The Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Ge’ez, 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 Englishmercy originates from the Latinmerces, originally “price paid,” Romance languages (Italian, Spanish, Corsican, Catalan, Friulian) and other Germanic languages (German, Swedish, Danish — Barmherzigkeit, barmhärtighet and barmhjertighed, respectively) tend to follow the Latin misericordia, lit. “misery-heart.”
Following are a number of back-translations of Romans 9:23:
Uma: “He does this to show how no kidding is the bigness of his life [i.e., his glory] to those whom he loves and whom he has made-ready from the start to get a share of his bigness of life.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “The reason God endures/holds-back his anger is so that all human-beings (may) know that his goodness to the people pitied (by) him and chosen (by) him to be honored in the future, is unimaginable/inexpressible.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And He did this so that as for us whom He has pitied, He can cause us to understand what His very good situation is, because He has prepared us so that we in the future might be made immortal.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “in order that he might also show his amazing godhood to the people to-whom-he-is-showing-mercy whom he previously prepared to participate in the exceedingly-good life in heaven.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “He wanted it to be know that abundantly he has the good. Because he was merciful to us and now we know about the good he has already determined to give us.” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff. ) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal tā (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential tā (祂) is used.”
In that system, one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and others for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff. ) explains: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff. )
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445 ). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant and Orthodox English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible or The Orthodox New Testament, but most translations do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In the latter two languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
There is a textual problem at the beginning of this verse: the question is whether the verse begins with “in order that” or “and in order that.” The latter of these possibilities (“and in order that”) is to be favored, both on the basis of manuscript evidence and in light of the fact that it is obviously the more difficult reading. Furthermore, this form of the text tends to lend support to the causal interpretation of the participle discussed in verse 22. For that reason the Good News Translation uses the words he wanted in each case.
His rich glory is literally “the richness of his glory” (so Jerusalem Bible), but in a construction of this type the abstract noun should be interpreted as a qualifier of the noun which appears in the genitive. To reveal his rich glory may be rendered as “to show how very glorious he is.”
In some languages one cannot say glory, which was poured out on us, since it is impossible to speak of glory being poured out on someone. But one can often say “glory, which he shared with us” or even change a clause into a complete sentence: “glory. He has given some of this glory to us.”
Objects is literally “vessels” (see the comments on verse 22), but the reference is obviously to the people with whom God had shared his mercy (see verse 24), and so the Good News Translation makes this information explicit by introducing a pronoun: us … those of us. The clause who are the objects of his mercy may be rendered in some languages as “to whom he has been merciful” or “to whom he has shown mercy.”
The Greek verb rendered prepared actually has the force of “to prepare beforehand” (see New English Bible “from the first” and Jerusalem Bible “long ago”). Paul identifies God’s actions in history as the working out of his eternal purpose. Elsewhere in the New Testament this verb appears only in Ephesians 2.10, where it is rendered by the Good News Translation as already prepared.
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.