Most translations are transliteration from the Greek “Deuteronomion” (“second law”), that is, they spell it in their own alphabet. However, some translators may wish to have a more meaningful title; for example, “Explanation of the Law” (Thai Common Language Bible, publ. 1985). (p. 11)
encourage
The Hebrew that is translated with “encourage” in English versions is translated with a Thai term that means “give heart power to.” (p. 41)
harden heart
The Hebrew that is translated into English as forms of “(to not) harden heart” is translated into other languages with their own vivid idioms; for example, Thai uses “black-hearted” (source: Bratcher / Hattoon, p. 272), Pökoot as makany kwoghïghitu mötöwekwo: “do not let become hard your heads” (source: Gerrit van Steenbergen), or Anuak as “make liver strong” (source: Loren Bliese).
See also hardness of heart, harden, and see Seat of the Mind for traditional views of “ways of knowing, thinking, and feeling.”
inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Deu. 2:29)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
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”).
Both the Jarai translation and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation use the exclusive pronoun (“since Yahweh is not the God of Sihon and his people.”).
believe, faith
Translations of the Greek pistis and its various forms that are typically translated as “faith” in English (itself deriving from Latin “fides,” meaning “trust, faith, confidence, reliance, credence”) and “believe” (from Old English belyfan: “to have faith or confidence in a person”) cover a wide range of approaches.
Bratcher and Nida say this (1961, p. 38) (click or tap here to read more):
“Since belief or faith is so essentially an intimate psychological experience, it is not strange that so many terms denoting faith should be highly figurative and represent an almost unlimited range of emotional ‘centers’ and descriptions of relationships, e.g. ‘steadfast his heart’ (Chol), ‘to arrive on the inside’ (Chicahuaxtla Triqui), ‘to conform with the heart’ (Uab Meto), ‘to join the word to the body’ (Uduk), ‘to hear in the insides’ (or ‘to hear within one’s self and not let go’ – Nida 1952) (Laka), ‘to make the mind big for something’ (Sapo), ‘to make the heart straight about’ (Mitla Zapotec), ‘to cause a word to enter the insides’ (Lacandon), ‘to leave one’s heart with’ (Baniwa), ‘to catch in the mind’ (Ngäbere), ‘that which one leans on’ (Vai), ‘to be strong on’ (Shipibo-Conibo), ‘to have no doubts’ (San Blas Kuna), ‘to hear and take into the insides’ (Kare), ‘to accept’ (Pamona).”
Following is a list of (back-) translations from other languages (click or tap here to read more):
- Western Kanjobal: “truth entering into one’s soul”
- Highland Puebla Nahuatl: “following close after”
- Huichol: “conform to the truth”
- Loma: “lay one’s hand on it”
- Mashco Piro: “obey-believe”
- Mossi: “leaning on God” (this and all the above acc. to Nida 1952, p. 119ff.)
- Tzeltal: “heart believe / heart obedience” (source: Marianna C. Slocum in The Bible Translator 1958, p. 49f. — see also wisdom (Proverbs))
- Thai: “place one’s heart in” (source: Bratcher / Hatton 2000, p. 37)
- Cameroon Pidgin: “to put one’s heart in God” (source: Jan Sterk)
- Kafa: “decide for God only” (source Loren Bliese)
- Martu Wangka: “sit true to God’s talk” (source: Carl Gross)
- Muna: kataino lalo or “stickiness of heart” (for “faithfulness”) (source: René van den Berg)
- Huehuetla Tepehua: “confidence” (source: Larson 1998, p. 279)
- Limos Kalinga: manuttuwa. Wiens (2013) explains: “It goes back to the word for ‘truth’ which is ‘tuttuwa.’ When used as a verb this term is commonly used to mean ‘believe’ as well as ‘obey.'”
- Ngiemboon: “turn one’s back on someone” (and trusting one won’t be taken advantage of) (source: Stephen Anderson in Holzhausen 1991, p. 42)
- Mwera uses the same word for “hope” and “faith”: ngulupai (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
- Kwang: “put one’s chest” (Source: Mark Vanderkooi right here )
- Yala: ɔtū che or “place heart” (in John 5:24; 5:45; 6:35; 6:47; 12:36; 14:1); other translations include chɛ̄ or “to agree/accept” and chɛ̄ku or “to agree with/accept with/take side with” (source: Linus Otronyi)
-
Awabakal: ngurruliko: “to know, to perceive by the ear” (as distinct from knowing by sight or by touch — source: Lake, p. 70) (click or tap here to read more)
“[The missionary translator] Lancelot Threlkeld learned that Awabakal, like many Australian languages, made no distinction between knowing and believing. Of course the distinction only needs to be made where there are rival systems of knowing. The Awabakal language expressed a seamless world. But as the stress on ‘belief’ itself suggests, Christianity has always existed in pluralist settings. Conversion involves deep conviction, not just intellectual assent or understanding. (…) Translating such texts posed a great challenge in Australia. Threlkeld and [his indigenous colleague] Biraban debated the possibilities at length. In the end they opted not to introduce a new term for belief, but to use the Awabakal ngurruliko, meaning ‘to know, to perceive by the ear,’ as distinct from knowing by sight or by touch.”
