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 translations both use the exclusive pronoun, excluding the Lord.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Psalm 60:5:
Chichewa Contempary Chichewa translation, 2002/2016:
“Save us and help us with your right hand,
that those whom you love should be saved.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Newari:
“Save us with Your strong right hand,
give answer to our prayer.
May You save the people whom You love.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon:
“Save us (excl.) through your (sing.) power.
Answer our (excl.) prayers so-that we (excl.) your (sing.) beloved will-be-saved.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Laarim:
“You help us with the power of your right hand,
answer our prayer,
so that people who you love would be saved.” (Source: Laarim Back Translation)
Nyakyusa-Ngonde (back-translation into Swahili):
“Utusaidie na kutukubalia,
ili wapendwa wako wawe wanaokolewa.” (Source: Nyakyusa Back Translation)
English:
“Answer our prayers and enable us by your power to defeat our enemies
in order that we, the people whom you love, will be saved."” (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 benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. Here, kotaete (答えて) or “answer” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).”
The form and meaning of verse 4 are disputed. The banner that God had set up could be either a sign for the Israelite forces to rally and fight back at the enemy, or else a sign for them to flee from the enemy (as in Jer 4.6). The verb which Revised Standard Version translates rally occurs only here in this sense; some derive the Masoretic text form from a verb that means “to flee” (see Briggs); others “so that they may flee” (so New English Bible, New American Bible).
Instead of the indicative mood, some read the first line of verse 4 as an imperative, a command to God “to raise the banner” (see Dahood, New Jerusalem Bible, Bible de Jérusalem). In many languages the idea of raising a flag during a battle will be unknown. Therefore the translator normally has three choices: He can keep the flag raising and clarify its meaning with an additional statement; for example, “You have raised a flag to warn those who follow you.” Or he can simply state the meaning without reference to a flag, as in Good News Translation. Verse 4a may also be rendered, for example, “You have sent a clear signal to those who worship you….” Finally, the translator may use a substitute for flag and translate, for example, “Your drumbeats have warned those who follow you.” Those who fear thee is expressed in many languages as “those who worship you” or “those who follow you.”
The next two words in verse 4b in Hebrew seem to mean “from before the bow.” So the translations that understand the preceding verbal form to mean “to flee” translate “to let them escape out of the range of the bow” (New Jerusalem Bible); Traduction œcuménique de la Bible “to flee from the bowman.” Revised Standard Versionto rally to it from the bow makes no sense in English. But the meaning of the Hebrew word translated bow (spelled this way only here in the Hebrew Bible) is also disputed, and some take it to mean “the truth” (see Revised Standard Version footnote); so New Jerusalem Bible translates the verse “Give those who fear You because of Your truth a banner for rallying.” Biblia Dios Habla Hoy has “Now give a signal to those who honor you so that they may escape from the arrows”; Good News Translation, similarly, “they might escape destruction.” Good News Translation would have done better by translating “… from defeat.”
In face of such variety of interpretations, the translator can only choose one that seems best suited to the context. Hebrew Old Testament Text Project says the meaning “bow” is to be preferred.
For Selah see 3.2.
The two lines in verse 5 have been reversed by Good News Translation for a more orderly progression of thought. Thy beloved translates “your beloved ones”; this means the people as a whole (Bible en français courant “we, your friends”). Delivered in line a translates the verb rendered “save” in 6.4a.
The verb in line b may mean give victory; it is the verb which is often translated “save” (see comments on “Help” in 12.1). And thy right hand means “your power” (see 18.35; 20.6; 21.8). The final request answer us means “answer our prayer.” One form of the Masoretic text (ketiv) has the plural “us”; the other form (qere) has the singular “me,” which is preferred by Kirkpatrick and New Jerusalem Bible. The expression answer us must not be translated normally by the term which is used for answering a question. Many languages make a distinction between answering a question and responding to a request. In some languages it will be necessary to say, for example, “hear us and help us.”
In some languages it will be necessary to introduce the first person plural pronoun into line b, if one follows the reordering suggested by Good News Translation; for example, “so that you may rescue us who are your people.”
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.