tribe

The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “tribe” in English when referring to the “12 tribes of Israel” is translated in some East African languages, including Taita and Pökoot, with the equivalent of “clan” instead.

Aloo Mojola explains (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 208ff. ) (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight):

“A number of Bible translation teams in East Africa have been baffled and intrigued by the use of the term ‘tribe’ in the English translations of the Bible. The usage employed in these translations does not reflect any of the popular meanings associated with the term ‘tribe’ in present-day English. Neither does it reflect popular conceptions of the meaning of this term in East Africa or in other parts of Africa and elsewhere. This raises the question: is the term tribe the best translation of the Hebrew terms shebeth and matteh or the Greek term phyle? What is a tribe anyway? Are the twelve tribes of Israel tribes in the sense this term is currently understood? How can this term be translated in East African languages?

“It is easy to see that there is no consistent definition of the term tribe which applies exclusively and consistently to the communities to which it is currently applied. Why, for example, are the Somali or the Baganda called a tribe, but not the Irish or the Italians? Why do the Yoruba or Hausa qualify, but not the Portuguese or the Russians? Why the Bakongo and the Oromo, but not the Germans or the Scots? Why the Eritreans, but not the French or Dutch-speaking Belgians? Why the Zulu or the Xhosa, but not the South African Boers (Afrikaners) or the South African English? The reason for the current prejudices, it would seem, has nothing to do with language, physical type, common territory, common cultural values, type of political and social organization or even population size. Ingrained prejudices and preconceived ideas about so-called “primitive” peoples have everything to do with it.

“The term ‘tribe’ is used to refer to a universal and world-wide phenomenon of ethnic identification which may draw on any of the following bases: identification in terms of one’s first or dominant language of communication (linguistic), in terms of one’s place of origin (regional), in terms of one’s presumed racial, biological or genetic type (racial), or in terms of one’s ideological or political commitments (ideological), and so on. Communities may choose one or more of these bases as criteria for membership. Any of these may change over time. Moreover forms of ethnic identification are dynamic or in a state of flux, changing in response to new environments and circumstances. Essentially forms of ethnic association reflect a people’s struggle for survival through adaptation to changing times. This is inextricably intertwined with the production and distribution of vital resources, goods and services as well as the distribution of power, class and status in society.

“At the base of any ethnic group is the nuclear family which expands to include the extended family. The extended family consists of more than two families related vertically and horizontally: parents and their offspring, cousins, uncles, aunts, nephews, and others, extending to more than two generations. A lineage is usually a larger group than an extended family. It includes a number of such families who trace descent through the male or female line to a common ancestor. A clan may be equivalent to or larger than a lineage. Where it is larger than a lineage, it brings together several lineages which may or may not know the precise nature of their relationships, but which nevertheless claim descent from a common ancestor. A clan is best thought of as a kind of sub-ethnic unit whose members have some unifying symbol such as totem, label, or myth. In most cases the clan is used to determine correct marriage lines, but this is not universally so. Above the clan is the ethnic group, usually referred to inconsistently as the tribe. Members of an ethnic group share feelings of belonging to a common group. The basis of ethnic identity is not always derived from a common descent, real or fictional; it may draw on any of the bases mentioned above.

“The Israelites identified themselves as one people sharing a common descent, a common religious and cultural heritage, a common language and history. There is no doubt that they constitute what would nowadays be called an ethnic group, or by some people a tribe. The twelve subunits of the Israelite ethnic group or tribe, (Hebrew shebeth or matteh, or Greek phyle) are clearly equivalent to clans. In fact this is what seems to make sense to most African Bible translators in the light of their understanding of these terms and the biblical account. Referring to a shebeth as a tribe or an ethnic group and to Israel as a collection of twelve tribes creates unnecessary confusion. Translating each of the terms shebeth, matteh, and phyle as clan seems to solve this problem and to be consistent with current usage in African languages.”

