inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (John 9:21)

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 exclusive form (excluding Pharisees). The Tok Pisin specifies this even more by using the dual (only including two, the parents of the blind man).

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

complete verse (John 9:21)

Following are a number of back-translations of John 9:21:

  • Uma: “But what happened with the result that he can see, we (excl.) do not know. And who healed him, we (excl.) also do not know. He is big now, ask him yourself. He can answer for himself.'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “But we (excl.) do not know as to how he can see now or as to who healed his eyes. Ask him. He is no longer a child. Let him answer you.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “However, how he is able to see and who medicined his eyes, we do not know. Perhaps you should ask him because he is already adult. He can be the one to answer.'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “But concerning his being-able-to-see now, we (excl.) don’t know who removed his blindness and how it was that it happened. He is the one you can inquire-from, because he is a grown-man and he knows how to answer.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “But we don’t know why he can see today, and we also don’t know who made him well. It would be good if he is the one you question, after all he’s no longer a child. He could tell properly concerning his body.'” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
  • Tenango Otomi: “But now we do not know how his eyes were opened. Neither do we know who healed his eyes. Ask him yourselves. Now he is a big man, he will tell you how come.'” (Source: Tenango Otomi Back Translation)

Translation commentary on John 9:21

Most translations maintain the literal Semitic expression “to open one’s eyes” when referring to the healing of blindness. Phillips translates “made him able to see.” The statement of the parents may be translated succinctly “We do not know how he is now able to see, and we do not know who caused him to be able to see.”

The expression he is old enough (so also Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible; Moffatt, New English Bible “he is of age”) is perhaps a reference to the age of legal responsibility. Phillips translates “He is a grown-up man.” In many languages it is sufficient to say “he is a man,” though it would be more typical to say in some languages “he is no longer a child.”

He can answer for himself (Moffatt “he can speak for himself”) is actually in the future tense “he will speak for himself” (Revised Standard Version, New English Bible). The meaning is that the man is old enough to speak for himself as a legally responsible person. The New American Bible rendering, “he is old enough to speak for himself,” leaves implicit the meaning “he can speak.”

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 .