tribe

The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “tribe” in English when referring to the “12 tribes of Israel” is translated in some East African languages, including Taita and Pökoot, with the equivalent of “clan” instead.

Aloo Mojola explains (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 208ff. ) (click or tap here to see the rest of this insight):

“A number of Bible translation teams in East Africa have been baffled and intrigued by the use of the term ‘tribe’ in the English translations of the Bible. The usage employed in these translations does not reflect any of the popular meanings associated with the term ‘tribe’ in present-day English. Neither does it reflect popular conceptions of the meaning of this term in East Africa or in other parts of Africa and elsewhere. This raises the question: is the term tribe the best translation of the Hebrew terms shebeth and matteh or the Greek term phyle? What is a tribe anyway? Are the twelve tribes of Israel tribes in the sense this term is currently understood? How can this term be translated in East African languages?

“It is easy to see that there is no consistent definition of the term tribe which applies exclusively and consistently to the communities to which it is currently applied. Why, for example, are the Somali or the Baganda called a tribe, but not the Irish or the Italians? Why do the Yoruba or Hausa qualify, but not the Portuguese or the Russians? Why the Bakongo and the Oromo, but not the Germans or the Scots? Why the Eritreans, but not the French or Dutch-speaking Belgians? Why the Zulu or the Xhosa, but not the South African Boers (Afrikaners) or the South African English? The reason for the current prejudices, it would seem, has nothing to do with language, physical type, common territory, common cultural values, type of political and social organization or even population size. Ingrained prejudices and preconceived ideas about so-called “primitive” peoples have everything to do with it.

“The term ‘tribe’ is used to refer to a universal and world-wide phenomenon of ethnic identification which may draw on any of the following bases: identification in terms of one’s first or dominant language of communication (linguistic), in terms of one’s place of origin (regional), in terms of one’s presumed racial, biological or genetic type (racial), or in terms of one’s ideological or political commitments (ideological), and so on. Communities may choose one or more of these bases as criteria for membership. Any of these may change over time. Moreover forms of ethnic identification are dynamic or in a state of flux, changing in response to new environments and circumstances. Essentially forms of ethnic association reflect a people’s struggle for survival through adaptation to changing times. This is inextricably intertwined with the production and distribution of vital resources, goods and services as well as the distribution of power, class and status in society.

“At the base of any ethnic group is the nuclear family which expands to include the extended family. The extended family consists of more than two families related vertically and horizontally: parents and their offspring, cousins, uncles, aunts, nephews, and others, extending to more than two generations. A lineage is usually a larger group than an extended family. It includes a number of such families who trace descent through the male or female line to a common ancestor. A clan may be equivalent to or larger than a lineage. Where it is larger than a lineage, it brings together several lineages which may or may not know the precise nature of their relationships, but which nevertheless claim descent from a common ancestor. A clan is best thought of as a kind of sub-ethnic unit whose members have some unifying symbol such as totem, label, or myth. In most cases the clan is used to determine correct marriage lines, but this is not universally so. Above the clan is the ethnic group, usually referred to inconsistently as the tribe. Members of an ethnic group share feelings of belonging to a common group. The basis of ethnic identity is not always derived from a common descent, real or fictional; it may draw on any of the bases mentioned above.

“The Israelites identified themselves as one people sharing a common descent, a common religious and cultural heritage, a common language and history. There is no doubt that they constitute what would nowadays be called an ethnic group, or by some people a tribe. The twelve subunits of the Israelite ethnic group or tribe, (Hebrew shebeth or matteh, or Greek phyle) are clearly equivalent to clans. In fact this is what seems to make sense to most African Bible translators in the light of their understanding of these terms and the biblical account. Referring to a shebeth as a tribe or an ethnic group and to Israel as a collection of twelve tribes creates unnecessary confusion. Translating each of the terms shebeth, matteh, and phyle as clan seems to solve this problem and to be consistent with current usage in African languages.”

Translation commentary on Hosea 5:9

Ephraim shall become a desolation …: Since Ephraim is another name for Israel, Good News Translation again renders both as “Israel” (see comments on 4.17 and 5.3). A translation that attempts to reflect the poetic structure of the receptor language will keep these parallel names. The Hebrew noun for desolation involves the idea of complete destruction, and horror or awe on the part of those involved. Jerusalem Bible renders shall become a desolation as “shall be laid waste,” Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch says “will become a wilderness” (similarly Bible en français courant), and Traduction œcuménique de la Bible has “will become a ruin.” New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh emphasizes the horror, saying “is stricken with horror.” This noun is preceded by a preposition in Hebrew meaning “to/into.” This is a fairly common combination in prophetic literature. It marks a complete transformation into destruction.

In the day of punishment: The Hebrew word for punishment involves the idea of judgment, but with it is the idea of chastisement or correction, almost as if it is combined with training for better behavior afterward. However, the idea of judgment is primary. New International Version renders this phrase as “on the day of reckoning.” Good News Translation places this phrase at the beginning of the verse, giving the specific punishment last as a climax: “The day of punishment is coming, and Israel will be ruined.”

Among the tribes of Israel I declare what is sure: In these two lines the prophet affirms that what he says as a prophet is sure and dependable. The tribes of Israel refers to the ten tribes that composed the northern kingdom. Cultures have different ways of dividing the units within ethnic groups. In some cultures there are basically three: (1) the nuclear family, (2) the extended family, which is often called a “clan,” and (3) the tribe or nation as a whole. Though English translations typically refer to the “tribes” of Israel, in some cultures it will be more accurate to speak of the “clans,” since they all spoke the same language. The Hebrew preposition here is usually translated among. The prophet announced God’s message in the midst of the people. It is also possible (though less common) to translate the preposition as “about.” In that case Hosea is saying his prophecies about Israel will certainly be fulfilled; for example, De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling renders these two lines as “what I have announced about the tribes of Israel is unavoidable.” Good News Translation takes the focus off the prophet and emphasizes the result: “People of Israel, this will surely happen!” Another possible model is “I am the prophet who announces to the tribes of Israel what will surely happen.” It is possible that Yahweh is the speaker here. As stated in the introductory comments on this section, some translations assume that throughout 5.8-15 the LORD is the speaker. In this context one can notice how, when a true prophet speaks, there is often no distinction between whether the prophet or Yahweh is speaking. As we move into the following verses, it seems that Yahweh is more clearly the speaker. But in the mind of the people of those days, the two were often considered the same.

A translation model for this verse is:

• Ephraim will turn into a heap of rubble
when the day of reckoning comes.
What I have declared about the tribes of Israel
will certainly happen!

Quoted with permission from Dorn, Louis & van Steenbergen, Gerrit. A Handbook on Hosea. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2020. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .