The name that is transliterated as “Pilate” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language (as well as in French Sign Language) with the sign signifying the washing of hands (referring to Matthew 27:24). (Source: John Elwode in The Bible Translator 2008, p. 78ff.)
In American Sign Language it is translated with the sign for “government/governor” plus the sign for “P” with a circular movement. The reference to government indicates Pilate’s position of authority in the Roman Empire. (Source: RuthAnna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Pilate” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
The Greek that is translated as “treat with contempt,” “treat with scorn,” “ridicule,” or “abuse” is translated in Gullah as suck dey teet or “suck their teeth.” (Source: David Frank)
The Greek that is transliterated as “Herod (Antipas)” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign for king and and a sign depicting cutting off the head (of John the Baptist), referring to Matthew 14:10 et al. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
Following are a number of back-translations of Luke 23:11:
Noongar: “Herod and his soldiers mocked Jesus and insulted him. Then they dressed him in fine clothes (lit.: cangaroo skin) and sent him back to Pilate.” (Source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang)
Uma: “After that, Herodes with his soldiers mocks and disparaged Yesus. They clothed him with king’s clothes, and they took him back to Pilatus.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Then Herod and his soldiers made fun of Isa and humbled him/put him down. They dressed him in a very nice long-robe and then Herod commanded him to be brought back to Pilatus.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then Herod and his soldiers, they played with Jesus and they treated him shamefully. They dressed him in very good clothing as if he were a king, and then they returned him to Pilate.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Then Herod joined his soldiers in laughing-at and mocking Jesus. They dressed him in a fine robe like that which kings wear and after that they returned him to Pilato.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Well, what else but Herodes and his soldiers then insulted/belittled and mocked Jesus. They dressed him in ornate clothing and then Herodes caused him to be returned to Pilato.” (Source: Tagbanwa 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.
exouthenēsas … kai empaixas peribalōn … anepempsen ‘after treating (him) with contempt and after mocking (him) he put on … and sent back.’ Of the three participles of this clause the first and the second go together and refer to acts without direct connexion with the act denoted by the main verb anepempsen; the third, however, is directly connected with the sending back of Jesus since it is a preparation for it. For exoutheneō cf. on 18.9; for empaizō on 14.29.
ho Hērōdēs sun tois strateumasin ‘Herod together with his troops.’
strateuma ‘army,’ in the plural ‘troops,’ ‘soldiers.’
peribalōn esthēta lampran ‘after putting on (him) a splendid robe,’ probably some mock royal robe or cloak. For periballō cf. on 12.27.
esthēs (also 24.4) ‘clothing,’ in a general sense, here, ‘robe,’ ‘cloak.’
lampros ‘splendid,’ ‘gorgeous,’ cf. Plummer.
anepempsen auton tō Pilatō ‘he sent him back to Pilate,’ cf. on v. 7.
Translation:
Grammatically only Herod is the subject of the whole sentence; semantically Herod and his soldiers are the agents of “treated … with contempt” and “mocked”; of the arraying the same may be true, but it is probably preferable to take Herod as the initiator; of the sending back Herod alone is the direct agent. These differences may have to be made explicit in the translation, e.g. in Fulah, or in Uab Meto, which has, ‘H. slandered him together with his officers, they all mocked him. Then he ordered to array him…, and he sent him back to P..’ Tzeltal has ‘Herod and his soldiers’ as subject of the first three verbs, ‘Herod’ as subject of ‘sent him back.’
To treat with contempt, or, ‘to look down upon,’ ‘to despise.’ To mock, see on 14.29.
Arraying him in gorgeous apparel, he sent him back, or in co-ordination, ‘Herod had him arrayed, or, they arrayed him…, and so he/Herod sent him back.’ For to array cf. on 12.27. Gorgeous apparel (cf. on 7.25), or, ‘splendid cloak’ (cf. on 6.29), ‘kingly clothes’ (Shona).
Quoted with permission from Reiling, J. and Swellengrebel, J.L. A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1971. For this and other handbooks for translators see here . Make sure to also consult the Handbook on the Gospel of Mark for parallel or similar verses.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.