The half-hearted attitude of Simon gains liveliness in the Balinese translation by the change of vocabulary. When he addresses Jesus the Master, he naturally uses deferential terms. In his reflection, however, he speaks “within himself” about Jesus and does not use the deferential terminology. In this way he reveals what he really thinks of his quest.
Source: J.L. Swellengrebel in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 124ff.
In Greek and in European languages such as Dutch and English the third person pronoun does not present much difficulty. In Balinese the situation becomes more complicated, for one has at least four pronouns for the third person: two to indicate important and very important persons {dané and ida), one to speak of a person of lower standing but in a familiar manner, and one to speak of such a person in a polite manner (ia and ipun). Dané, the pronoun of the slightly less important person of the third caste, is also in use for people of lower caste who through their official position, age, or ability have a right to be respected or with whom one is trying to ingratiate oneself. (…)
These differences in the third person pronouns sometimes make it difficult to translate the plural “they.” [So the Greek what is translated as] “When they were come down from the hill” [in English] must be translated: “When He (ida) came down, followed by His disciples.”
Source: J.L. Swellengrebel in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 124ff.
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”).
“In Gal. 2:14 Paul quotes himself as speaking to Peter. If the quotation continues into v. 15, then the ‘We ourselves, who are Jews by birth’ [in English translation] would be translated as inclusive. More likely, however, the quotation ends with v. 14, the focus of attention then shifting to the Galatians, and so it would be exclusive we.”
Source: Velma B. Pickett in The Bible Translator 1964, p. 88f.
Nida (p. 205) also speaks of the problem of this specific verse:
“In Galatians 2:15 there is a troublesome passage for which the selection of an inclusive or exclusive form is highly debatable. The preceding sentence is obviously a part of direct discourse; but what are we to understand by the words “we ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners”? Is Paul here continuing to represent what he said in Antioch in opposition to Peter, or is he merely arguing a general position with the Galatian church audience to whom he is writing? If one assumes that Paul is still addressing the assembly in Antioch, and Peter in particular, then the inclusive form is required; but if the words are directed to the church in Galatia, obviously one should employ the exclusive. Scholars are by no means agreed on this point, for the Greek text itself is obscure. Apparently there is a gradual shift from the specific situation which involved Peter to a general statement of the gospel as it is related to the Galatian church. The translator who is rendering this passage into a language with an inclusive-exclusive distinction cannot, however, retain this obscurity. He must specify clearly by the very forms he uses whether or not this sentence is to be regarded as a part of the direct discourse.”
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”).
“Gal. 5:5 taken out of its context might be the basis of a sermon in which speaker and audience were included in the “we wait for the hope…,’ but the context of v. 4 indicates a contrast between Paul’s message and that of the Judaizers, and thus an exclusive we.”
Source: Velma B. Pickett in The Bible Translator 1964, p. 88f.
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 quotation from Isaiah 53:1 (“Lord who has believed our report?” in many English translations) “does Isaiah mean the message of God and himself (hence inclusive) or the message he and others were giving out? The Hebrew form [translated into English as] ‘what we heard,’ together with the Greek form (translated as) ‘what is heard of us,’ gives the clue that it should be exclusive, the message that he and others were giving out.” (Source: Velma B. Pickett in The Bible Translator 1964, p. 88f.)
The Jarai and Adamawa Fulfulde translations, however, use the inclusive pronoun for this (“referring to the speakers and their fellow Judeans in exile”), following the recommendation of Ogden / Sterk.
The Greek that is translated as “disqualified” or “castaway” in English is translated as chisashili in Chokwe. This refers to a “basket or the like that has broken down or for some reason unfit for the fulfillment of its original purpose. It is then thrown out, though it may be picked off the rubbish heap to serve some other, though always inferior, end. It is rejected as unfit for the job intended by its owner or maker and lies on the refuse pile in shame.”
(Source: D. B. Long in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 87ff.)
The Greek that is translated as “overseer” or “bishop” is kalayi in Chokwe. “This is the word for a watchman set in time of danger or war, who is responsible for the welfare of all under his care and will be held accountable for his faithfulness or otherwise.” (Source: D. B. Long in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 87ff. )
In Bacama the translation is adɨ nidə ji-kottə: “person who looks after the followers.” (Source: David Frank in this blog post )
The Greek that is often translated as “deacon” in English is translated as kavumbi in Chokwe, someone “who serves another, not from compulsion or for a wage, but because of vumbi or grace.”
(Source: D. B. Long in The Bible Translator 1952, p. 87ff.)