25And as John was finishing his work, he said, ‘What do you suppose that I am? I am not he. No, but one is coming after me; I am not worthy to untie the strap of the sandals on his feet.’
The Greek that is translated as “(not worthy to) untie sandals” or similar in English is translated in Awa as “because he is an important one, when he speaks I will be silent” since “the Jewish idea of not being worthy of even removing the sandals of an important person is foreign to Papua New Guinea.”
Other languages express it this way: “I am not worthy to be his servant” (Yatzachi Zapotec), “if unworthy I should even carry his burden, it would not be right” (Alekano), or “I don’t compare with him” (Tenango Otomi). (Source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.)
In Ayutla Mixtec it is translated as “I am too unworthy to perform even the lowliest of tasks for him” to avoid the wrong meaning of playing a trick by tying the sandals. In Choapan Zapotec the metaphor of the shoelaces is completely replaced by a similar one from the local culture: “I am not even important to carry his pack.” (Source for this and above: B. Moore / G. Turner in Notes on Translation 1967, p. 1ff.)
The Greek that is translated as “What do you suppose that I am?” or similar in English is translated in Huixtán Tzotzil as “Who do you mistakenly think I am?” Huixtán Tzotzil frequently uses the verb -cuy to express “to mistakenly think something” from the point of view of the speaker. (Source: Marion M. Cowan in Notes on Translation 20/1966, pp. 6ff.)
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “sandal” in English is illustrated for use in Bible translations in East Africa by Pioneer Bible Translators like this:
Image owned by PBT and Jonathan McDaniel and licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 13:25:
Uma: “When the work of Yohanes was almost done, he said to the people: ‘According to your opinions, who am I? I am not the King you are waiting for. He will come when my work is finished. Even to become his servant that undoes the strings of his shoes, I am not fitting.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “When Yahiya’s work that God had given him was almost finished, he said to the people of Isra’il, ‘If you think, who am I? I am not the one you are waiting for. But there is (someone) coming after me, I am not even worthy to untie the string of his shoes.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then when John was about to finish that which God had given him to do, he said to the people, he said, ‘You suppose mistakenly perhaps that I am the king you are expecting. But I am really not. He will come after me, and he is greater than I, because even to loosen the tie of his shoe, I am not yet worthy.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “When Juan’s work was almost done, he said to the many-people, ‘Do you perhaps think that I am the one God sent to save you? It is not I but-rather the one who succeeds me. Due-to his greatness (lit. highness), I am not worthy to even untie the ties of his shoes.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “When Juan was now finishing that work of his, he next said to the people, ‘Who am I in your opinion? Maybe, in your perception, I am the one who is the Savior. It’s true, I am not he. But before long, he will come. And really as for him, he is far superior to me. Proof is, even to undo the tie of his footwear, it isn’t possible/acceptable for me to do it, for his importance is so extremely great.'” (Source: Tagbanwa 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 ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (祂) is used.”
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one 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 in the following way: “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 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, but most translations, especially those published in the 21st century, do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both 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. ).
See also this chapter in the World Atlas of Language Structures on different approaches to personal pronouns.
John was about to finish his mission (literally, “race to run” or “course to follow”) may be rendered as “John would soon finish his task” or “soon John would not have more to do.”
Rather than reading the first part of John’s words as a question, who do you think I am?, some translations connect it with the following words and render it as a statement (Jerusalem Bible, “I am not the one you imagine me to be”). As has been previously indicated, the Greek manuscripts were not punctuated and there is nothing in the sentence itself or even in the context to indicate which alternative ought to be followed. If John’s words are phrased as a question, as in the Good News Translation, then the answer which John literally gave was “I am not he.” The Good News Translation has taken this to mean I am not the one you are waiting for while others understand it in the sense “I am not the one you think I am.” (See The Punctuation Apparatus in the UBS Greek New Testament for the decisions of various editions and translations.)
He is coming after me must be understood in a temporal sense, “he comes later than me” or “he comes as I am finishing.”
To take his sandals off his feet must be understood as being a service to Jesus and not as robbing him of his sandals. (Taking off someone else’s sandals was regarded as the menial task of a slave.) This may be introduced in some languages by saying “help him by taking sandals off his feet.”
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on The Acts of the Apostles. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1972. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.