The term that is translated as “lamb” in English is typically translated as “offspring of a sheep” in Ixcatlán Mazatec since there is no specific word for “lamb.” Since this could distract readers with thoughts of God being the sheep when the “lamb” refers to Jesus the translation into Ixcatlán Mazatec chose “little (individual) sheep” for those cases. (Source: Robert Bascom)
In Dëne Súline the native term for “lamb” directly translated as “the young one of an evil little caribou.” To avoid the negative connotation, a loan word from the neighboring South Slavey was used. (Source: NCEM, p. 70)
For the Kasua translation, it took a long process to find the right term. Rachel Greco (in The PNG Experience ) tells this story:
“To the Kasua people of Western Province, every four-legged animal is a pig. They call a horse a pig-horse, a cow, a pig-cow, and a sheep, a pig-sheep, because all of these animals have four legs, which is kopolo, or pig, in their language.
“When the translation team would translate the word, ‘sheep’ in the New Testament, they would translate it as ‘pig-sheep’. So when Jesus is referred to as the ‘Lamb,’ (John 1:29; Rev. 12:11; Rev. 17:14), they translated as ‘pig-sheep’ so that in John 1:29 it would read: ‘Behold, the pig-sheep of God.’
“When some members of the translation team attended the Translators Training Course, they had the opportunity to observe and study sheep for the first time. As they watched and learned more about the animals’ behavior, their understanding of these creatures—and God’s Word—rotated on its axis.
“Once during the course, Logan and Konni — the translation team’s helpers — were driving with the team to a Bible dedication when Amos, one of the team members, said passionately, ‘We can’t use the word kopolo in front of the word, ‘sheep’! Pigs know when they’re about to die and squeal and scream.’ The team had often watched villagers tie up pigs so they wouldn’t escape.
“’But,’ Amos said, ‘Jesus didn’t do that.’ The team had learned that sheep are quiet and still when death walks toward them. They had observed, as they translated the New Testament, the words of Isaiah 53 fulfilled: ‘Like a lamb led to the slaughter, he did not open his mouth.’ And now they understood what it meant. For this reason, the team decided not to put pig-sheep in the New Testament for the word ‘sheep,’ but used sheep-animal or, in their language, a:pele sipi.
“The Kasua translation team also chose to discard the word ‘pig’ before sheep because pigs are unclean animals to the Jews. The team knew that Jesus was called the ‘Lamb of God’ in the New Testament to show that he is unblemished and clean. Hopefully the Lord will open up the Kasua villagers’ eyes to these same truths about Jesus as they read of Him in their own language.”
The Hebrew, Greek, and Latin that is translated in English as “wolf” is translated in Muna as da’u ngkahoku: “forest dog,” because there is no immediate lexical equivalent. (Source: René van den Berg)
In Asháninka, it is translated as “ferocious animal,” in Waffa and Kui as “wild dog,” and in Navajo (Dinė) as “Coyote” (source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125), and in Odia as “tiger” (source for this and for Kui: Helen Evans in The Bible Translator 1954, p. 40ff. )
In Lingala it is translated as “leopard.” Sigurd F. Westberg (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 117ff. ) explains: “The wolf, for example, does not exist here, but its relative the jackal does and we have a name for it. But the jackal does not prey on domestic animals as the wolf did in Palestine, nor is he as fierce. The equivalent from these points of view is the leopard. Hence in Genesis 49 Benjamin is likened to a ravenous leopard, and the basic meaning is approached more closely than if we had been governed by scientific classification.”
Mungaka also uses “leopard” (see also bear (animal)) (source: Nama 1990). Likewise in Klao and Dan (source: Don Slager).
In Elhomwe “fierce animal” is used. (Source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Michel Kenmogne comments on this and comparable translations (in Noss 2007, p. 378 ff.): “Some exegetical solutions adopted by missionary translations may have been acceptable during that time frame, but weighed against today’s translation theory and procedures, they appear quite outdated and even questionable. For example, Atangana Nama approvingly mentions the translation into Mungaka of terms like ‘deer’ as ‘leopard’, ‘camel’ as ‘elephant’, and ‘wheat’ as ‘maize,’ where the target language has no direct equivalent to the source text. These pre-Nida translation options, now known as adaptations, would be declared unacceptable in modern practice, since they misrepresent the historico-zoological and agricultural realities in the Bible. Nowadays it is considered better to give a generalized term, like ‘grain,’ and where necessary specify ‘a grain called wheat,’ than to give an incorrect equivalence. Unknown animals such as bears, can be called ‘fierce animals,’ especially if the reference is a non-historical context.”
