Detail of an artwork by Yoshihei Miya (宮芳平). “Miya was born in Japan in 1893 in the Niigata Prefecture. He studied in Tokyo Academy and taught in Suwa Girl’s High School. In 1966 he visited the Holy Land and his book of art and poetry from that trip became popular in Japan. He died in 1971 in Kyoto.”
“Ruth’s great love for Naomi — her Jewish mother-in-law, enables her to dedicate her young life to protect and support her. Naomi, herself a widow, was not so keen to go back to Bethlehem with a widowed daughter-in-law who belonged to another race. But Ruth embraced and clung to her… There was nothing in Ruth’s mind which could come between her and Naomi — least of all racial differences. She was totally committed to ‘the other’ in Naomi.
“Ruth’s selfless devotion to her mother-in-law challenges Boaz to a similar response — he takes them both under his wing. On the occasion of the birth of Boaz and Ruth’s son, Obed, the women of Jerusalem, too, find themselves overcoming their racist prejudices in acclaiming Ruth the Moabitess as ‘being better than seven sons.’ — Chitra Fernando (චිත්රා ප්රනාන්දු), Sri Lanka!”
(Source for this and the image: The Bible Through Asian Eyes by Masao Takenaka and Ron O’Grady 1991)
Following is a back-translation of Ruth 1 from a song presented in the traditional Fang troubadour style (mvét oyeng) as part of a project by Bethany and Andrew Case. (For more information about this, see Case / Case 2019)
Verse 1 – It happened that, in the time of the chiefs, they were governing Israel, and hunger came there to the regions of those lands.
2 – It came about that a man of the town that they call Bethlehem, the clans of the lands of Ephrata, they called him Elimelek.
Then he moved from there, he moved, saying, “I will try to go and live in the regions of the lands of Moab.”
When he went there, he went with [his] wife, [his] wife Naomi, and his two sons, his grown sons.
One was named Mahlon, and the other was Kilion.
All those were people of Ephrata.
After they arrived in Moab there, then they lived there, living.
3 – It came about that Elimelek, Naomi’s husband, died, and Naomi was left a widow. (Click or tap here to see the rest.
4/5 – Left like that, [with] only just one thing her two sons, when they were left, then these two sons also married two girls, young Moabite women.
One of them was named Orpah, and the other was named Ruth.
And it came about that after ten years passed, ten years, then these two sons of hers also died there, beginning with Malon and Kilion.
Then Naomi was left only all alone [lit. point and point: a bird’s beak from which its worm has fallen] with nothing.
6 – Then it came about that Naomi, living in Moab [unclear].
There she found out that Yahweh had had compassion on her town’s/people’s pain, the famine had ended, ending.
7 – Then Naomi said there that, “right now, I’m going back to Judah.”
When she was returning, then she went together with her two daughter-in-laws.
They left the place where they were and at that time they went.
8 – When they were walking on the road, then she said to them, “Oh my daughters-in-law, go back to your houses, to the houses of your mothers, please go back.”
9 – “I ask Yahweh that he treat you well at all times just like you also treated me and my sons.”
“I continually repeatedly again and again ask that Yahweh give you a place that is just and solid/secure, that he give you homes and also give you new husbands.”
Then Naomi kissed them on the cheeks, a goodbye kiss.
10 – Then the girls wept and they said “We will not go back, oh Naomi, we will go with you to your land.”
11 – Then Naomi insisted again, and said to them, “O my daughters, please go back.”
“Do you really wish to return with me, to go and do what?”
I can no longer again have other children for them to again marry you, please go back to your homes.
12 – I am too old, I cannot again go into marriage.
Even if I did also go into it, and bear two sons this night, oh my daughters, would you begin to wait again for these sons, for them to be your husbands?
13 – In this time you are without husbands, and for how long?
No no, oh my daughters, my evil is too great, and surpasses yours [lit. my evil it exaggerates with bigness to pass this with yours].
The hand of Yahweh has struck me, striking.”
14 – Then they opened their mouths (wept), they were crying.
After they finished crying, then Orpha afterward went to kiss [her] mother-in-law, kissing goodbye.
Then Ruth, she insisted to her that she would not go.
15 – Then Naomi said to her, “Look, the other has gone to her people.
Go youuuu too with her to the place where your gods are, go with her.”
Ñeŋǃ
16 – Then Ruth answered her, “Don’t you ask me that I separate from you.
Don’t you ask me that I separate from you.”
Because the place where you go, to it also I will go.
The place where you’re going to live, there also I am going to live.
Your people this also will be my people.
Your god this too will be my god.
17 – The place where you will die, in this also I will die, I tell you truly (lit. truth and truth).
I say that may Yahweh strike me, may he punish me severely (lit. [punish me with real punishment]) if I separate from you except only that death do it.”
18 – Then it happened that, when Naomi saw that Ruth insisted [with] real insistence [firmness], she didn’t insist anymore, then she said, “Let’s go”.
