The Greek that is typically translated as “will” in English is translated in Warao as obojona, a term that “includes the concepts of consciousness, will, attitude, attention and a few other miscellaneous notions.” (Source: Henry Osborn in The Bible Translator 1969, p. 74ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of John 6:39:
Uma: “This is his will: that from all the people that he gives me, not one will be lost, I will definitely raise them all on Kiama Day.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “God wants that really none of the people he gave to me is lost from me. But I have to make all of them alive in the last day.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “As for my Father God who sent me, his desire is that I strengthen-about all people whom he has given me so that there won’t even be one of them who is not given life. And I will raise them up in the future on the last day.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “And what my Father who sent me wants is that I thoroughly care-for those whom he entrusted to me so that not even one is lost but rather I will give-them -life again on the last day. Because he wants that all who know and believe in me, they will have life that has no end.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “For this is what his will is, that I should not just leave to be lost even one of those he has given to me, but on the contrary raise them all to life at the end of the world.” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
Tenango Otomi: “The will of my Father who sent me is that no one of those he delivered over to me will be lost, rather I will cause them to be resurrected on the last day.” (Source: Tenango Otomi 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.
And it is the will of him who sent me that is literally “but this is the will of the one who sent me, that…,” which Good News Translation has restructured to achieve a more natural English sentence.
Any of all those translates a neuter expression in Greek (note Revised Standard Version “nothing of all that”), and them all is literally “it” in Greek. As indicated in verse 37, the neuter singular gives a stronger collective force, but in this context a neuter singular would sound odd in English. It should be noted that New English Bible switches from the neuter singular to the masculine plural in the last part of the verse (“them all”), even though it retains the neuter form in the first part (“one of all that”), as it does in verse 36 (“all that”). The persons referred to in this verse are, of course, the same ones mentioned in verse 37.
By translating raise … to lifeGood News Translation makes explicit the meaning of the Greek word “raise.” This same promise is made again in verses 40,44, and 54.
The last day (see also verses 40,44,54; 11.24; 12.48) is a reference to the day of judgment.
The obligation that God has placed upon Jesus, expressed in the English translation as should not lose and should raise them, may be expressed in some languages by an obligatory element more or less equivalent to “must.” To do so may involve some shift in the structure, for example, “The following is what God who sent me wants me to do: I must not lose anyone of all those whom he has given to me; rather, on the last day I must cause them all to come back to life.”
Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of John. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1980. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.