-
Language in southern Nigeria: a word based on the idiom “lose feathers.” Randy Groff in Wycliffe Bible Translators 2016, p. 65 explains (click or tap here to read more):
What does losing feathers have to do with faith? [The translator] explained that there is a species of bird in his area that, upon hatching its eggs, loses its feathers. During this molting phase, the mother bird is no longer able to fly away from the nest and look for food for her hungry hatchlings. She has to remain in the nest where she and her babies are completely dependent upon the male bird to bring them food. Without the diligent, dependable work of the male bird, the mother and babies would all die. This scenario was the basis for the word for faith in his language. - Teribe: mär: “pick one thing and one thing only” (source: Andy Keener)
-
- Tiv: na jighjigh: “give trust” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
Luba-Katanga: Twi tabilo: “echo” (click or tap here to read more)
“Luba-Katanga word for ‘Faith’ in its New Testament connotation is Twi tabilo. This word means ‘echo,’ and the way in which it came to be adapted to the New Testament meaning gives a very good idea of the way in which the translator goes to work. One day a missionary was on a journey through wild and mountainous country. At midday he called his African porters to halt, and as they lay resting in the shade from the merciless heat of the sun. an African picked up a stone and sent it ricocheting down the mountain-side into the ravine below. After some seconds the hollow silence was broken by a plunging, splashing sound from the depths of the dark river-bed. As the echo died away the African said in a wondering whisper ‘Twi tabilo, listen to it.’ So was a precious word captured for the service of the Gospel in its Luba Christian form. Twi tabilo — ‘faith which is the echo of God’s voice in the depths of human sinful hearts, awakened by God Himself, the answer to his own importunate call.’ The faith that is called into being by the divine initiative, God’s own gift to the responsive heart! (Source: Wilfred Bradnock in The Bible Translator 1953, p. 49ff. )
J.A. van Roy (in The Bible Translator 1972, p. 418ff. ) discusses how a translation of “faith” in a an earlier translation into Venda created difficult perceptions of the concept of faith (click or tap here):
The Venda term u tenda, lutendo. This term corresponds to the terms ho dumela (Southern Sotho), and ku pfumela (Tsonga) that have been used in these translations of the Bible, and means “to assent,” “to agree to a suggestion.” It is important to understand this term in the context of the character of the people who use it.
The way in which the Venda use this term reveals much about the priority of interpersonal relationships among them. They place a much higher priority on responding in the way they think they are expected to respond than on telling the truth. Smooth interpersonal relationships, especially with a dominant individual or group, take precedence over everything else.
It is therefore regarded as bad form to refuse directly when asked for something one does not in fact intend to give. The correct way is to agree, u tenda, and then forget about it or find some excuse for not keeping to the agreement. Thus u tenda does not necessarily convey the information that one means what one says. One can tenda verbally while heartily disagreeing with the statement made or having no intention whatsoever to carry out what one has just promised to do. This is not regarded as dishonesty, but is a matter of politeness.
The term u sokou tenda, “to consent reluctantly,” is often used for expressing the fatalistic attitude of the Venda in the face of misfortune or force which he is unable to resist.
The form lutendo was introduced by missionaries to express “faith.”
According to the rules of derivations and their meanings in the lu-class, it should mean “the habit of readily consenting to everything.” But since it is a coined word which does not have a clearly defined set of meanings in everyday speech, it has acquired in church language a meaning of “steadfastness in the Christian life.” Una lutendo means something like “he is steadfast in the face of persecution.” It is quite clear that the term u tenda has no element of “trust” in it. (…)
In “The Christian Minister” of July 1969 we find the following statement about faith by Albert N. Martin: “We must never forget that one of the great issues which the Reformers brought into focus was that faith was something more than an ‘assensus,’ a mere nodding of the head to the body of truth presented by the church as ‘the faith.’ The Reformers set forth the biblical concept that faith was ‘fiducia.’ They made plain that saving faith involved trust, commitment, a trust and commitment involving the whole man with the truth which was believed and with the Christ who was the focus of that truth. The time has come when we need to spell this out clearly in categorical statements so that people will realize that a mere nodding of assent to the doctrines that they are exposed to is not the essence of saving faith. They need to be brought to the understanding that saving faith involves the commitment of the whole man to the whole Christ, as Prophet, Priest and King as he is set forth in the gospel.”
We quote at length from this article because what Martin says of the current concept of faith in the Church is even to a greater extent true of the Venda Church, and because the terms used for communicating that concept in the Venda Bible cannot be expected to communicate anything more than “a mere nodding of assent”. I have during many years of evangelistic work hardly ever come across a Venda who, when confronted with the gospel, would not say, Ndi khou tenda, “I admit the truth of what you say.” What they really mean when saying this amounts to, “I believe that God exists, and I have no objection to the fact that he exists. I suppose that the rest of what you are talking about is also true.” They would often add, Ndi sa tendi hani-hani? “Just imagine my not believing such an obvious fact!” To the experienced evangelist this is a clear indication that his message is rejected in so far as it has been understood at all! To get a negative answer, one would have to press on for a promise that the “convert” will attend the baptism class and come to church on Sundays, and even then he will most probably just tenda in order to get rid of the evangelist, whether he intends to come or not. Isn’t that what u tenda means? So when an inexperienced and gullible white man ventures out on an evangelistic campaign with great enthusiasm, and with great rejoicing returns with a list of hundreds of names of persons who “believed”, he should not afterwards blame the Venda when only one tenth of those who were supposed to be converts actually turn up for baptismal instruction.
Moreover, it is not surprising at all that one often comes across church members of many years’ standing who do not have any assurance of their salvation or even realise that it is possible to have that assurance. They are vhatendi, “consenters.” They have consented to a new way of life, to abandoning (some of) the old customs. Lutendo means to them at most some steadfastness in that new way of life.
The concept of faith in religion is strange to Africa. It is an essential part of a religion of revelation such as Christianity or Islam, but not of a naturalistic religion such as Venda religion, in which not faith and belief are important, but ritual, and not so much the content of the word as the power of it.
The terms employed in the Venda Bible for this vital Christian concept have done nothing to effect a change in the approach of the Venda to religion.
It is a pity that not only in the Venda translation has this been the case, but in all the other Southern Bantu languages. In the Nguni languages the term ukukholwa, “to believe a fact,” has been used for pisteuo, and ukholo, the deverbative of ukukholwa, for pistis. In some of the older Protestant translations in Zulu, but not in the new translation, the term ithemba, “trust”, has been used.
Some languages, including Santali, have two terms — like English (see above) — to differentiate a noun from a verb form. Biswạs is used for faith, whereas pạtiạu for “believe.” R.M. Macphail (in The Bible Translator 1961, p. 36ff. ) explains this choice: “While there is little difference between the meaning and use of the two in everyday Santali, in which any word may be used as a verb, we felt that in this way we enriched the translation while making a useful distinction, roughly corresponding to that between ‘faith’ and ‘to believe’ in English.”
Likewise, in Noongar, koort-karni or “heart truth” is used for the noun (“faith”) and djinang-karni or “see true” for the verb (“believe”) (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
See also this devotion on YouVersion .
Translation commentary on Deuteronomy 1:1
These are the words that Moses spoke to all Israel: this can be rendered “This is a [written] report [or, record] of what Moses said to all the people of Israel.” The pronoun These must, of course, point forward, not backward. So the sentence may begin “What follows is…,” or even “In this book are the words…” (Good News Translation, Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje, German common language version [Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch]); Bible en français courant has “This book reports…,” and Contemporary English Version has “This book contains the speeches that Moses made….” And instead of the literal words, it will be better for translators to have something similar to “the long speeches” (Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje, Bible en français courant), or even “the discourses.”
To all Israel means, of course, “to all the people of Israel,” “to all the Israelites.” However, in some languages simply translating “to the Israelites” or “to the people of Israel” will mean that “all” are included.
Beyond the Jordan: the point of view of the writer is the land of Israel, so that “the other side of the Jordan River” means the east side, that is, Transjordan. More precisely Moses and the people of Israel are in the plains of Moab (Num 33.48; 36.13). Contemporary English Version makes this clear with “while Israel was in the land of Moab.” Jordan may be translated as “Jordan River” or “the river named Jordan.”
In the wilderness: this was an area without permanent human habitation, usually dry and rocky, unfit for cultivation of crops, but with occasional patches of moisture and vegetation. Translations have often used the term “desert” for wilderness, meaning that it had only sand; but this is not accurate, as this wilderness did have vegetation of various kinds. In cultures where very dry areas like this are unknown, we may translate wilderness with a descriptive phrase; for example, “rocky region with little vegetation,” “place where people don’t settle,” “a place where no house is,” and so on.
