steadfast love

The Hebrew that is translated as “steadfast love,” “lovingkindness” (Goldingay 2018: “commitment”) or similar in English is translated in a number of ways:

  • Vidunda: “love of enduring” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Bura-Pabir: “love which cannot be-changed” (hyirkur na a palidzi wa)
  • Hausa Common Language Bible “his love without changing” (kaunarsa marar canjawa) (source for this and above: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
  • Elhomwe: “love that does not finish” (echikondi yoohisintheya) (source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
  • Nyamwezi: chelu, combining “love,” “faithfulness,” “loyalty,” and “kindness” (source: James Lundeen)

In Pijin tinghevi long or “think heavy about” is used. “The Pijin expression ‘think heavy about’ is very much within the domain of committed relationships. The relationship between father and child, husband and wife, God and His people. There is a very strong element of ‘loyalty’ in this expression.” (Source: Bob Carter)

See also mercy and pain-love.

happiness / joy

The Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek that is typically translated in English as “joy” or “happiness” is translated in the Hausa Common Language Bible idiomatically as farin ciki or “white stomach.” In some cases, such as in Genesis 29:11, it is also added for emphatic purposes.

Other languages that use the same expression include Southern Birifor (pʋpɛl), Dera (popolok awo), Reshe (ɾipo ɾipuhã). (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)

See also Seat of the Mind / Seat of Emotions, rejoiced greatly / celebrated, the Mossi translation of “righteous”, and joy.

mercy

Click here to view graphically

The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin terms that are typically translated as “mercy” (or “compassion” or “kindness”) in English are translated in various ways. Bratcher / Nida classify them in (1) those based on the quality of heart, or other psychological center, (2) those which introduce the concept of weeping or extreme sorrow, (3) those which involve willingness to look upon and recognize the condition of others, or (4) those which involve a variety of intense feelings.

While the English mercy originates from the Latin merces, originally “price paid,” Romance languages (Italian, Spanish, Corsican, Catalan) and other Germanic languages (German, Swedish, Danish — Barmherzigkeit, barmhärtighet and barmhjertighed, respectively) tend to follow the Latin misericordia, lit. “misery-heart.”

Here are some other (back-) translations:

See also steadfast love.

asking God for mercy in Lakota

When biblical writers ask God for mercy, Lakota translators can add a female grammatical deferential marker to translate the passages in a culturally appropriate manner.

Steve Berneking (in Beerle-Moor / Voinov, p. 119f.) explains:

“The Bible of our Judeo-Christian tradition is filled with examples in which God is described in and granted human attributes. Anthropomorphically, God sees, walks, talks, fights. Further, God is said to demonstrate human emotions: love, hate, jealousy, anger. And, quite remarkably, humans can communicate to God the entire range of human feelings: love, fear, doubt, anger. Humans can argue with, command, remind, negotiate with, and even ignore God in our biblical tradition.

“Few places in the biblical canon are as filled with the joy and angst of this human/God encounter as the book of Psalms. Even the traditional genres or categories of the psalms reflect such a range of emotion: praise, lament, complaint, thanksgiving. It is precisely this open and frank dialogue between human and God that troubles the Lakota translators when working with the psalms. Because Wakȟáŋ Tȟáŋka [see God] is not engaged anthropomorphically as the Christian ‘God’ is in the Psalms, the translators have a difficult time getting into Psalms. . . almost to the point of despair and abandoning the translation of Psalms. My examples are from two places in the Psalter (both cited according to the New Jewish Publication Society’s translation):

Psalm 57:1
Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me, for in You I seek refuge.

Psalm 90:13, 14
Turn, O Lord! How long? Show mercy to Your servants. Satisfy us at daybreak with your steadfast love that we may sing for joy all our days.

“How is it, the Lakota translators ask, that humans can demand anything from God, especially mercy? No Lakota, they noted, would or even could speak to Wakȟáŋ Tȟáŋka with such boldness. In their translation of the Psalms into Lakota, they needed a transcultural and translingual alternative, so they employed the female deferential command enclitic [= closely connected in pronunciation with the preceding word] marker ye in these and other psalms. That positioned the psalmist in these psalms as a female, thereby softening the rhetoric from a blatant command addressed to Wakȟáŋ Tȟáŋka to an earnest, heartfelt plea of desperation. Here are these examples from the Lakota translation, along with word-for-word renderings plus the enclitic markers.

Psalm 57:1
Uŋṡimala ye, Wakȟáŋ Tȟáŋka, uŋṡimala ye. Inakijiŋyaŋ el ċiu welo.
Have pity [female deferential command], Wakȟáŋ Tȟáŋka, have pity [female deferential command]. [Defense] for I come to you [male statement].

Psalm 90:13,14
Tohaŋyaŋ niċaŋzekiŋ kta hwo?
How long are you angry [potential] [male question]
Niṫawowaṡi ki lena uŋṡiuŋlapi ye.
Your workers the these be kind to us [female deferential command]
Ihihanŋi iyohila wouŋṡila uŋṡiuŋlapi ye.
Morning each one mercy show/give [female deferential command]
Heċel wiyuṡkiqiŋyaŋ uŋlowaŋpi na ċaŋte waṡteya niuŋk’uŋpi ktelo.
So that happily sing and heart in a good way live [potential].

“Their solution, I would argue, shows a particular theology of their spirituality, interpreting and translating these texts in their own way, thereby ‘making them their own.’”

inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Ps 90:14)

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.

complete verse (Psalm 90:14)

Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Psalm 90:14:

  • Chichewa Contempary Chichewa translation, 2002/2016:
    “Satisfy us in the morning with your unending love,
    that we may sing with joy and stay joyous all our days.” (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
  • Newari:
    “Fill us each morning with Your never-ending love.
    May we be able to sing hymns
    and continue to rejoice as long as we live.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
  • Hiligaynon:
    “Every morning show your (sing.) love to us (excl.) so-that we (excl.) sing for joy and we (excl.) will-be happy throughout our (excl.) whole lives.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
  • Laarim:
    “You (sing.) give us your love which remains forever satisfies us in the morning,
    so that we would sing in happiness and in gladness all our days.” (Source: Laarim Back Translation)
  • Nyakyusa-Ngonde (back-translation into Swahili):
    “Utushibishe kila asubuhi neema yako,
    ili tushangilie na kufurahi katika maisha yetu yote.” (Source: Nyakyusa Back Translation)
  • English:
    “Each morning show us that your faithfully loving us is enough for us
    in order that we may shout joyfully and be happy for the rest of our lives.” (Source: Translation for Translators)

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.