They began to walk, they’re going, they’re going.
19 – When it happened that they have already entered Bethlehem, that they have already arrived.
Then there in the town people began going and looking, [saying], “wow, but who is this?
Who is this?
Is it not Naomi who’s coming over there?
Yes, wow, it is Naomi.
Aáaáaáa
Aaáǃ
20 – After Naomi knew that she was the one they were talking about, then she said, “Don’t call me again Naomi.
Naomi means I have a glad heart, I am well.
And now that I’m here, please call me Mara because God Almighty has given me bitter and bitter, bitter and bitter, this has filled my body.
21 – When I left here to go, I left here [with] my hands full.
When I was returning now, I was coming [with] my hands now emptied, because thus Yahweh has wanted it, so why do you again call me Naomi?
When Yahweh, he who is all-powerful has lowered me to the ground, this kind of punishment that I have here.”
22 – In that way, Naomi returned to Moab with her daughter-in-law Ruth, she who is a young Moabite woman.
In that way, they arrived in Bethlehem, finding that the time of harvesting food had arrived.
The translation of the tetragrammaton (YHWH or יהוה) is easily the most often discussed issue in Bible translation. This is exemplified by the fact that there is virtually no translation of the Bible — regardless of language — where the position of the respective translator or translation team on how to translate the name of God into the respective language is not clearly stated in the preface or introduction.
Click or tap here to read about the different ways the tetragrammaton is and has been translated
The literature on this topic is overwhelming, both as far as the meaning of YHWH and the translation of it by itself and in combination with other terms (including Elohim and Adonai). There is no reason or room to rehash those discussions. Aside from various insightful translations of YHWH into various languages (see below), what’s of interest in the context of this tool are official and semi-official statements regarding the translation by Bible translation agencies and churches. These include the 1992 statement by United Bible Societies’ “Names of God” Study Group (see The Bible Translator 1992, p. 403-407 ) or the “Letter to the Bishops’ Conference on ‘The Name of God'” by the Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Discriplina Sacramentorum of 2008 (see here et al.).
In summary, the UBS study group gives six different options on how to translate YHWH: 1) transliterate (some form of “Yahweh” or “Jehovah” if this is an already established term); 2) translate (along the lines of kurios — κύριος in the Septuagint); 3) translate the meaning of YHWH; 4) use a culture-specific name; 5) translate Elohim and YHWH in the same way; or 6) use a combination of any of these options.
The official Catholic directive states that for liturgical purposes YHWH is to be translated as an equivalent of Kurios (“Lord”) unless when appearing in combination with Elohim (“God”) or Adonai (“lord”), in which case it’s to be translated with “God.”
In the following collection of examples, any of the above-mentioned strategies are used.
Use of Typographical Means to Offset the Name of God
A large number of Bible translations in many Western European languages have used a similar strategy to translate YHWH as an equivalent of Kurios or Adonai (“lord” in Greek in Hebrew) but have used either small caps or all caps to denote these occurrences as an equivalent to a proper name. Here are some examples:
None of the European languages have found a “cultural-linguistic equivalent” with the possible exception of Eternal or l’Éternel (see below).
The rendering of the translation of YHWH in bold (and uppercase) characters is for instance used in Guhu-Samane: QOBEROBA (a term of address for a respected person and also connotes “forever”) (for “forever”, see below under Translations of the Name of God) and the upper-casing in Bible translations in several other languages in Papua New Guinea:
In Cebuano (Ang Pulong sa Dios edition, 2010) and Hiligaynon (all versions), Ginoo, a typographical variant of Ginoo (“Lord”) is used. Bible translation consultant Kermit Titrud (SIL): “‘Yahweh’ is too close to Yahwa, their word for ‘Satan.’ We were afraid that in the pulpits readers might misread ‘Yahweh’ and say ‘Yahwa.’ So we went with the tradition found in most English translations. Ginoo for ‘Yahweh’ and Ginoo for ‘adonai.'”
In languages where capitalization is not a typographical option, other options are available and used, such as in Japanese, where the generic term shu 主 for “Lord” is bolded in some translations to offset its meaning (Source: Omanson, p. 17).
In Pattani Malay, the word for “Lord” is underlined: ربي. (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
A graphical way of representation beyond typography was used by André Chouraqui in his French La Bible hebraique et le Nouveau Testament (publ. 1974-1977) for which he superimposed adonai and Elohim over (the French rendition) of the tetragrammaton:
(Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff.; see also tempt God / put God to the test)
Translations of the Name of God
A translation of YHWH with a rendering of the meaning of “Eternal” was done in English by James Moffatt (between 1926 and 1935) with Eternal, The Voice translation with Eternal One (2012), in French versions as L’ÉTERNEL by J. F. Ostervald in 1904 or l’Éternel by L. Segond (1910-1938, not in more recent revisions) and Zadoc Kahn (1964) (for the French translation, see also LORD of hosts), in Esperanto as “la Eternulo,” and in Obolo as Okumugwem: “The Ever-Living” (source: Enene Enene). In francophone Africa, translations of l’Éternel are widely used, due to the wide use of Segond’s early editions (see above). Examples include Nancere (Nandjéré) with Kumuekerteri, Ngambay (Ngambaï) with Njesigənea̰, Sar with Kɔ́ɔ̄ɓē, Mbay (Mbaï) with Bïraþe, Kim with Bage ɗiŋnedin, or Lélé uses Gojɛnɛkirɛkindiy (verbatim: “who remains for his eyes”). (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Similarly and at the same time expanding its meaning, the Nzima translation of 1998 translated YHWH as Ɛdεnkεma, the “Eternal All-Powerful Creator and Sustainer” (Source: David Ekem in The Bible Translator 2005, p. 72ff. ).
“Creator” is also used in Kazakh (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан]), Karakalpak (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан], sometimes in combination with Iyeg [Ийег] — “Master”), and Kirghiz (Zharatkhan [Жаратқан], likewise in combination with “Master” or Ege [Эге]). (Source: David Gray).
Nepali, Bengali, and Hindi are all derived from Sanskrit and have (eventually) all found similar translations of YHWH. In Bengali “God” is translated as Ishwar (ঈশ্বর) (widely used in Hindu scriptures, where it’s used as a title, usually associated with “Siva”) and YHWH as Shodaphrobhu (সদাপ্রভু) — “Eternal Lord”; in Nepali and NewariYHWH is translated as Paramaprabhu (परमप्रभु)– “Supreme Lord”; and Hindi translates YHWH as Phrabu (प्रभु) — “Lord.” In earlier translations all three languages used transliterations of Jehovah or Yahweh. (Source: B. Rai in The Bible Translator 1992, p. 443ff. and Barrick, p. 124).
The influential German Jewish translation of Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig (between 1925 and 1961) translates YHWH in Exodus 3:15 with “Ich bin da” (“I exist” or “I am”) and in all other instances with pronouns in small caps (Er, Ihm, Ihn, Ich — “he,” “him,” “his,” “I”).
The Jewish orthodox English ArtScroll Tanach translation (publ. 2011) uses Hashem or “The Name”
In the Bavarian translation by Sturmibund (publ. 1998), it is translated as Trechtein or “Sovereign, Lord.” “Trechtein” is related to the obsolete English “drighten.” (Source: Zetzsche)
In Ge’ez, Tigrinya, and Amharic it is translated with Igziabeher (እግዚአብሔር) or “Ruler/Lord of the Nations/Peoples.” In Ge’ez Igziabeher is used for “God” as well, whereas in Tigrinya and Amharic it is often, but not always used for “God.” In a recent revision by Biblica (see here ), an attempt was made to use Igziabeher exclusively for occurrences of the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew Bible, but after strong responses by the Christian community, a compromise was found by using Igziabeher in the first chapter of Genesis and changing it according to the Hebrew text elsewhere. (Source: Zetseat Fekadu)
Warlpiri uses Kaatu Jukurrarnu (Kaatu is a transcription of “God” and Jukurrarnu means “timelessness” and shares a root with jukurrpa — dreamings) (Source: Stephen Swartz, The Bible Translator 1985, p. 415ff. ).
The translation of YHWH into Weri with Aniak Tupup or “man of the holy house” intends “to maintain the Jewish practice of not uttering God’s name [with] the use of another vernacular phrase that signals that a ‘taboo’ name is being referred [which] could give a cue that would be recognizable in written or oral communication” (Source: P. King, The Bible Translator 2014, p. 195ff. ).
Aruamu translates it as Ikiavɨra Itir God or “Ever Present God” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Idakho-Isukha-Tiriki: Nyasaye Wuvunyali Muno or “God powerful great” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Ruund uses Chinawej, a term that is otherwise used as a response of approval. Anna Lerbak (in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 84ff. ) tells the genesis of this term (click or tap to see an explanation):
“The name ‘Jehovah’ had been used in some contexts, but I had the feeling that it did not mean much to the people, and when I asked the pastors they all said it didn’t, and worse, it very often confused people, especially in the villages. During the conversation it was suggested that the name Chinawej be used in the place of ‘Jehovah’, and this met with immediate approval. A few days later I was working on a Psalm in which ‘Jehovah’ was used frequently, so I wrote Chinawej in its place and then read the Psalm to them. The response was about like this: “That is it, now people will understand, that is how Chinawej is. The Jews call God ‘Jehovah’, we call Him Chinawej, it is the same God. but we know Him as Chinawej as the Jews know Him as ‘Jehovah’ “. They often call God Chinawej in prayer, it seems to indicate warmth and intimacy.