Click or tap here for the rest of the entry about “wolf” in United Bible Societies’ All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible.
There is no problem in identifying the Hebrew word with the Wolf Canis lupus, which was a common wild animal all over the land of Israel in the biblical period. Today it is almost extinct in Israel, but small numbers still exist in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. The Greek and Latin words are general words for the wolf, including European species as well as the Syrian one.
The wolf is the ancestor of the German shepherd dog, and all similar breeds. The Syrian wolf, however, unlike the European and North American breeds, does not have long thick fur. It is a light brown color with a typical long face, and it is about the size of the German shepherd dog. It looks similar to the jackal, but is much bigger. This type of wolf lived singly, in pairs, or occasionally in a small family group of three or four animals; but sometimes, when prey was scarce, neighboring wolves would come together temporarily to hunt in cooperation with each other. The varieties in North America and Europe, on the other hand, come together in packs in the winter and stay together until well into the spring.
In biblical times the Syrian wolf took hares, small gazelle, and partridges as its main prey, but it was also a constant threat to sheep and goats. Only extremely rarely would it attack a human being. It was nowhere near as dangerous to humans as the lion or the bear. On the other hand, the Syrian wolf was not afraid of humans, and once it had killed a sheep, it would fiercely protect its kill. A group of men was required if it was to be chased away. It was extremely clever at avoiding traps that had been set for it. It hunted at night and located other wolves early in the evening by howling loudly.
These wolves did not stay in one area but roamed constantly. Shepherds could thus never be confident that there were no wolves nearby. They could appear unexpectedly at any time, even in the villages where they were often mistaken for dogs.
To the biblical writers the wolf was a symbol of roaming, opportunistic, dangerous, fierce, and clever banditry. To refer to a person as a wolf would in some contexts indicate that he was a roaming, clever bandit, and in other contexts that he was a clever, dangerous opportunist. This latter usage usually referred to someone using a position of leadership for his own benefit at the expense of other people.
In Africa there are no wolves, but the Spotted Hyena Crocula crocuta, the Brown Hyena Hyaena brunnea, or the African Painted Hunting Dog Lycaon pictus are the local equivalents used in many translations. A problem with using these terms for the Syrian wolf is that these African animals may have a symbolic significance for the local readers which is very different from that intended by the biblical writers. For instance, the spotted hyena is associated with witchcraft in some societies. In cases where the local significance is sufficiently different, a footnote should be used to provide a guide to the readers.
In Argentina and Brazil the beautiful Maned Wolf Chrysocyon jubatus is a good local equivalent, or the Portuguese or Spanish words for wolf can be used. The coyote is another possible equivalent.
In India and in Central and Southeast Asia, the Indian (or red) wild dog, also known as the Dhole Cuon alpinus, is likewise a good local equivalent for the wolf.
In areas where there are no animals equivalent to wolves, a phrase like “large wild dog” can be used, or a word may be borrowed from the dominant language of the area.
Tzotzil: “[people who] are zealously doing what they think is God’s word”
Mezquital Otomi: “[people who] very much believe what they have been taught about God” (source for this and five above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Chichewa interconfessional translation, publ. 1999: “[people who] love God” (source: Wendland 1998, p. 90)
Uma: “[people who] submit to Lord God” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “very religious” (source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “[people who] are faithful in carrying out the commands of God” (source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “[people who] are serving God” (source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “[people who] are indeed devout-worshipers of God” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Bariai: “[people who] respect God” (source: Bariai Back Translation)
Kupsabiny: “[people who] have dedicated themselves to God” (source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
German: “God-fearing” (gottesfürchtig) or “pious” (fromm)
Low German translation by Johannes Jessen, publ. 1933, republ. 2006: “[people who] take their faith very seriously” (source for this and above: Zetzsche)
HausaCommon Language Bible: “owners of worshiping God” (source: Hausa Common Language Bible Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “godly” (source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
Before the time of Abraham at least five breeds of sheep had already been developed in Mesopotamia. From mummified remains (that is, preserved dead bodies) and ancient art it is also known that at least two different breeds had reached Egypt by about 2000 B.C. Thus it is likely that the sheep mentioned in the Bible were of more than one breed.
The Hebrew word kar seems to be used of imported foreign sheep and may refer to a special breed but some scholars think it refers to a wether (castrated ram), since this word is never used in the context of sacrifice. This word is also used for a battering ram, that is, a heavy pole suspended on a rope, used in war for breaking down walls. ’Ayil is the word for a ram or adult male sheep, rachel is a breeding ewe or female sheep, and taleh is a very young lamb, probably still unweaned. The remaining Hebrew words refer to sheep in general.
The Greek word probaton is the general word for sheep, or flocks that may include goats. Krios is the Greek word for a ram or male sheep. Pascha is a technical name for the Passover lamb exclusively, and the remaining Greek words all mean lamb. Ovis is the Latin word for sheep.
Click or tap here for the rest of this entry in United Bible Societies’ All Creatures Great and Small: Living things in the Bible.
The early Hebrews were nomadic shepherds to whom sheep were the most important domestic animal. While goats eat almost any vegetation, sheep are much more selective about the grasses and plants they eat. This meant that suitable grazing for them was not always easy to find, and shepherds had to keep moving their flocks from place to place. This led to a nomadic lifestyle, with movable tents rather than houses being the normal household shelter. It was not until the occupation of Canaan after the Exodus that the lifestyle of the Israelites changed, and they became settled village-dwelling farmers and fruit growers.
However, even then, most households owned sheep, and some family members would function as shepherds, often living away from home for fairly long periods.
Sheep in the Bible were a source of meat, milk, wool, hides, and horns, and it seems likely that various strains were bred selectively to enhance production of these commodities. Wool is mentioned in the Bible as early as the Mosaic Law, which forbade the weaving of cloth containing both wool and plant fibers. The shearing of sheep is mentioned even earlier, in Genesis 31:19. Wool was in fact the most common and available fiber known to the people of Israel.
There was a very extensive wool trade in biblical times, stretching from Egypt to China. In the Middle East wool was cheaper than cotton or linen, which were the other common fibers. (Silk was known by the time of Solomon, but it was extremely expensive as it was produced in China and handled by numerous traders on its way west.) It would be a mistake to think of all wool at that time as being white, as Genesis 30 indicates quite clearly that there were also dark colored sheep and sheep that had dark and light patches, probably varying combinations of black, white, and brown.
We can be fairly sure that one breed of sheep known to the Israelites was the Fat-tailed Sheep Ovis laticaudata and that its fatty tail is referred to in Exodus 29:22, Leviticus 3:9 et al.
Rams’ horns had a variety of uses. Whole ram horns were used as drinking vessels, jars, and trumpets. But pieces of horn were used as handles for knives and other household implements, and for jewelry such as bracelets and beads. Needles too, and probably also arrow heads, were made from horn, as well as from bone and later from bronze and iron.
Sheep were also very important in Israelite religion. They were a very important element in the sacrificial system and in the traditional religious feasts, especially the Feast of Passover.
Sheep and goats belong to the same general family. They differ in that sheep produce wool, which is a special type of soft hair, among the ordinary hairs on their bodies. A ram’s horns too differ in shape from a goat’s horns, those of a ram curling down in a tight spiral beside its face, with those of a goat curving more gently back towards its shoulders. The sheep of biblical times produced much shorter wool than is common with wool-bearing breeds of today.
The fat-tailed or broad-tailed sheep is a smallish breed usually brown and white with a very broad tail. Like most other breeds of sheep in the Middle East it has large floppy ears.
