inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Acts 16:21)

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”).

For this verse, translators typically select the inclusive form (including the chief magistrates).

Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.

complete verse (Acts 16:21)

Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 16:21:

  • Uma: “They are teaching people customs that are different/at-odds-with from our customs. We Romans cannot receive or follow customs like that.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “They teach customs which people of the Roma tribe like us (incl.) cannot follow. Their teachings are against our (incl.) law.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “They teach customs that are against our law, and as for us Romans, we (incl.) cannot accept the customs which they are teaching.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “because the customs they have been teaching are against our law, and it is not possible that we Romano follow them.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “They are teaching customs which are contrary to our laws who are Romano, which are not possible/acceptable for us to receive or obey.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Acts 16:21

It is not known what customs are referred to. Perhaps the reference is to the fact that although the Romans recognized the Jewish religion, they did not permit them to go about actively seeking converts. In the eyes of the Roman officials Paul and Silas were at best Jews seeking converts for their religion.

Teaching customs that are against our law may be rendered as “teaching us to do things which our law says we should not do.”

We are Romans is rendered in some languages as “we belong to the city of Rome” or “we are the same as people who live in the city of Rome.” (See also 16.37.) And cannot accept or practice them may be rendered as “therefore we must not do as these men are telling us.”

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 .