Psalms 9 and 10 constitute one psalm in the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate translations. Accordingly all Orthodox and some Catholic translations also treat it as one psalm. One indication that it might in fact have been intended to be one psalm is the fact that both Psalm 9 and 10 together constitute one acrostic, a literary form in which each verse is started with one of the successive 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. According to Brenda Boerger (in Open Theology 2016, p. 179ff. ) there are three different reasons for acrostics in the Hebrew text: “for ease of memorization,” the representation “of the full breadth and depth of a topic, all the way from aleph to taw (tav),” and the perception of “the acrostic form as aesthetically attractive.” (p. 191)
While most translations mention the existence of the acrostic in a note or a comment, few implement it in their translation. The Natügu translation is one such exception. Boerger (see above) cites a strong tradition in singing the psalms and the fact that Natügu, like Hebrew, also has 22 possible initial letters as motivating factors to maintain the acrostics in that language.
Click or tap here for both Psalm 9 and 10 successively in Natügu
Psalm 9
1 Awi Yawe! Naglqpx-atwrnr-ngrne nim.
Ale-zvzq da kcng tzkctipxng, x napipxxng.
2 Angrlvzx drtqm.
Bilvzx nim kc tqmyalz-esz’ngr.
3 Brngzvxitx nzyzlukr enqmi rnge mz nzmc-krde nim.
Bz x tao-ngrde nzulrm.
4 Clvetio-lzbqx x rpiq kx tubqx.
Clveq leplz amrlx mz nzwxbuo-krme mz tron, x ayzlu-ngrbzme da badr.
5 Dalr nrlc nzmailzlr kxdrka’-ngrng.
Delc napnanati-ngrn nidr x
Drtqdr na-amrbrtx-alobzme.
6 Doa ngr alwx lcng nzyrkrtrpeng.
Enqmi rngeng trpengr nzdcpx-krdr mz drtwr leplz x mztea nyzdr amznrpe-ngrnq.
7 Eu, a’ Yawe ngini-alom King.
Elalvzx nzwxbuo-krme mz tron nyzm murde nzayzlu-krbzme da mz leplz tubq.
8 Eu, murde nzaclve-krm nrlc tubq-esz’ngr,
Esakrlrngr nzpipx-krm nztubqkr leplz o trtingr.
9 Gct, nim lrpalvc nyz kxnzobqszong.
Glxx kx nim me nzrlakitrkr mzli kx prtzngr da.
10 Gct, krkcng tzkrlzlr nim nzabrtrpzlr drtwrdr bam.
Itoto x doa amrlx kcng tzrtangrtilr nim, trmrbrtru mz drtwrm.
11 Itoto x nigu amrlx napipxbzku mz kxnzmnc-mrbrng da kcng tqale Yawe.
Jerusalem ngi mzteadau nyzde mrkc tqmnc-ngrde. Na-angrlvzku nide.
12 Jzsle krkcng tzrnibqting leplz mz nzayzlu-kr-mopwzle badr da kcng tqtrka tzalelr.
Kxnzmncng mz drtq kxetq sa na-ayzlu-kzpzle badr natq ngr nzyrni-krbzlr bade.
13 Kxetu, nayc mz drtwrm ninge x mcom kxmu nzaetq-krm enqmi rngeng drtqnge.
Kxrpalz, bzkq rlrpx-ngrn nzbz-krnge.
14 Kxarlapx, naelalz-ngrm drtwrnge nzarlapx-krm ninge.
Leplz kxkqlu Jerusalem sa naxlrlr nzglqlz-krnge nim.
15-16 Lalztqmamu! Yawe aelwapx-lzbqngr mz nztubqkr nzayzlu-krbzle da mz leplz.
Murde lr mrkzbleng nztao-moung mz gq kx nzekqtilr.
Mz br kx nzatu-kapqlr, nzdwatr-moung elr.
Mz trtxki kx nzamwilr, nzprtz mou kxdrka’-ngrng elr.
17 Mz nzesablqti-krdr Gct,
Nabz-ngrdr leplz ngr nrlc.
18 Nzmu nakxpung, trtxpnzngr nzmrbrtitrkr drtwr Gct nidr.
Nzobqtipxngr kxtrnzrngiscung trtxpnzngr nzbotxpx-krde.
19 Natulzme Yawe, mz nzaryplapx-krm lr mrkzbleng amrlx.
Na-aelwapx-ngrn kx drtwr kxnzetung amrlx ngi brmrda.
20 Namwxlrtilr x na-amrluelr nim.
Nakrlzlr kx nidr leplz txneng, x sa nabzng.
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.”
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 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 Dutch and Western Frisian translations, however, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.
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 show different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are 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, tsuiteo-rare-ru (着いておられる) or “arriving” is used.
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 show different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are 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, kik-are-ru (聞かれる) or “hear” is used.
For: it is better, with Revised Standard Version, to indicate that verse 4 gives the ground, or reason, for the psalmist’s affirmation in verse 3.
Thou hast maintained my just cause translates “you accomplished my right and my cause”; for “my right” see comments on “judgment” in 7.6; the word for cause is a legal term, meaning a claim in court, a legal case. The line may be rendered “you upheld my right and my cause” (New American Bible, New International Version) or “you have given fair judgement in my favour” (New Jerusalem Bible). Bible en français courant is better: “You have done the right thing for me, you have given me justice.” In some languages it is necessary to recast the process of judging in terms of two events in which the second is a consequence of the first; for example, “you have judged me and found me innocent” or “you have judged my case and found that I was right.”
For greater ease of understanding, Good News Translation has reversed the two lines. The psalmist sees the LORD as an “honest” (or, “righteous”) judge, or, as Revised Standard Version has it, righteous judgment. For righteous see comments on “right” in 4.1; for judgment see comments on “to judge” in 7.8. Yahweh sits on the throne to judge, as both ruler and judge of all humanity.
Good News Translation gives first the general statement and then the specific application. Revised Standard Version, following the Hebrew order, gives the specific event before the general statement. In all such cases the translator must determine for his or her language which order is more natural. In some languages the logical relation of reason to result may be clearer; for example, “because you are fair and honest in your judging, you have judged in my favor.”
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 .
The following are presentations by the Psalms: Layer by Layer project, run by Scriptura . The first is an overview, the second an introduction into the poetry, and the third an introduction into the exegesis of Psalm 9.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.