The Greek and Hebrew that is translated as “high priest” in English is translated as “the ruler of the priests of our nation” in Yatzachi Zapotec, as “very great priest” in Chol (source: M. Larson / B. Moore in Notes on Translation February 1970, p. 1-125.), as “first over the priests” in Ayutla Mixtec, and “chief of the priests” in Desano (source for this and one above: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.).
In Uma it is translated as “Big Priest,” in Western Bukidnon Manobo as “high sacrificer,” and in Tagbanwa as “Most-important Priest of God.” (See here.)
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “witness” in English is translated as “truly have seen” in Highland Popoluca, as “telling the truth regarding something” (Eastern Highland Otomi), as “know something” in Lalana Chinantec, as “verily know something to be the truth” in San Mateo del Mar Huave, as “we ourselves saw this,” in Desano, as “tell the truth about something” in Eastern Highland Otomi, as “know something is true because of seeing it” in Teutila Cuicatec. (Source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.)
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated with “clothes” or similar in English is translated in Enlhet as “crawling-in-stuff” (source: Jacob Loewen in The Bible Translator 1971, p. 169ff. ) and in Noongar as bwoka or “Kangaroo skin” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
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 inclusive form (including the chief priests, the scribes and the elders).
Source: Velma Pickett and Florence Cowan in Notes on Translation January 1962, p. 1ff.
Following are a number of back-translations of Mark 14:63:
Uma: “Hearing that, the Big Priest ripped his shirt from his anger, and he said: ‘There is no longer a need for witnesses!” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “Then the leading priest tore his clothes because of his anger (peddi’ atey). And he said, ‘Why should we (incl.) still search for witnesses?” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And then the high priest tore his shirt as a sign that he was very angry with what Jesus had said. And he said, It’s no longer necessary that anyone testify because as for all of you,” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “When he heard that, the highest priest tore his own clothes due-to his anger and he said, ‘Is it indeed-the-case that (RQ implying of course not) we still need witnesses?” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “When the Most-important Priest heard, he tore his own clothes in anger. He spoke, saying, ‘Well, why do we (incl.) still need someone to give-evidence?” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)
diarēxas tous chitōnas autou ‘tearing his (own) garments.’
diarēssō (only here in Mark) ‘rend,’ ‘burst,’ ‘tear.’
hoi chitōnes (cf. 6.9) ‘the tunics’: as Arndt & Gingrich remark the word is here probably used in a general way for ‘clothes,’ ‘garments,’ rather than strictly with reference to the under-garments (the parallel Mt. 26.65 has ta himatia ‘the garments’). Revised Standard Version ‘mantle’ is inaccurate: cf. ‘clothes’ (Moffatt, Williams, Translator’s New Testament, American Standard Version), ‘vestments’ (Montgomery), ‘garments’ (The Modern Speech New Testament, Manson), ‘clothing’ (Goodspeed). The gesture of tearing one’s garments was indicative of sorrow or horror and in the case of judicial proceedings, such as this one, in tearing his garments the high priest indulged in a formal ceremonial act, minutely prescribed by tradition.
chreian echomen (cf. 2.17) ‘we have need of.’
marturōn (only here in Mark) ‘witnesses.’
Translation:
For high priest see 14.47.
Tore must not imply some accidental tearing, but a deliberate, planned tearing as a gesture of consummate indignation. Such an action may not be readily understandable to people in other cultures but the context is such as to prevent any very wrong interpretation of the action.
Mantle should be translated by the most generic term for ‘clothes.’
Still need witnesses is equivalent in some languages to ‘need more people to speak against him’ or ‘require more men to say what they know about him.’
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.