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

complete verse (Revelation 7:8)

Following are a number of back-translations of Revelation 7:8:

  • Uma: “From the descendants of Zebulon, twelve thousand. From the descendants of Yusuf, twelve thousand. From the descendants of Benyamin twelve thousand.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “From the descendants of Sibulun twelve thousand were marked. From the descendants of Yusup twelve thousand were marked. From the descendants of Benjamin twelve thousand were marked.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “of the descendants of Zebulun, twelve thousand; of the descendants of Joseph, twelve thousand; of the descendants of Benjamin, twelve thousand were also marked.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “Twelve thousand-each were marked who were descended from each one of the children of Israel who were Juda, Ruben, Gad, Aser, Naftali, Manases, Simeon, Levi, Issakar, Zebulun, Jose and Benjamin.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Because from the clan of the descendants of Juda, twelve thousand. It was like that too for Ruben, Gad, Aser, Neftali, Manases, Simeon, Levi, Isacar, Zabulon and for Jose and Benjamin.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “Concerning Zebulun, his relatives who lived later added up to 12,000 who were sealed. Concerning Joseph, his relatives who lived later added up to 12,000 who were sealed. Concerning Benjamin his relatives who lived later added up to 12,000 who were sealed.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

large numbers in Angguruk Yali

Many languages use a “body part tally system” where body parts function as numerals (see body part tally systems with a description). One such language is Angguruk Yali which uses a system that ends at the number 27. To circumvent this limitation, the Angguruk Yali translators adopted a strategy where a large number is first indicated with an approximation via the traditional system, followed by the exact number according to Arabic numerals. For example, where in 2 Samuel 6:1 it says “thirty thousand” in the English translation, the Angguruk Yali says teng-teng angge 30.000 or “so many rounds [following the body part tally system] 30,000,” likewise, in Acts 27:37 where the number “two hundred seventy-six” is used, the Angguruk Yali translation says teng-teng angge 276 or “so many rounds 276,” or in John 6:10 teng-teng angge 5.000 for “five thousand.”

This strategy is used in all the verses referenced here.

Source: Lourens de Vries in The Bible Translator 1998, p. 409ff.

See also numbers in Ngalum and numbers in Kombai.

Translation commentary on Revelation 7:4 – 7:8

And I heard the number: presumably the angel in charge, or some other angel, told John. It may be better to translate “I was told” (Good News Translation, Bible en français courant, Biblia Dios Habla Hoy, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje), or “someone told me.”

Of the sealed: it is much better to use a descriptive phrase, “of all those who had been marked on their foreheads with God’s seal” or “all those whom the angels had marked on their foreheads with God’s seal.” For seal see the previous verse.

A hundred and forty-four thousand: the number is symbolic, 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes, indicating the totality of all of God’s people. As is true of other numbers and symbols in this book, this is not meant literally.

Every tribe of the sons of Israel: it is better to translate “every one of the tribes of Israel” or “all the Israelite tribes.”

Alternative translation models for verse 4 are:

• Someone told me that the number of those people whom the angels had marked with God’s seal on their forehead was 144,000. These people were from all twelve tribes of Israel.

Or:

• Someone told me that the angels had marked 144,000 people on their foreheads with God’s seal. These people were from….

There is no generally accepted explanation of the twelve tribes that are named. In the Old Testament the tribes are named for ten of Jacob’s twelve sons (Reuben, Simeon, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad, and Asher) and the two sons of Joseph (Manasseh and Ephraim). Two of Jacob’s sons, Levi and Joseph, do not have tribes named after them. In this list Levi and Joseph are named as tribes; Dan and Ephraim are not listed. There is also no explanation for the order of the names; it is generally assumed that Judah is named first because it was the tribe to which Jesus belonged.

For verses 5-8 some translators may find it helpful to imitate Good News Translation in giving the information, while others may wish to reproduce the style of the Greek text, as Revised Standard Version does, if that is the way that lists of names and numbers are handled in the receptor-language culture.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on The Revelation to John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1993. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .