The Greek and Hebrew that is translated into English as “moth(s)” was translated as “cockroach(es)” in Gola “since moths are not seen as destroying things but cockroaches are” (source: Don Slager). The same translation was chosen for Uripiv (source: Ross McKerras).
In Yakan it is translated as “termites” (source: Yakan Back Translation) and in Tagbanwa as “chewing-insects” (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation).
There is general consensus that ‘ash refers to a moth, and sas to its larva stage in the Hebrew Bible, and that sēs in the New Testament also refers to a moth. The moth referred to is always in contexts of destroyed or damaged clothing, so the reference is obviously to a moth that lays its eggs on human clothing. This limits the type of moth to one of the clothes moths of the Tineidae family, probably Tineola biselliella. Although the damage is blamed on the moth in the Bible, it is actually its larvae that cause the damage. It is possible that both moth and larva are meant when ‘ash is used.
Clothes moths are smallish brown or gray moths that lay eggs in clothing or other forms of cloth. The eggs hatch into very small caterpillars, which almost immediately begin to feed on the fibers. They make small silken cocoons from which only the heads protrude, and later finally emerge as moths.
Moths are symbols of decay, ruin, and slow destruction.
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 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.”
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Psalm 39:11:
Chichewa Contempary Chichewa translation, 2002/2016:
“You rebuke and punish people because of their sin;
You destroy their wealth like moths;
every person is like air.
Selah” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Newari:
“You rebuke people for the sins they commit,
and [You] will punish them.
Like an insect eats, [You] will destroy their property.
As for people, they turn out to be only a single breath.
Sela” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon:
“You (sing.) discipline a person/man by rebuking him, for his sins.
And like a small-insect that nibbles, you (sing.) consume his valuable properties.
(It is) really true that the life of man (is) like wind that passes by.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Eastern Bru:
“You punish sinners by means of rebuke. Then you destroy all the things they hold dear, it’s like termites destroying. Surely, all people are only like a breath we breathe, they don’t live long.” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
Laarim:
“You rebuked people, and you instructed them because of their sins,
you destroyed their wealth like moths,
a person is just a breath.” (Source: Laarim Back Translation)
Nyakyusa-Ngonde (back-translation into Swahili):
“Wakati unamwadhibu mtu na kumkemea kwa mabaya yake,
unaharibu ambavyo anavipenda, kama vile kiwavi.
Uhai wa mtu uko kama vile pumzi tu.” (Source: Nyakyusa Back Translation)
English:
“When you rebuke someone and punish him for the sin that he has committed,
you destroy the things that he loves/are precious to him, like moths’ larva destroy clothing.
Our lives disappear like a puff of wind.
(Think about that!)” (Source: Translation for Translators)
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 usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, nakus-are-ru (なくされる) or “rid” is used.
With verse 11 the psalmist joins the themes of sin-suffering and fleeting existence, and in doing so returns to the three-line pattern, which he uses again in verse 12a-c before returning in verses 12d-e and 13 to the two-line verse.
Lines a and b are circumstantial clauses, as Revised Standard Version‘s translation shows. It may be better to translate them as complete statements, as Good News Translation does (also Bible en français courant, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy). When … with rebukes for sin can be rendered in some languages as “You punish a person’s sins with your strong words” or “You speak hard words and punish a person for doing wrong things.”
The figure in line c, like a moth, seems to be applied to God, which is strange (but see Hos 5.12, where it is applied to God). New American Bible changes the comparison by translating “cobweb”: “you dissolve like a cobweb all that is dear to him.” But, unusual as it is, “moth” is a valid comparison, since it is a biblical figure for destruction and decay (see Job 13.28; Isa 50.9; Matt 6.19-20). Bible en français courant translates “like a worm in a fruit, you consume what man loves.”
What is dear to him probably refers to life, the most precious thing a person owns; New International Version, however, has “their wealth,” and New Jerusalem Bible “what he treasures.”
Once more (line d) the psalmist emphasizes how fleeting and frail is human existence (see verse 5c).
Selah: see 3.2.
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 .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.