The same word is used in two other ways. It is the name of a snake which never attacks human beings. And it is used as a response of approval. When told of something they are pleased to hear, something they find good, just, helpful, generous, they often respond by saying, Chinawej. When they call God Chinawej, it indicates that they think of Him as One Who is good and just and generous towards them. When it was suggested at the committee that we use Chinawej in place of ‘Jehovah’ it was accepted immediately and unanimously.
Ebira has Eneyimavara. Eneyimavara was created by merging a praise phrase that was only used for the traditional deity Ohomorihi (see here), that had become the word for the Christian God: ene e yi ma vara or “the one that never changes.” “The translators came to the agreement that this praise name that describes the unchangeableness of God is very close in meaning to the probable meaning of YHWH.” (Source: David O Moomo in Scriptura 88 (2005), p. 151ff. )
The Uzbek Bible uses the term Ega (Эга) — “master, owner” in various forms (including Egam / Эгам for “my Owner” or Egamiz / Эгамиз for “our Owner.” (Click or tap to see an explanation):
Jim Zvara (2019, p. 6) explains: “The Uzbek term ega means owner or master (‘master,’ in the historical context of an owner-slave relationship). By extension, it is natural for an Uzbek to speak to or refer to God as Egam (‘my owner’/’master’). In the Uzbek context to be God’s slave is a positive way of understanding one’s relation to him. It suggests that one is in a dependent and obedient relationship to God. The team felt that this relational connection and what it implies fits well with the concept of YHWH as the God who is in a covenant relationship with his people. In the Uzbek context, the choice of Ega was deemed to be the best balance of natural language with meaningful translation.”
The Seediq Bible translation team chose Utux Tmninun (“the weaving god”) for their translation of YHWH. (Click or tap to see a retelling of the process of how that decision was reached):
“(…) The Seediq team requested that we spend time with them on key terms. They had compiled a list of key terms that they wanted input on, and we went through the list item by item. The most important item was how to deal with the divine name. They had tentatively translated it as Yehoba, transliterated from Jehovah, but they were also aware that this transliteration may not be accurate, and they were keen to explore other options.
“We explored various alternatives. Were they interested in following the ancient Jewish practice of substituting ‘Lord’ for the divine name? Would capitalising the letters help? Would they be bold enough to use ‘Yahweh,’ following the opinion of most Old Testament scholars who regard this as the correct pronunciation? Was it feasible to adopt a mixed approach in dealing with the divine name (…)? Each option had its advantages as well as disadvantages.
“In the midst of the discussion, a participant said, ‘Our ancestors, as well as we today, always call God by the term Utux Tmninun. I suggest we use this term.’ The term Utux Tmninun in the Seediq culture means ‘the weaving God.’ In their culture, God is the weaver, the one who weaves life together. All the participants were excited about this proposal. They tried this term with all the composite terms that involve the divine name, and it seemed to work well, so they decided tentatively to adopt this term. After the workshop, the participants went back to their villages and sought feedback from the wider community, and eventually they confirmed the use of the term Utux Tmninun as the rendering of the divine name.
Translating the divine name as Utux Tmninun, the weaving God, is a creative solution. This term is viewed very positively in the Seediq community. It also correlates well with the concept of God as the creator (Gen. 1-2) and as the weaver who formed our inward parts and knit us together in our mothers’ wombs (Ps. 139:13). It also has the advantage of portraying God beyond the traditional masculine form.
“Some may argue that since names are usually transliterated, we should do the same with YHWH, most likely pronounced ‘Yahweh.’ Unfortunately, due to the influence of Chinese Union Version for almost one hundred years now, Chinese Christians only know God as Yehehua. Attempts to change the term Yehehua to Yahweh have not been successful. This is a reality that the Seediq Christians have to live with.
“Others may argue on theological grounds that YHWH is not only the creator, but also the God of the covenant, hence any attempt to substitute another term for YHWH will not do justice to the Hebrew text. In the case of the Seediq translation, there are significant similarities between Utux Tmninun and YHWH, though the terms are not identical. This is a reality translators often have to struggle with. Exact correspondence is hard to come by. Often it is a matter of approximation, give and take. Besides theological considerations, one has to deal with the constraints of past traditions (‘Jehovah,’ in this instance), the biblical cultures and one’s own culture, and audience acceptance. Hopefully, by using Utux Tmninun for YHWH, the Seediq term will be transformed and take on the aspect of the covenant God as well.” (Source: Yu Suee Yan, The Bible Translator 2015, p. 316ff. )
Nyankore: Nyakubaho or “the one who is from within itself” (source: Bühlmann 1950, p. 146)
‘One local dialect of Carpathian Romani: Drágon Dél or “Beloved/Dear God.” In most Romani dialects, the word Rai (Lord/Boss/landlord/shopkeeper) is sort-of acceptable, but in one particular subgroup of Carpathian Romani they said it only meant shopkeeper and ‘everyone knows that [majority term for YHWH] means God, and why can’t we translate it that way?’ We tried to explain, but they weren’t keen on anything but Dél (‘God’). We eventually compromised with Drágon Dél, a common expression for YHWH, and Dél for Elohim, but it took quite a lot of convincing them that there was any theological point there.
