Hebrew “(with) my eye upon you” carries the idea of concern and care, not of a veiled threat, as the English phrase might be understood. The expression with my eye upon you may sometimes be rendered “taking care of you” or “watching out for your safety.”
Verse 8 is a case of stairstep parallelism. Each succeeding line adds something to the first. Furthermore, the verse can be analyzed as a tricolon, that is, having three lines: I will instruct you / and teach you the way you should go / I will counsel you with my eye upon you.
The last two lines of verse 9 are filled with difficulties, since there is much controversy over the precise form and meaning of the separate words; but the meaning of the whole seems to be that given by Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. The last line is translated by Dahood “Then you can approach him”; New English Bible transposes the words to the end of verse 7 and translates “beyond all reach of harm”; New Jerusalem Bible takes the words to be a warning to the hearer: “far be it from you!”; Traduction œcuménique de la Bible has “and no harm will reach you”; Biblia Dios Habla Hoy “or else they will not come to you”; similarly “so that they may not attack you.” Any one of these (except, perhaps, New English Bible) can be defended as a valid translation of the text. The translator faces a great deal of choice in this verse. If Good News Translation and Revised Standard Version are followed, readers may be surprised to learn that a horse or mule might be thought of as stupid. On the basis of the Hebrew expression, there is reason to say, for example, “Don’t be like a horse or mule; they do not know which way to go without a bit and bridle.” In some areas the horse is largely unknown and the mule is totally unfamiliar. In such cases the usual thing is to identify these animals through a borrowed word from a major language, and if necessary, to use a classifier; for example, “an animal called horse.” The bit is that part of the bridle which is inserted in the animal’s mouth. Where bit and bridle are unknown, it is best to use a short descriptive phrase (a borrowed word may be too technical). Bridle is sometimes called “animal guiding rope,” and a bit is sometimes referred to as “guide thing in the mouth.” If more information is required, a note or illustration should be provided.
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Reyburn, William D. A Handbook on the Book of Psalms. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1991. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
John Wu Ching-hsiung (1899-1986) was a native of Ningbo, Zhejiang, a renowned jurist who studied in Europe and the United States, and served as a professor of law at Soochow University, as a judge and the Acting President of the Shanghai Provisional Court, and as the Vice President of the Commission for the Drafting of the Constitution of the Republic of China, before becoming the Minister of the Republic of China to the Holy See. Wu has written extensively, not only on law but also on Chinese philosophy, and has also written his autobiography, Beyond East and West, in English. Wu was a devout Catholic and had a personal relationship with Chiang Kai-shek (1887-1975). Wu began translating the the Psalms in 1938, and was encouraged by Chiang to translate the entire New Testament, which he corrected in his own handwriting. (…) John Wu Ching-hsiung’s translation of the Psalms (first draft in 1946, revised in 1975) was translated into Literary Chinese in the form of poetic rhyme, with attention paid to the style of writing. According to the content and mood of the different chapters of the original psalm, Wu chose Chinese poetic forms such as tetrameter, pentameter, heptameter [4, 5 or 7 syllables/Chinese characters per stanza], and the [less formal] Sao style, and sometimes more than two poetic forms were used in a single poem. (Source: Simon Wong)
John Wu Ching-hsiung himself talks about his celebrated and much-admired (though difficult-to-understand) translation in his aforementioned autobiography: (Click or tap here to see)
“Nothing could have been farther from my mind than to translate the Bible or any parts of it with a view to publishing it as an authorized version. I had rendered some of the Psalms into Chinese verse, but that was done as a part of my private devotion and as a literary hobby. When I was in Hongkong in 1938, I had come to know Madame H. H. Kung [Soong Ai-ling], and as she was deeply interested in the Bible, I gave her about a dozen pieces of my amateurish work just for her own enjoyment. What was my surprise when, the next time I saw her, she told me, “My sister [Soong Mei-ling] has written to say that the Generalissimo [Chiang Kai-shek] likes your translation of the Psalms very much, especially the first, the fifteenth, and the twenty-third, the Psalm of the Good Shepherd!”
“In the Autumn of 1940, when I was in Chungking, the Generalissimo invited me several times to lunch with him and expressed his appreciation of the few pieces that he had read. So I sent him some more. A few days later I received a letter from Madame Chiang [Soong Mei-ling], dated September 21, 1940, in which she said that they both liked my translation of the few Psalms I had sent them. ‘For many years,’ she wrote, ‘the Generalissimo has been wanting to have a really adequate and readable Wen-li (literary) translation of the Bible. He has never been able to find anyone who could undertake the matter.’ The letter ends up by saying that I should take up the job and that ‘the Generalissimo would gladly finance the undertaking of this work.’
“After some preliminary study of the commentaries, I started my work with the Psalms on January 6, 1943, the Feast of the Epiphany.
“I had three thousand years of Chinese literature to draw upon. The Chinese vocabulary for describing the beauties of nature is so rich that I seldom failed to find a word, a phrase, and sometimes even a whole line to fit the scene. But what makes such Psalms so unique is that they bring an intimate knowledge of the Creator to bear upon a loving observation of things of nature. I think one of the reasons why my translation is so well received by the Chinese scholars is that I have made the Psalms read like native poems written by a Chinese, who happens to be a Christian. Thus to my countrymen they are at once familiar and new — not so familiar as to be jejune, and not so new as to be bizarre. I did not publish it as a literal translation, but only as a paraphrase.
“To my greatest surprise, [my translation of the Psalms] sold like hot dogs. The popularity of that work was beyond my fondest dreams. Numberless papers and periodicals, irrespective of religion, published reviews too good to be true. I was very much tickled when I saw the opening verse of the first Psalm used as a headline on the front page of one of the non-religious dailies.”
A contemporary researcher (Lindblom 2021) mentions this about Wu’s translation: “Wu created a unique and personal work of sacred art that bears the imprint of his own admitted love and devotion, a landmark achievement comparable to Antoni Gaudi’s Basilica of the Sagrada Família in Barcelona, Spain. Although its use is still somewhat limited today, it continues to attract readers for the aforementioned qualities, and continues to be used in prayers and music by those who desire beauty and an authentic Chinese-sounding text that draws from China’s ancient traditions.”
The translation of Psalm 32 from the 1946 edition is in tetrameter and the rhyme schemes are -ou, -ui, -ao, -u, and -uan (the 1946 edition did not have verse numbers either):
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.