Joseph

The term that is transliterated as “Joseph” in English is translated in American Sign Language with a sign that relates to a) the coat he wore (see Gen 37:3), b) the holding of his clothes by Potiphar’s wife (see Gen 39:12), and c) the many times Joseph experienced grief. (Source: RuthAnna Spooner, Ron Lawer)


“Joseph” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor

In Spanish Sign Language it is translated with a sign that signifies “dream,” referring to Jacob’s dream at Bethel (see Genesis 28:10 and the following verses). (Source: Steve Parkhurst)


“Joseph” in Spanish Sign Language, source: Sociedad Bíblica de España

cherub

Some key biblical terms that were directly transliterated from the Hebrew have ended up with unforeseen meanings in the lexicons of various recipient languages.

Take, for example, the English word “cherub,” from Hebrew “kĕrȗb.” Whereas the original Hebrew term meant something like “angelic being that is represented as part human, part animal” (…), the English word now means something like “a person, especially a child, with an innocent or chubby face.” Semantic shift has been conditioned in English by the Renaissance artistic tradition that portrayed cherubim in the guise of cute little Greek cupids. This development was of course impossible to foresee at the time when the first English translations borrowed this Hebrew word into the English Bible tradition, following the pattern of borrowing set by the Greek and Latin translations of the Old Testament.

In Russian, the semantic shift of this transliteration was somewhat different: the -îm ending of “kĕrūbîm,” originally signifying plurality in Hebrew, has been reanalyzed as merely the final part of the lexical item, so that the term херувим (kheruvim) in Russian is a singular count noun, not a plural one. (A similar degrammaticalization is seen in English writers who render the Hebrew plural kĕrūbîm as “cherubims.”) Apparently, this degrammaticalization of the Hebrew ending is what led the Russian Synodal translator of Genesis 3:24 to mistakenly render the Hebrew as saying that the Lord God placed a kheruvim (accusative masculine singular in Russian) to the east of the garden of Eden, instead of indicating a plural number of such beings. (Source: Vitaly Voinov in The Bible Translator 2012, p. 17ff.)

In Ngäbere the Hebrew that is translated in English as “cherub” is translated as “heavenly guard” (source: J. Loewen 1980, p. 107), in Nyamwezi as v’amalaika v’akelubi or “Cherubim-Angel” to add clarity, in Vidunda as “winged creature” (source for this and before: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext), and in Bura-Pabir as “good spirit with wings” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).

In Northern Pashto it is either translated as “heavenly creature” (Afghan Pashto Bible, publ. 2023) or “winged creature” (Holy Bible in Pakistani [Yousafzai] Pashto, publ. 2020) (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin).

In French Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines “angel” and “spinning sword” (referring to Genesis 3:24):


“Cherub” in French Sign Language (source: La Bible en langue des signes française )

See also seraph and ark of the covenant.

shepherd

The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “shepherd” in English is translated in Kouya as Bhlabhlɛɛ ‘yliyɔzʋnyɔ — ” tender of sheep.”

Philip Saunders (p. 231) explains:

“Then one day they tackled the thorny problem of ‘shepherd’. It was problematic because Kouyas don’t have herdsmen who stay with the sheep all the time. Sheep wander freely round the village and its outskirts, and often a young lad will be detailed to drive sheep to another feeding spot. So the usual Kouya expression meant a ‘driver of sheep’, which would miss the idea of a ‘nurturing’ shepherd. ‘A sheep nurturer’ was possible to say, but it was unnatural in most contexts. The group came up with Bhlabhlɛɛ ‘yliyɔzʋnyɔ which meant ‘a tender of sheep’, that is one who keeps an eye on the sheep to make sure they are all right. All, including the translators, agreed that this was a most satisfactory solution.”

In Chuj, the translation is “carer” since there was no single word for “shepherd” (source: Ronald Ross), in Muna, it is dhagano dhumba: “sheep guard” since there was no immediate lexical equivalent (source: René van den Berg), in Mairasi it is translated with “people who took care of domesticated animals” (source: Enggavoter 2004), in Noongar as kookendjeriyang-yakina or “sheep worker” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang), and Kwakum as “those-who-monitor-the-livestock” (source: Stacey Hare in this post ).

See also I am the good shepherd.

female second person singular pronoun in Psalms

In Garifuna the second person singular pronoun (“you” in English) has two forms. One is used in women’s speech and one in men’s speech. In the Garifuna Bible the form used in men’s speech is typically used, except when it’s clear that a woman is quoted or in Psalms where the women on the translation team insisted that the form used in women’s speech (buguya) would be used throughout the whole book.