For the interconessional translation into Chichewa (publ. 1999) the term Chauta (“Great-One-of-the-Bow”) was chosen for YHWH (Click or tap to see the detailed story):
“The name Chauta, literally ‘Great-One-of-the-Bow’, i.e. [is] either the rainbow (descriptively termed uta-wa-Leza ‘the-bow-of-God’) or, less likely, the hunter’s bow. And yet Chauta was also distinct from Mulungu [“God”] in that it has reference to the specific tribal deity of the Chewa people — the God who ‘owns’ yet also ‘belongs to’ them — and hence it carries additional positive emotive overtones. Although research indicated that in an ancient traditional setting, Chauta too was probably associated with the indigenous ancestral rain cult, in the Christian era it has been progressively generalized to encompass virtually all religious contexts in which God may be either appealed to, proclaimed, or praised. After prolonged deliberation, therefore, the translation committee determined Chauta to be the closest functional equivalent to YHWH of the Hebrew Scriptures. The choice of this name is not without its difficulties, however, and these were carefully considered by the Chewa committee. For example, the use of a more specific local term, as opposed to the generic Mulungu, carries a greater likelihood of bringing along with it certain senses, connotations, and situations that were (and no doubt still are) associated with the indigenous, pre-Christian system of worship. If these happened to remain strong in any contemporary sacred setting, then of course the dangers connected with conceptual syncretism might well arise. In the case of Chauta, however, it appeared that the process of positive Christian contextualization had already reached an advanced stage, that is, judging from the widespread use of this name in all aspects of religious life and practice. A more scholarly argument against Chauta takes the position that there is too great a female component associated with this term because it was traditionally applied (by figurative metonymy) to refer also to the ritual ‘wife of God’, i.e. the chief officiant at a traditional rain shrine and worship sanctuary. However, this usage seems to be quite remote, and most people questioned do not even recognize the connection anymore. Besides, in a matrilineal society such as the Chewa, it does not seem inappropriate to have this aspect of meaning lying in the background, particularly since it is not completely foreign to the notion of God in the Bible (cf. Ps. 36:7; 73:15; Isa. 49:14-15; Mt. 23:37). In terms of ‘connotative fit’ or emotive identification and appeal, there can be little doubt that the name Chauta is by far the closest natural equivalent to YHWH in the contemporary Chewa cultural and religious environment. This aspect of meaning was probably also utmost from the ancient Jewish perspective as well; in other words, “for them the associated meaning of this special name [YHWH], in terms of their history and culture, far outweighed any meaning it may have suggested because of its form or derivation”. To be sure, this ‘new’ divine name — that is, new as far as the Scriptures are concerned — may take some getting used to, especially in the formal setting of public worship. But this is not a foreign god whom we are talking about; rather, he is certainly by now regarded as the national deity of the Chewa nation. Chauta is the great God who for one reason or another ‘did not make himself known to them by his holy name, the LORD’ (Exod. 6:3), that is, in the prior translations of his Word into Chewa. He is, however, and always has been “a God who saves … the LORD (Chauta), our Lord, who rescues us from death” (Ps. 68:20, Good News Bible)!” (Source: Wendland 1998, 120f.; see also The Bible Translator 1992, 430ff. )
Transliteration of YHWH
A 12th century reading of the Masoretic vowel points around יהוה (יְהֹוָה) was interpreted to be pronounced as Yehowah from which Iehouah and Jehovah were derived. This was reflected in the English versions of Tyndale (publ. 1530) and the Geneva Bible (significantly based on Tyndale and publ. in 1560) and again the King James Version (Authorized Version) (publ. 1611) which all used Iehouah or Jehovah in 7 different verses in the Old Testament. The translators and editors of the American Standard Version (publ. 1901), a review of the King James Version used Jehovah for all appearances of the tetragrammaton something that the Spanish Reina-Valera (publ. 1602) had already done as well.
