Teutila Cuicatec: “God who has a great rule” (source for this and above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
Sa’a: “God, the Surpassing One” (source: Carl Gross)
Elhomwe: Mulluku Muullupalli or “God the Great” (source: project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Chichewa: Wammwambamwamba: A name of God. While this word is difficult to translate into English, its sense implies that God is highly above everything in his power and greatness. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero 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. Other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are Twents as well as 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. ).
He searches out the abyss, and the hearts of men: The abyss refers to the oceans believed to be underneath the earth (see Gen 7.11; see also the comments on 1.3; 16.18; 24.5), but “the oceans” (Good News Translation) expresses the idea adequately. An even clearer rendering may be “the deep parts of the oceans.” In Greek the hearts of men is simply “the heart.” Revised Standard Version adds of men to clarify the Greek. For the Hebrews the “heart” was the center of thinking, but for many cultures it is the mind. If so, the hearts of men should be rendered “the minds of people.”
And considers their crafty desires: Revised Standard Version misses the point with crafty. The idea is that there are depths of the human heart that are as complicated and hard to discern as the depths of the ocean. Good News Translation “he knows the secrets of both” expresses the idea. New Revised Standard Version is a bit better with “he understands their innermost secrets.”
For the Most High knows all that may be known: The Most High refers to God in his majesty, not to his size or height (see 4.10).
And he looks into the signs of the age: Instead of the plural signs, the Greek text has the singular “sign.” Both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation use the plural here to express the sense of the Greek better in English. However, the Greek is almost certainly a misreading of the Hebrew, which makes better sense. We would suggest that translators follow the Hebrew, which reads “and he sees what is to come forever.” New Revised Standard Version expresses it by saying “he sees from of old the things that are to come.” The last two lines could be translated “The Most High knows everything that can be known, even things that have not yet happened.”
It is possible to reorder the clauses of this verse as follows:
• The Lord Most High knows everything that can be known,
even things that have not yet happened. *
He knows everything from the secret depths of the ocean
to the secret thoughts of the human heart.
* Hebrew even … happened; Greek and understands the sign of the age.
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.