offering (qorban)

The Hebrew qorbān (קָרְבָּן) originally means “that which is brought near.” Most English Bibles translate it as “offering.” The Hebraic English translation of Everett Fox uses near-offering and likewise the German translation by Buber-Rosenzweig has (the neologism) Darnahung.

See also burnt-offering and offering..

dove, pigeon

The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “dove” or “pigeon” in English is translated in Pijin with the onomatopoeia kurrukurru. (Source: Bob Carter)

fat, oil

The different Hebrew and Greek terms that are translated as “(olive) oil” and “(animal) fat” in English are translated in Kwere with only one term: mavuta. (Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)

sin

The Hebrew and Greek that is typically translated as “sin” in English has a wide variety of translations.

The Greek ἁμαρτάνω (hamartanō) carries the original verbatim meaning of “miss the mark.” Likewise, many translations contain the “connotation of moral responsibility.” Loma has (for certain types of sin) “leaving the road” (which “implies a definite standard, the transgression of which is sin”) or Navajo uses “that which is off to the side.” (Source: Bratcher / Nida). In Toraja-Sa’dan the translation is kasalan, which originally meant “transgression of a religious or moral rule” and has shifted its meaning in the context of the Bible to “transgression of God’s commandments.” (Source: H. van der Veen in The Bible Translator 1950, p. 21ff. ).

In Shipibo-Conibo the term is hocha. Nida (1952, p. 149) tells the story of its choosing: “In some instances a native expression for sin includes many connotations, and its full meaning must be completely understood before one ever attempts to use it. This was true, for example, of the term hocha first proposed by Shipibo-Conibo natives as an equivalent for ‘sin.’ The term seemed quite all right until one day the translator heard a girl say after having broken a little pottery jar that she was guilty of ‘hocha.’ Breaking such a little jar scarcely seemed to be sin. However, the Shipibos insisted that hocha was really sin, and they explained more fully the meaning of the word. It could be used of breaking a jar, but only if the jar belonged to someone else. Hocha was nothing more nor less than destroying the possessions of another, but the meaning did not stop with purely material possessions. In their belief God owns the world and all that is in it. Anyone who destroys the work and plan of God is guilty of hocha. Hence the murderer is of all men most guilty of hocha, for he has destroyed God’s most important possession in the world, namely, man. Any destructive and malevolent spirit is hocha, for it is antagonistic and harmful to God’s creation. Rather than being a feeble word for some accidental event, this word for sin turned out to be exceedingly rich in meaning and laid a foundation for the full presentation of the redemptive act of God.”

In Kaingang, the translation is “break God’s word” and in Sandawe the original meaning of the Greek term (see above) is perfectly reflected with “miss the mark.” (Source: Ursula Wiesemann in Holzhausen / Riderer 2010, p. 36ff., 43)

In Warao it is translated as “bad obojona.” Obojona is 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. ). See other occurrences of Obojona in the Warao New Testament.

Martin Ehrensvärd, one of the translators for the Danish Bibelen 2020, comments on the translation of this term: “We would explain terms, such that e.g. sin often became ‘doing what God does not want’ or ‘breaking God’s law’, ‘letting God down’, ‘disrespecting God’, ‘doing evil’, ‘acting stupidly’, ‘becoming guilty’. Now why couldn’t we just use the word sin? Well, sin in contemporary Danish, outside of the church, is mostly used about things such as delicious but unhealthy foods. Exquisite cakes and chocolates are what a sin is today.” (Source: Ehrensvärd in HIPHIL Novum 8/2023, p. 81ff. )

See also sinner.

Translation commentary on Leviticus 5:11

But: as at the beginning of verse 7, it may not be necessary to use such a strong transition word in translation. Naturalness in the receptor language should be the determining factor.

If he cannot afford …: the expression is slightly different from the beginning of verse 7, because the word “amount” does not appear here. And the verb translated afford is also different in this verse. The identical wording of verses 7 and 11 in both Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation is misleading. In view of the differences between the introductory words in the Hebrew of these verses, it is quite possible to translate here “if he does not have….” Traduction oecuménique de la Bible, for example, begins verse 11 with “If someone does not have in hand…,” and Bible en français courant translates “If a person does not have at his disposition….”

This second paragraph (5.11-13) probably does not represent a further reduction of the offering in favor of the extremely poor, as it has sometimes been interpreted. It seems rather to be a practical matter. In fact, the value of the flour required was probably not much less than that of two doves or two pigeons. But while everyone had a certain reserve of flour at home, not everyone was able to provide the birds required for the sacrifice. Consequently the translator should avoid any rendering that follows the first-mentioned interpretation (for example, “If he cannot afford even two doves or two pigeons…” as in Moffatt). The words may just as easily be translated “or if he does not have….”

A tenth of an ephah of fine flour: the translation of terms of measurement such as ephah in Good News Translation is given in pounds in the American version but in kilograms in the British version. The metric system will be shown in square brackets where it differs from the American version of Good News Translation. The translator, of course, should select the system in common use in the area where the receptor language is spoken, and not translate both forms.

The meaning of the term ephah is very uncertain. Estimates of the value of this dry measure in modern versions range from 20 pounds (10 kilograms) in Good News Translation to 30 kilograms in Bible en français courant. A tenth of an ephah could therefore be from one to three kilograms. While the exact value of this measurement is uncertain, it is important that the term be translated consistently. Other references where the ephah is mentioned in Leviticus are 6.20; 14.10, 21; 23.13, 17; and 24.5. It also occurs in 19.36, but not as an exact measurement. Translators working with languages that do not use the metric system should look for the closest natural equivalent in their own culture, especially in those cases where flour is measured by weight rather than volume. It is better to provide the reader with a meaningful equivalent rather than transliterating or being overly concerned about the precise value of this uncertain term. A footnote explaining its uncertainty is acceptable if it is deemed necessary in the receptor language.

Fine flour: see the discussion of the two kinds of flour under 2.1. The word used here is the one for “choice flour” (New Jerusalem Bible).

No oil … no frankincense: this is in contrast with 2.1, where olive oil and incense are mixed with the flour given as a grain offering. Good News Translation makes the contrast more explicit by adding “… not a grain offering.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René and Ellington, John. A Handbook on Leviticus. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1990. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .