inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Acts 21:23)

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 exclusive form (excluding Paul).

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

complete verse (Acts 21:23)

Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 21:23:

  • Uma: “It is better that you (sing.) follow this advice of ours(excl.), so that it will be clear that those critical words are not true: There are here four of our (excl.) companions who made a promise to God with vowing.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “Therefore it is good if you follow what we (excl.) are saying to you,’ the elders said. ‘There are four men here who have made a vow to God and soon their vow is finished/fulfilled.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “It would be good if you would do what we advise you. There are here four men who have made a promise to God according to our custom.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “That which is in our (excl.) mind/thoughts, it would be good if this is what you (sing.) will do. There are among us (excl.) four men whose ritual-abstinence that they have promised God is almost finished.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “It would be good if you follow/obey this which we (excl.) will say to you. There are four men here who have made a promise to God.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)

Translation commentary on Acts 21:23

Beginning with this verse the church elders explain to Paul what they think is best for him to do in light of the situation. It is generally assumed that the vow referred to was a Nazirite vow (see 18.18). In ancient Israel it was customary for some men to take a lifelong vow to abstain from wine or anything unclean, and never to cut their hair (note Samson in Judges 13). Later the Jewish Law provided for a man to assume a temporary Nazirite vow, which meant that he would live as a Nazirite for a certain length of time, and at the end of that time offer a series of sacrifices. When all of this had been completed, the man shaved his head and burned the hair along with the sacrifice. After this he was free to drink wine and to go back to his normal way of life. It is known from rabbinic sources that the shortest length of time for which one could assume this temporary vow was 30 days, so this raises problems with the mention of seven days in verse 27. A number of solutions have been offered, but it must be admitted that none of these are without their particular difficulties. Perhaps the least complicated conclusion is to assume that these men who had taken the vow had in the meanwhile become defiled. Therefore, it was necessary for them to undergo a period of seven days purification, at the end of which they would be permitted to offer the sacrifices required by the Jewish Law (see Numbers 6.9-12).

The term vow may be rendered as “a promise made before God” or “a strong promise made to God.” The process of “taking a vow” in some languages may actually be rendered as “bound themselves by a promise to God.”

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 .