In English versions, Yahweh as a transliteration of the tetragrammaton is used by the Catholic Jerusalem Bible (publ. 1966), the Protestant Holman Christian Standard Bible (publ. 2004) and the Legacy Standard Bible (publ. 2021). The Catholic translation by Knox (publ. 1949) occasionally uses Javé, “to make it a Latin name, to match all the other names in the Old Testament.” (Source Knox 1949, p. 80)
Mandinka for instance uses Yawe for YHWH. “The use of Yawe for YHWH is good and may be a trendsetter in this part of Africa.” (Source: Rob Koops)
In a group of related languages in another part of Africa an interesting development from a transliteration to a indigenous translation can be shown: In the Nandi Bible (1938) Jehovah was used as a translation for YHWH. Kamuktaindet (“The Powerful One”) was used as a translation for Elohim (“God”). This was taken over by a translation into the macrolanguage Kalenjin (1969) (intended to include the closely related Keiyo, Kipsigis, Markweeta, Nandi, Okiek, Sabaot, Terik, and Tugen). Sabaot, Markweeta, Tugen and Okiek later wanted there own translations. Both Sabaot and Markweeta use the indigenous word for “Creator” (Yēyiin in Sabaot and Iriin in Markweeta) to translate Elohim and YHWH of the Old Testament and Theos of the New Testament. The Kalenjin Bible has recently been revised to cater to Keiyo, Kipsigis, Nandi and Terik, and this revision has completely dropped Jehovah in favour of Kamuktaindet. (Source: Iver Larsen)
Early translations into Gilbertese faced a problem when transliterating “Jehovah” (a form of “Jehovah” was first used in Spanish Bible translations in 1569 and 1602): “There are only thirteen letters in the Kiribati alphabet: A, E, I, O, U, M, N, NG, B, K, R, T (pronounced [s] when followed by ‘i’), W For instance, ‘Jehovah’ is rendered Iehova, but Kiribati speakers can only pronounce it as ‘Iowa,’ since the phonemes [h] and [v] do not exist in Kiribati.” (source: Joseph Hong, The Bible Translator 1994, p. 329ff. .)
In a recent edition of a Thai translation (Thai Standard Version, publ. 2011) a combination of translation and transliteration is used: phra’ ya(h)we (h) (พระยาห์เวห์) (“Divine Yawe”). (Source: Stephen Pattemore)
In Nyarafolo Senoufo the transliteration is Yewe which also means “the being one” or “he that is.” David DeGraaf (in: Notes on Translation 3/1999, p. 34ff.) explains: “Since it is widely recognized that the vowels of the name are uncertain, another possible transliteration is Yewe. This proposal is in accord with the Nyarafolo rules of vowel harmony and is thus open to being understood as a normal nominalization in the language. Second, Yewe is exactly the word that would be formed by nominalizing the verb ‘to be’ in the class that includes sentient beings. Thus, Yewe can be understood as ‘the being one’ or ‘he that is’. This solution accords well with YHWH’s self-revelation to Moses in Exodus 3:14, ‘I am who I am.'”
In the Literary and Mandarin Chinese (Protestant) tradition the transliteration of “Jehovah” is historically deeply rooted, even though there are also some historical burdens (Click or tap to see more details):
“YHWH” is rendered in the Chinese Union Version — the most widely used Bible translation in China—as well as most other Chinese Bible translations as yehehua 耶和華. According to Chinese naming conventions, yehehua could be interpreted as Ye Hehua, in which Ye would be the family name and Hehua — “harmonic and radiant” — the given name. In the same manner, Ye would be the family name of Jesus (transliterated as yesu 耶穌) and Su would be the given name. Because in China the children inherit the family name from the father, the sonship of Jesus to God the Father, yehehua, would be illustrated through this. Though this line of argumentation sounds theologically unsound, it is indeed used effectively in the Chinese church.” (see Wright 1953, p. 298, see also Jesus).
“Ye 耶, an interrogative particle in classical Chinese, is part of the same phonetic series as ye 爺, which gives it a certain exchangeability. Ye 爺 carries the meaning “father” or is used as an honorable form of address. The choice of the first Bible translators to use the transliteration yehehua 爺火華 for Jehovah had a remarkable and sobering influence on the history of the 19th century in China by possibly helping to shape the fatal Taiping ideology, a rebellion that ended up costing an estimated 20 million lives.
“The founder of the Taiping rebellion, Hong Xiuquan, was given a tract (…) [that he used to] interpret a nervous breakdown he had had in 1837 as his “call” to be the “Messiah.” This “vision” that Hong experienced is likely to have had a direct correlation with the name of “God” in that tract. Shen yehuohua 神爺火華 (directly translated: ‘God (or: spirit); old man (or: father); fire; bright)” was the term that was used in that tract for ‘God Jehovah,’ but this was not indicated as a (in its second part) transliteration of a proper name. In his vision, Hong saw ‘a man venerable in years (corresponding with ye), with golden (corresponding with huo and hua) beard and dressed in a black robe,’ an image likely to have been inspired by a direct translation from that name for ‘God,’ especially as it appeared at the beginning of the tract. That this term was considered to be a term of some relevance to the Taiping ideology is demonstrated by the fact that both yehuohua 爺火華 as the personal name of God and ye 爺 as “God the Father” later appeared in Taiping writings.” (Source: Zetzsche in Malek 2002, p. 141ff.)