In the Arabah over against Suph: the Arabah is the deep depression that makes for the Jordan Valley, running to the Dead Sea and further south as far as the Gulf of Aqaba. Good News Translation “the Jordan Valley” accurately names the part of the Arabah that is spoken of here. The phrase against Suph modifies the Arabah, that is, “that part of the Arabah that faces [or, is opposite] Suph.” We do not know exactly what “opposite Suph” means, since the identity and location of Suph are unknown. The Hebrew preposition means “in front of”; in more general terms the phrase can be represented by “near a place named Suph.” New Jerusalem Bible has “facing Suph.” In languages that will have difficulty expressing “Jordan Valley,” it will be possible to combine the two phrases beyond the Jordan in the wilderness and in the Arabah over against Suph, and translate the first part of this verse as follows:
• This book contains the long speeches that Moses spoke to the Israelites while they were in the land of Moab. They were camped near the place called Suph in the wilderness east of the river named Jordan.
Between Paran and Tophel, Laban, Hazeroth, and Dizahab: Good News Translation and the Revised English Bible (Revised English Bible) make it clear that Paran is on one side, and the other four towns are on the other side of the Jordan. None of these localities has been identified. Since it is not clear whether Paran was to the west and the other towns to the east, translators should leave this ambiguous. Another way to express this is “The town of Paran was on one side of them and the towns of … on the other side.” Contemporary English Version resolves this problem with “The town of Paran was in one direction from their camp, and the towns of … were in the opposite direction.” In cultures where the only large human settlements are villages surrounded by fences, translators will need to use descriptive phrases for “towns”; for example, “large villages with high fences around them,” and in the case of “cities,” when this term occurs later in Deuteronomy (see 1.22), we may say “very large villages…” or something similar.
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Deuteronomy. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2000. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Translation commentary on Deuteronomy 1:2
This verse is placed within parentheses by New Revised Standard Version (New Revised Standard Version), Revised English Bible, Bible en français courant, Good News Translation, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, since its relation to what comes before and what follows is unclear. See verse 19. A translator must be aware of what parentheses mean in a given language. In English (such as Good News Translation) they mean that the statement inside them interrupts the flow of the discourse, which goes directly from what comes before them to what follows them. In some languages parentheses indicate that the material enclosed is not very important and can be overlooked.
It is eleven days’ journey: this converts into something like 250-270 kilometers (160-170 miles). In some languages we may express this clause as “It takes only eleven days to walk from Mount Sinai…,” or “A person needs only eleven days to….”
Horeb is the area in which Mount Sinai is located, and the word often functions as the name of the mountain itself (as Good News Translation translates).
By the way of Mount Seir: this means the road that runs through the mountainous region of Seir, better known as Edom. Another way to express this phrase is “by way of [or, through] the area with many hills [or, hilly area] named Edom.”
Kadesh-barnea is an oasis in the desert (that is, the Negev), some 80 kilometers (50 miles) south of Beersheba (see map, page xi).
An alternative translation model for this verse is:
• A person needs only eleven days to walk from Mount Sinai to Kadesh Barnea through the hilly area named Edom.
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Deuteronomy. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2000. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Translation commentary on Deuteronomy 1:3
In the fortieth year: that is, forty years after leaving Egypt.
The eleventh month was named Shebat, the month beginning with the new moon in what now is usually January; but this can vary by as much as four weeks because their calendar was based upon the appearance of the new moon as the beginning of every month.
The people of Israel: this is more naturally represented in English by “the Israelites” (as New Revised Standard Version has it).
According to all that the LORD had given him in commandment to them: the phrase according to (or, “just as”) does not refer to the manner in which Moses delivered Yahweh’s message to the people; it is simply saying that Moses told them everything that Yahweh had ordered him to tell them.
The translation of “Yahweh” (spelled YHWH in Hebrew), the name of the God of Israel, is a matter dealt with in most Bibles, and the Introduction to Good News Translation explains why it happens that practically all major translations into English and other world languages have “the LORD” or its equivalent. Since the publication in English of the Jerusalem Bible, “Yahweh” has been shown to be an option for translators, and the translations of the Jerusalem Bible into other languages (German, Spanish, Portuguese) have the same transliteration of the Hebrew name.
There is, however, another option for translators: substitute another personal name from the language and culture of the translation. A Handbook on Leviticus, page 10, has some helpful comments on this issue:
… there may be a personal name for God which is distinct from the generic name for “god” but quite similar in usage to the biblical term … In such cases it may be wise to adopt this name as the equivalent of YHWH. This possibility has often been overlooked in past translations of the Bible. But even though the commonly used name in the receptor language is not an exact equivalent of YHWH, it may be wise to use it in translation and give a full explanation of the Biblical name in the glossary.
However, translators who consider this option should be sensitive to the ideas and meanings associated with the name of a local deity. If these should contradict or even distort the biblical concept of God, then translators should follow one of the other options.
The solution to this problem requires serious study and research by the leaders of the Christian community for which the translation is intended. For other comments on the translation of “Yahweh,” see “Translating Deuteronomy,” pages 7 and following. Translators should also pay particular attention to comments in the prefaces of Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation, and discussions in other UBS Handbooks.
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Deuteronomy. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2000. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
