“know something is true because of seeing it” in Teutila Cuicatec (source for this and above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
“ones who will confirm that these-things that you have seen are true” in Kankanaey (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
“ones who are to testify about these things, because it all happened before your eyes” in Tagbanwa (source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
The Hebrew that is typically translated as “anointed (one)” in English is translated in Bashkir as masikh (мәсих), the same term that is used in the New Testament for Μεσσίας (engl. “Messiah”) and Χριστός (engl. “Christ”).
Translation team member Gulsira Gizatullina explains (in a translation from Bashkir by Teija Greed):
“When we were choosing in the team the term for ‘to anoint,’ from the very start we did not go for the simple verb ‘to rub (with) oil; to oil’ (which is used in contexts like ‘oiling one’s hair when combing it’ or ‘oiling a frying pan’), because we felt that this verb cannot fully express the true meaning [of the biblical concept]. The terms masekhlay [anoint], masekh mayy [anointing oil], Masikh [Messiah] also exist in Islam, and they are familiar terms to [Bashkir] Muslims who know religious terminology. That is why we chose masekhlay [for the concept ‘to anoint’].”
Teija Greed explains further: “The Turkic language Bashkir spoken in Russia uses the Bashkir word masikh (мәсих) for the Hebrew mashiach in Ps 2:2 [and in other places in the Old Testament], with a lower-case ‘m.’ The Bashkir team decided that this is how the Hebrew meaning ‘anointed one’ is translated everywhere. The link with the New Testament’s Masikh — capitalized — is therefore very easy to understand. Masikh (Мәсих) is known from the Qur’an as being Jesus’ title. The idea about using masikh for the general ‘anointed one’ was first introduced by one of the translators, and I’d think the link with the original Hebrew term is not generally known. However, we in the team find this a practical way to make the Bashkir audience aware of both the meaning of the word, and the connection between the two Testaments.”
In Chichewa, it is translated with wodzozedwa. In Chewa culture, this word is used to refer to people of authority such as chiefs who are anointed through the ritual of pouring oil on their head when they are being installed. The pouring of oil symbolizes receiving of spiritual powers that they may act wisely and justly under the guidance of God. This ritual also signifies that leadership comes from God and that it can be done accordingly if leaders depend on God. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
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 to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
The Hebrew that is translated as “forsake” or “reject” in English is translated in the Shinkaiyaku Bible as o-sute (お捨て), combining “abandon” (sute) with the respectful prefix o-. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Psalm 89:38:
Chichewa Contempary Chichewa translation, 2002/2016:
“‘But now You have rejected him, you have thrown him away,
you are very angry with your anointed one.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Newari:
“But You have abandoned the one whom You anointed,
You have hated him, and You have been angry with him.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon:
“But, LORD, you (sing.) (were) angry with your (sing.) chosen king;
you (sing.) turned-away and rejected him.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Laarim:
“But instead, you God rejected your king,
you were angry with him much, and you left him alone.” (Source: Laarim Back Translation)
Nyakyusa-Ngonde (back-translation into Swahili):
“Lakini ee BWANA, umemtupa na kumkataa,
umemchukia mfalme wako, ambaye ulimteua.” (Source: Nyakyusa Back Translation)
English:
“But Yahweh, now you have rejected David!
You are very angry with the king whom you appointed.” (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 rare (られ) 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, ikatteo-rare-ru (怒っておられる) or “be angry” is used.
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.”
The third Good News Translation heading may be recast in some languages to say, for example, “The psalmist mourns because the king has been defeated” or “The psalmist laments because the king’s enemies have defeated him.”
In verses 38-45 the psalmist accuses God of having broken his covenant with the king and having caused his defeat and humiliation. In order to make it clear that the psalmist is addressing God, it may be well to say “But you, LORD, are angry….” Kirkpatrick notes that the harshness of the language of these verses scandalized many ancient Jewish commentators; one of them, Aben-Ezra of Toledo, Spain (twelfth century A.D.), reported that there was “a certain wise and pious man in Spain who would never read nor listen to this Psalm.”
Good News Translation has reversed the two lines of verse 38 for a more natural development of thought. For a similar expression of God’s anger, see 78.59, 62. “Your chosen king” translates thy anointed (see 2.2). There is no certain way of identifying the king. He has suffered military defeat, and Jerusalem has fallen to enemy forces and been ransacked (verses 40-41). The king has been deposed and stripped of his royal symbols (verses 39b, 44). It should be noted that some believe that these verses do not express a concrete historical situation but are part of a cultic act in which the king underwent a ritual degradation.
The boldness of verse 39 is extraordinary: God is accused of having gone back on the promise he made to the king: “You have broken your covenant with your servant.” The verb translated renounced occurs only here and in Lamentations 2.7b (“disowned”). In verse 39b Good News Translation “thrown” translates a verb which means “to pollute, defile, desecrate” (see its use in 74.7b, “desecrated”). The crown was the symbol not only of the king’s power but also of the holiness of his office, as the anointed of God. The Hebrew word here translated crown is not the usual one; nezer is related to the verb “to dedicate, consecrate,” and the Septuagint translates the word here “his holiness”; New Jerusalem Bible has “his dignity.” It may be well to follow the example of Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, “You have thrown his diadem to the ground and profaned it,” or Bible en français courant “you have dirtied his crown by throwing it on the ground.” In languages in which defiled his crown in the dust carries little or no meaning, it will be necessary to shift to another symbol and say, for example, “you have taken away his chief’s stool,” or to a nonmetaphorical rendering, “you have taken away his authority as chief” or “… removed the symbol of his authority.” In languages in which the leader’s symbols of authority are in objects very different from crowns, these symbols should be employed.
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.