In American Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines the letter Y and a sign that points up and is similar to the sign for “God.” (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“YHWH” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
In British Sign Language is is translated with a sign that combines the signs for “God” and “name” and the finger-spelling of Y-H-W-H. (Source: Anna Smith)
“YHWH” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
Japanese Sign Language combines the sign for “Lord” with “exist” to make a name sign that technically means “the existent one,” but is close enough to “Lord” that it isn’t too jarring for people in the church who expect to see “Lord” in certain contexts (source: Mark Penner). For a Japanese Sign Language explanation, see here.
“YHWH” in Japanese Sign Language, source: 日本手話訳聖書を
For further reading on the translation of YHWH, see Rosin 1956, p. 89-125 and Andy Warren-Rothlin in Noss / Houser, p. 618ff.
A natural Chichewa cultural substitute for the Hebrew oath and curse formula, “May the Lord do so to me and more,” is “May lightning (i.e., viewed as being sent by God) tear me!” But this expression may convey negative (“heathen”) overtones as far as the Christian constituency is concerned, thus making it unacceptable for use in the Scriptures. Ruth’s expressed desire that she be buried at the home of her husband’s relatives is a very significant pledge of loyalty also from a Chewa point of view, for normally (unless too great a distance is involved) a man, or woman, will be taken back to his (her) own village for burial. Ruth’s promise that even death will not be able to separate her from Naomi corresponds to the Chewa/Tonga socio-religious belief that the grave is no barrier to interpersonal relation-ships, whether good or bad, for one’s community includes the society of ancestral spirits.
Following are a number of back-translations of Ruth 1:15-1:17:
Noongar: “Naomi said to Ruth, ‘Look! Your sister-in-law is returning to her family and her gods. Return with her.’ But Ruth said, ‘Don’t tell me to leave you or go away from you. Where you go, I will go; where you stay, I will stay; your people will be my people and your God will be my God. Where you die, I will die –- there they will bury me. May God strike me if I leave you before I die.'” (Source: Bardip Ruth-Ang 2020)
Eastern Bru: “So Naomi said to Ruth: ‘Here! Your sister has returned to the home of her mother and father, and she has returned to worship the gods of her country. Now you do like that also. You follow your sister.’But Ruth answered: ‘Please don’t drive me away. I want to go with you. Whatever place you go, I will go to that place also. Whatever place you live, I will live in that place also. Your family will be like my family also. Your God will be as my God also. Whatever place you die, I want to die in that place also. Whatever place they bury you, I want them to bury me in that place also. If we are still living but I leave you, I ask that God will give me heavy punishment and kill me.’” (Source: Bru Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “Noemi said, ‘Look, your(sg) sister-in-law is now there-(distant), she has- now -returned to her fellow-countrymen and to her god, so you(pl) go with her.’ But Ruth replied, ‘Do- not -force me to leave you(sg), for wherever you(sg) go I will-go there too, and wherever you(sg) live I will-live there too. Your(sg) countrymen will-become my fellow-countrymen too, and your(sg) God will-become my God too. Where you(sg) will-die, there I will-die too and there also be-buried. May the LORD punish me very severely if I will-separate from you(sg), unless I will- now -die.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “Naomi said to her, ‘Look! Your sister-in-law is going back to her relatives and to her gods! Go back with her!’ But Ruth replied, ‘No! Don’t urge me to leave you! I want to go with you. Where you go, I will go. Where you stay, I will stay. Your relatives will be my relatives, and the God you worship will be the God I worship. Where you die, I will die. Where you are buried, I will be buried. May Yahweh punish me severely if I separate from you. I will be separated from you only when one of us dies.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
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 Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the choice of a benefactive construction as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017.
Here, basshite (罰して) or “punish” is used in combination with kudasaru (くださる), a respectful form of the benefactive kureru (くれる). A benefactive reflects the good will of the giver or the gratitude of a recipient of the favor. To convey this connotation, English translation needs to employ a phrase such as “for me (my sake)” or “for you (your sake).” (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
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 Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme are (され) is 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, shin-are-ru (死なれる) or “die” is used.
Verses 16 and 17 have a poetic structure. Verse 16 consists of three lines with a meter of 3 + 2, 3 + 3, and 2 + 2. Verse 17 consists also of three lines with a meter of 3 + 2, 3 + 2, and 3 + 2. See P. Humbert, “Art et leçon de l’histoire de Ruth,” Revue Théologique et Philologique 26 (1938), pages 257-286. If one can reproduce the poetic effect of this passage, it is important to do so. However, the context itself does not provide the basis for what one so frequently finds in poetry, namely, figurative expressions in a very condensed formal structure. Rather, what is characteristic of this passage is the parallelism, so typical of most Hebrew poetry. Therefore, what one should attempt in rendering this passage is a kind of dignified prose which will emphasize the parallelism and provide a rhythmic effect.