Sheep are generally fairly timid animals, lacking the self-confidence and adaptability of goats. While goats will spread out in their search for food and then regroup without much difficulty, sheep become very insecure when they are separated from other sheep and tend to stay bunched together. They thus require a lot of shepherding. In the Middle East the method of shepherding involves training the dominant ram to follow the shepherd. The remaining sheep then follow this dominant ram, which often wears a wooden clapper or a bell. As they feed, the sheep usually keep within earshot of this sound. It is likely that this method is centuries old.
In most modern breeds only male sheep have horns, but in most ancient breeds female sheep had short horns too. This made separating sheep from goats in a single flock more difficult than it is today.
Of all animals the sheep was the most important for the Israelite nation. It had great religious, social, and economic importance.
The metaphor of a lamb is used in the New Testament to refer to Christ, with an emphasis on his being a sacrifice for the sin of the world. This is especially the case in John’s gospel and Revelation. In the latter book the metaphor is introduced in a very striking way. In Revelation 5:5 as the writer is mourning the fact that no one can be found to open the scroll, he is comforted by one of the elders who tells him that “the Lion of the tribe of Judah” has triumphed and can thus open the scroll. Then the writer, expecting to see the Lion, sees instead a Lamb that looks as if it has been killed for sacrifice. The remainder of the book is then concerned with describing the triumph of this Lamb over the forces of evil.
In the gospels Jesus also refers to his disciples as “sheep” and “lambs” (Matthew 10:17; John 10:1 et al.).
The metaphor of the shepherd is extended to God himself who is the ultimate “Shepherd of Israel” (Psalms 23:1; 80:1). Then those who are responsible for the nurture, guidance, ruling, and protection of Israel, be it kings, prophets, or priests, are also likened to shepherds (Isaiah 56:11; Jeremiah 23:4; 49:19; Ezekiel 34:2; Zechariah 10:2).
The Messiah is also called a shepherd (Isaiah 40:11), and Jesus refers to himself as “the good shepherd” (John 10:11). In Hebrews 13:20 he is referred to as “the great shepherd of the sheep” and in 1 Peter 2:25 he is called “the Shepherd and Guardian of your lives”.
In languages that have a word for sheep, it is advisable to translate according to the meanings given above. If possible, the feminine forms should be translated as “female lamb” or “female sheep”. In languages in which sheep are not known, a word has usually been coined or borrowed by the time Bible translation begins, and this word should be used. It is not advisable to substitute another locally well-known animal in this case, since doing so negates the ritual and symbolic importance that sheep had for the biblical cultures.
In translating Psalms 23:1 it is extremely important to make sure that the phrase “my shepherd” preserves the relationship intended by the writer and reflects the psalmist’s theme that Yahweh is his benefactor, protector, and guide. There are really two metaphors involved in the opening verse-the caring shepherd (God) and by clear implication, the dependent sheep (the psalmist). In many languages the literal phrase “my shepherd” depicts a wrong relationship, meaning something like “the one who looks after my sheep” or “the one I employ to watch my sheep.” In many African languages unwary translators have produced a rendering that means “The Chief is (nothing more than) my herdsman.” It is often necessary to restructure the whole verse as something like “I am a sheep, and the lord is my shepherd.”
What fellowship has a wolf with a lamb? No more has a sinner with a godly man: The word for fellowship is a verb in Greek, and it is the same verb translated “associate[s]” in verses 1 and 2 (twice in verse 2). Many societies are familiar with the wolf. But where it is unknown, translators may say “wild dog” or even “jackal.” New Revised Standard Version has a good translation for the first line here: “What does a wolf have in common with a lamb?” This is of course a rhetorical question, and can be expressed as a statement; for example, “A wolf has nothing in common with a lamb” or “Wolves have nothing in common with lambs.” The full sense of this verse is “What do wolves and lambs have in common? Nothing. That’s what sinners have in common with devout people—nothing.” Good News Translation takes the two lines and makes them into a single statement. We may also combine the lines as follows:
• Sinners and people who revere God are as different as wolves and lambs.
In cultures where wolves and lambs are unknown, we may say:
• Sinners and people who revere God are as different as wild animals and tame animals.
Quoted with permission from Bullard, Roger A. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Sirach. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2008. For this and other handbooks for translators see here.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.