25But as for the gentiles who have become believers, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from sexual immorality.”
The Greek that is translated as “sexual immorality” or “fornication” or similar is translated much more specifically in some languages. Morelos Nahuatl has “let a man not yield himself to another woman except only to his wife. Also let a woman not yield herself to another man except only to her husband” or in Lalana Chinantec as “not proper for them to mix themselves with other women. The same is true of women for other men also.” (Source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
In Low German as Hurenkram or “things related to prostitution (and/or sleeping around)” (translation by Johannes Jessen, publ. 1933, republ. 2006).
The Hebrew, Greek and Latin that is translated as “idol(s)” in English is translated in Central Subanen as ledawan or “images.” (Source: Robert Brichoux in OPTAT 1988/2, p. 80ff. )
In German, typically the term Götze is used. Originally this was used as a term of endearment for Gott (“God” — see here ), later for “icon” and “image, likeness.” Luther started to use it in the 16th century in the meaning of “false god, idol.”
Other terms that are used in German include Götzenbild(er) (“image[s] of idols”) or Bildnis (“image” — Protestant) / Kultbild (“cultish image” — Catholic) (used for instance in Exodus 20:4 and Deuteronomy 5:8). The latest revision of the Catholic Einheitsübersetzung (publ. 2016) also uses the neologism Nichtse (“nothings”) in 1 Chron. 16:26 and Psalm 96:5. (Source: Zetzsche)
The Greek that is often translated as “gentiles” (or “nations”) in English is often translated as a “local equivalent of ‘foreigners,'” such as “the people of other lands” (Guerrero Amuzgo), “people of other towns” (Tzeltal), “people of other languages” (San Miguel El Grande Mixtec), “strange peoples” (Navajo) (this and above, see Bratcher / Nida), “outsiders” (Ekari), “people of foreign lands” (Kannada), “non-Jews” (North Alaskan Inupiatun), “people being-in-darkness” (a figurative expression for people lacking cultural or religious insight) (Toraja-Sa’dan) (source for this and three above Reiling / Swellengrebel), “from different places all people” (Martu Wangka) (source: Carl Gross).
Tzeltal translates it as “people in all different towns,” Chicahuaxtla Triqui as “the people who live all over the world,” Highland Totonac as “all the outsider people,” Sayula Popoluca as “(people) in every land” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), Chichimeca-Jonaz as “foreign people who are not Jews,” Sierra de Juárez Zapotec as “people of other nations” (source of this and one above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.), Highland Totonac as “outsider people” (source: Waterhouse / Parrott in Notes on Translation October 1967, p. 1ff.), Uma as “people who are not the descendants of Israel” (source: Uma Back Translation), and Yakan as “the other tribes” (source: Yakan Back Translation).
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”).
According to Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan (in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.) translators typically select the exclusive form (excluding Paul) for this verse. According to SIL International Translation Department (1999) it is also possible to use the inclusive form which would include Paul.
Following are a number of back-translations of Acts 21:25:
Uma: “So, that is our (excl.) advice to you (sing.), relative. But as for them who are not Yahudi that believe in Yesus, we (excl.) have already sent to them a letter telling them our (excl.) decision. They do not need to follow the Law of Musa. We(excl.) just request that they not eat food sacrificed to idols, and also not eat blood or meat that has not already had the blood taken out, and that they not behave immorally [wrongly].'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Na, concerning the people of other tribes who trust in Isa,’ they said, ‘we (excl.) have already sent them a letter telling them that they must not eat anything that has been offered to images of gods, they must not eat blood or strangled animal and they must not commit adultery.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “As as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have told them already by means of a letter what we command them. That is, that they should not eat anything offered to false gods and they should not also eat blood or anything butchered that is not allowed to bleed. And it is necessary also that they do not mess with anyone who is not their spouse.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Concerning also the Gentiles who believe, these only are the commands that we (excl.) wrote them that they need to obey. They are not to eat-for-viand what has been offered to idols, they are moreover not to eat-for-viand blood or strangled animals, and they are not moreover to sleep-with someone not their spouse.’ That is what plural Santiago told Pablo.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “But the believers who aren’t Jews are indeed not being caused to be included in this. All that we (excl.) want them to obey is like we said in that letter which was sent to them that they not eat meat which has been used by others in their worship of their pretend god, that they also not eat blood or meat which has not been bled, and that they taboo all kinds of immorality with one not their spouse.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
This verse, which introduces the apostolic decree as though it were imparting new information, fits in very loosely with the context. Even though the words are formally addressed to Paul, in reality Luke seems to have included them for the benefit of his readers (as he did with 1.18-19). On the interpretation and translation of this verse see 15.20. The introductory conjunction but is particularly important here, since it shifts the attention from the Jewish believers to the Gentile believers.
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.