Ronald Ross (in Omanson 2001, p. 375f.) tells the story: “Throughout most of the translation, [the distinctions between the different forms of the pronouns] presented no problem. Whenever the speaker in the text was perceived as a man, the male speech forms were used; and when a woman was speaking, the female speech forms were used. True, the women members of the translation team did object on occasion to the use of the male forms when the author (and narrator) of a book was unknown and the men translators had used the male speech forms as the default. Serious discord arose, however, during the translation of the Psalms because of their highly devotional nature and because throughout the book the psalmist is addressing God. The male translators had, predictably, used the male form to address God, and the male form to refer to the psalmist, even though women speakers of Garifuna never use those forms to address anyone. The women contended that they could not as women read the Psalms meaningfully if God and the psalmist were always addressed as if the readers were men. The men, of course, turned the argument around, claiming that neither could they read the Psalms comfortably if the reader was assumed to be a woman.

“Initially there seemed to be no way out of this impasse. However a solution was found in the ongoing evolution of the language. There is a strong propensity for male speech and female speech to merge in favor of the latter, so the few remaining male forms are gradually dying out. Moreover, male children learn female speech from their mothers and only shift to the male speech forms when they reach adolescence to avoid sounding effeminate. However they use the female form buguya when addressing their parents throughout life. So the women wielded two arguments: First, the general development of the language favored the increasing use of the female forms. Secondly, the female forms are less strange to the men than the male forms are to the women, because the men habitually use them during early childhood and continue to use them to address their parents even in adulthood. Therefore, the female pronominal forms prevailed and were adopted throughout the book of Psalms, though the male forms remained the default forms in the rest of the translation.”

See also female first person singular pronoun in Psalms and addressing God.

addressing God

Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed. The first example is from a language where God is always addressed distinctly formal whereas the second is one where the opposite choice was made.

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight

Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or 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 Dutch and Western Frisian translations, however, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.

See also female second person singular pronoun in Psalms.

Translation commentary on Psalm 80:1 - 80:2

The psalmist appeals to God, the Shepherd of Israel, to listen to his people. In verse 1b Joseph is synonymous with Israel in verse 1a as a designation of the people of Israel. But since two of the northern tribes are named in verse 2, perhaps Joseph here stands specifically for the northern tribes (Joseph was the father of Ephraim and Manasseh; see discussion at 78.71). Good News Translation does not formally represent Joseph in verse 1b, since it means simply “people of Israel,” and few readers will know that; if the text says only Joseph, they will probably think of the person, not the tribe.

In languages in which the figure of the shepherd is understandable, it will often be necessary to recast the opening of verse 1 to say, for example, “Shepherd of the people of Israel, listen to us.” If the shepherd image is not fully meaningful, the translator may say, for example, “you who take care of the people of Israel….” Line b, if it is to be kept as a parallel line, may require using a different verb, particularly if the object of the verb is the same as in line a. In some cases the two lines may best be reduced to one; for example, “Listen to us, you who lead the people of Israel” or “You who lead the people of Israel like a flock, listen to us.” It is possible to retain the name Joseph as follows: “Listen to us, O Shepherd of Israel, you who lead the descendants of Joseph like a flock.”

For the cherubim see the description in 18.10. Here they denote the Covenant Box, which was regarded as the earthly throne of God. If the word cherubim is transliterated, it will be essential to provide the reader with a note or a reference to the earlier verse where the note may be found. Most attempts at rendering this word by means of a descriptive phrase result in confusing the reader, due to the very large number of winged creatures he already knows.

The psalmist asks God to shine forth, that is, to “reveal” his power and might by coming to save his people.

Ephraim and Manasseh were the two most important northern tribes; Benjamin, a southern tribe, was often associated with them. It is to be remembered that Joseph (the father of Ephraim and Manasseh) and Benjamin were the two sons of Rachel. In translation it is advisable to provide the reader with a note explaining these three tribes, particularly if Joseph is kept in verse 1. Without a note it may not be clear in what way the prayer is directed toward the saving of the three tribes and at the same time save us. This problem may also be handled within the text by saying, for example, “reveal yourself to our people of the tribes of….”

Stir up thy might (Good News Translation “Show us your strength”) translates “Rouse your power” (see Dahood), which is practically equivalent to the plea in 44.23 for the Lord to wake up, to rouse himself. It seems to the people of Israel that Yahweh has been inactive, and so they ask him to take action on their behalf. The final save us means to free the people from their enemies (as in verses 3, 7, 19).

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 .