inclusive vs. exclusive pronoun (Josh 9:25)

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, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the exclusive pronoun, excluding Joshua.

formal 2nd person pronoun (Spanish)

Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Spanish uses a formal vs. informal second-person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Spanish Bibles all use only the informal second-person pronoun (tú), with the exception of Dios Habla Hoy (third edition: 1996) which also uses the formal pronoun (usted). In the referenced verses, the formal form is used.

Sources and for more information: P. Ellingworth in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 143ff. and R. Ross in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 217ff.

See also the use of the formal vs. the informal pronoun in the Gospels in Tuvan.

Translation commentary on Joshua 9:24 - 9:25

In a redundant manner the writer brings the account to a close with a final dialogue between Joshua and the Gibeonites. Once more they explain the reason for their deceptive conduct (verse 24): it was only in order to avoid being killed that they had lied to the Israelites.

The use of sir in Good News Translation is to indicate the tone of the men’s response to Joshua. In languages where honorifics are obligatory, or where there is a definite distinction made between a lower and a higher person in conversation, special attention should be given to the proper categories of language to be used in the dialogue. It is obvious, of course, that the men of Gibeon would be addressing a superior, while Joshua would be speaking to person of lower status than himself.

We learned translates an emphatic Hebrew idiomatic phrase: “we were told repeatedly” (see Traduction œcuménique de la Bible) “were fully informed” (New American Bible).

In translation it may be more effective to invert the order of the men’s explanation to Joshua. For example:

• “We did it, sir, because we feared for our lives. Moses served the LORD your God, and we know what the LORD promised to him and to all the people of Israel. He promised to give you the whole land, and he commanded you to kill the people in it.”

Or:

• “… feared for our lives. We know that the LORD your God will make true his promise to Moses his servant. He told Moses, ‘I command you to take the whole land and to kill all the people living there.’ ”

They throw themselves on Joshua’s mercy (verse 25), and he protects them from the Israelites, who want to kill them (verse 26). Right (verse 25) translates two Hebrew nouns (Revised Standard Version “good and right”). In such a context the two nouns are basically synonymous, and the use of a single noun is perhaps more effective in contemporary English. For other languages it may be more natural to maintain the two synonyms or else shift to an idiom.

Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Newman, Barclay M. A Handbook on Joshua. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1983. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .