The Greek that is often translated as “flesh” in English (when referring to the lower human nature) can, according to Nida (1947, p. 153) “very rarely be literally translated into another language. ‘My meat’ or ‘my muscle’ does not make sense in most languages.” He then gives a catalog of almost 30 questions to determine a correct translation for that term.
The Toraja-Sa’dan translation uses a variety of terms for the translation of the same Greek term (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight)
A form of kale tolinona or “corporeal” is for instance used in Romans 9:5 or Colossians 1:22 (and also in Genesis 6:3 and Exodus 30:32)
A form of mentolinona or “the human” is for instance used in Matthew 16:17 or John 1:14
Phrases that include pa’kalean or “bodiliness” (also: “human shape”) are for instance used in Romans 6:6 or 1 Peter 2:11 (as well as in Isa 52:14, Isa 53:2, and Lamentations 4:7
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, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the writer of the letter and the readers).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 8:4:
Uma: “God’s purpose in doing like that is so that we become truly straight in his sight, like is demanded in the Lord’s Law. For we here, we no longer follow the evil desires of our heart. Now we follow the desire of the Holy Spirit.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “This was done by God so that we (dual) could really obey the commands in his law and our (dual) deeds would be straight. Because if we (dual) already trust Isa we (dual) no longer follow what our (dual) greedy desires want. But what we (dual) obey is the will/wish of the Holy Spirit. Therefore if we (dual) obey/follow the teaching of the Holy Spirit we (dual) are really able to obey/follow the commands in God’s law.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “The reason God did this was so that we might be able to obey what is right according to that commanded by the Law. And this is possible because it’s no longer necessary that we obey the evil desires of our bodies, but rather we can obey what is right because we are helped by the Holy Spirit.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “God did that so that we who follow the Holy Spirit, not our human minds, we have the power to thoroughly obey the correct commands of the law.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “Thus he did because he wanted that the Holy Spirit would show us the road to how we should live so that we could do the good spoken of in the law. But no longer now should we do the evil which was in our hearts before.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
The Greek that is translated in English as “Law” or “law” is translated in Mairasi as oro nasinggiei or “prohibited things” (source: Enggavoter 2004) and in Noongar with a capitalized form of the term for “words” (Warrinya) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
In Yucateco the phrase that is used for “law” is “ordered-word” (for “commandment,” it is “spoken-word”) (source: Nida 1947, p. 198) and in Central Tarahumara it is “writing-command.” (wsource: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.)
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. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) can be used, as in mi-tama (御霊) or “Spirit (of God)” in the referenced verses.
In Greek verses 3 and 4 are one sentence, and verse 4 begins with a conjunction that appears in the Good News Translation and in the New English Bible as so that (Jerusalem Bible “in order that”) and may be taken either with the force of purpose or of result, the former being the more probable. The Good News Translation makes a full stop at the end of verse 3 and reintroduces the subject (God did this) so that the reader can see immediately the relationship between the two thoughts.
Righteous demands (Jerusalem Bible “just demands”) is in the Greek text a singular (New English Bible “the commandment”; An American Translation* “the requirement”). The Good News Translation, along with a number of other translations (Phillips, New American Bible, Moffatt, Jerusalem Bible), has this word in a collective sense, and this accounts for the plural demands. The righteous demands of the Law may be rendered as “the righteous deeds which the Law demands must be done” or “what the Law demands, which is right.”
The fact that the salvation event upholds the Law and does not contradict it (so that the righteous demands of the Law might be fully satisfied) is a familiar theme in the book of Romans (see 3.31; 6.13). The passive expression might be fully satisfied in us may be made active, “that we might fully accomplish” or “that we might do completely.” An inversion of clauses may thus result—for example, “God did this so that we, who live according to the Spirit and not according to human nature, might do completely what the Law demands as just.”
Who live according to the Spirit is literally “who walk according to the Spirit.” “To walk” in Semitic thought is merely another way of saying “to live, to behave, to act.”
Human nature again is literally “flesh.” For equivalent translations of according to the Spirit, not according to human nature, see the discussion under Rom 8.1.
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Living Water is produced for the Bible translation movement in association with Lutheran Bible Translators. Lyrics derived from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®).
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.