Though this passage does focus upon Ruth’s loyalty to Naomi, it goes much further in that it constitutes a declaration of Ruth’s allegiance to the Jewish community, since she identifies herself with the people and the God of Naomi. The Targum even inserts here a short proselyte catechism. Some ancient versions lay more stress upon the declaration in using explicitly emphatic pronouns (Septuagint, Targum: “where you go yourself”; Syriac: “there I will be buried, I also”) and emphatic locatives (some Septuagint manuscripts: “I will lodge there”). Furthermore, she concludes this statement of identification with an oath in which she calls upon the LORD to punish her if she in any way violates her pledge of loyalty.
Rather than the simple verb “said,” as in Hebrew, it may be useful to employ at the beginning of verse 16 a term meaning answered, which will indicate that Ruth is now responding to what Naomi has just said to her.
The Hebrew term here translated ask often means “to meet” or “to encounter,” but in this context it has the specific meaning of “to encounter with a request.” See Brown-Driver-Briggs, s.v. phagaʿ. To an extent the English verb ask is a rather weak equivalent for the Hebrew term. Expressions such as “do not urge me” or “do not beseech me” would probably be closer equivalents.
The Hebrew text has two verbs, “leave” and “return,” both dependent on an introductory verb often translated “entreat,” so that a traditional translation is “do not entreat me to leave you or to return from following you.” In Good News Translation this structure is divided into two clauses, one with a negative command and the other with a positive request: Don’t ask me to leave you! Let me go with you.
In a number of languages Wherever you go or wherever you live must be expressed as a type of condition; for example, “If you go some place, I will go there; and if you live some place, I will live there.” In still other languages a paratactic construction is sometimes employed; for example, “You will go some place, then I will go there too; you will go to live some place, then I will go and live there too.”
For a treatment of the possessive pronoun with terms for people and God, see the comments on verse 15. The very emphatic form of this declaration may require the use of certain adverbial attributives such as “certainly,” “surely,” “indeed,” etc.; for example, “your people will certainly be my people.”
The clause that is where I will be buried probably does not seem too important to the average modern reader, but to people in many cultures, this is one of the most important expressions in the entire declaration of Ruth. For the sake of some special advantage people may be willing to go and live among another tribe or people, but they almost always want to be buried in their homeland. Hence, it is this final statement of Ruth’s which confirms her lasting loyalty. In some languages it is difficult to have a passive expression will be buried. Therefore an indefinite active expression may sometimes be employed: “they will bury me,” or even “your people will bury me.” Sometimes this concept may be expressed euphemistically: “there my body will remain.”
The last sentence of verse 17 consists of an oath and curse formula. In Hebrew it is literally “may the LORD do so to me and more also,” a formula found in the Old Testament twelve times, once here and eleven times in the books of Samuel and Kings (1 Sam 3.17; 14.44; 20.13; 25.22; 2 Sam 3.9, 35; 19.13; 1 Kgs 2.23; 2 Kgs 6.31). A plural form of the verbs occurs in 1 Kings 19.2 and 20.10. In this formula the expression translated so is a substitute for a curse which would normally be pronounced to indicate the nature of the punishment; for example, sickness, loss of wealth, death. So Joüon, par. 165, note 3. It is rare that in a receptor language one can use such an indefinite reference to the nature of the curse or punishment; and therefore in Good News Translation a somewhat general statement is employed: May the LORD’s worst punishment come upon me. Or one may follow Moffatt’s translation: “May the Eternal kill me….” New English Bible does not employ the curse formula, but it does indicate that an oath is involved: “I swear a solemn oath before the LORD your God.” Many languages have set formulas for such vows and curses; for example, “May the lightning [viewed as being sent by God] tear me!” So the Chewa oath; E. Wendland, The Cultural Factor in Bible Translation (London-New York-Stuttgart: UBS, 1987), page 170. “May the anger of the LORD be upon me” or “May the curses come upon my head.” Compare the Latin equivalent found in Livy (i, 24, ad fin.) and quoted by J. A. Montgomery and H. Snyder Gehman, The Books of Kings, Edinburgh, 1951, page 100: Tu, illo die, Iupiter, populum sic ferito, ut ego hunc porcum hic hodie feriam; tantoque magis ferito quanto magis potes pollesque. See also J. Pedersen, Der Eid bei den Semiten, 1914. Whether or not one wishes to retain a literal translation of the Hebrew in a marginal note depends upon the extent to which an adaptation of this formula is required in the receptor language.
If I let anything but death represents a Hebrew expression which may be translated literally as “if even death,” but it is usually better to translate as “nothing but death will separate” or “only death will divide us.” See Gerleman, ad loc.; Brown-Driver-Briggs, s.v. ki 1c. The deictic particle has asseverative force. In some languages, however, it is impossible to speak of death as the agent of an activity such as separating or dividing. In fact, in many languages there is no noun for death, only the verb “to die.” Hence this last clause may be translated as “if I leave you except when I die” or “if I leave you; only when I die will I leave you.”
Quoted with permission from de Waard, Jan and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Ruth. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1978, 1992. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.