teach

The Greek that is translated as a form of “teach” is translated with some figurative phrases such as “to engrave the mind” (Ngäbere) or “to cause others to imitate” (Huichol). (Source: Bratcher / Nida)

In Noongar it is translated as karni-waangki or “truth saying” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).

parable

Click here to view graphically

The Greek that is usually translated as “parable” in English is translated in other languages in a number of ways:

In British Sign Language it is translated with a sign that combines the signs for “tell-a-story” and “compare.” (Source: Anna Smith)


“Parable” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)

Scot McKnight (in The Second Testament, publ. 2023) translates it into English as analogy because “the Greek word has the sense of tossing down something alongside something else. Hence an analogy.”

See also image and figures of speech.

complete verse (Mark 4:2)

Following are a number of back-translations of Mark 4:2:

  • Uma: “He taught them many things with parables. He said to them like this:” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
  • Yakan: “He taught/preached-to the people and much of it he taught in parables. When he taught he said to them,” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
  • Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And Jesus taught them many things by means of parables.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
  • Kankanaey: “He taught them much using-parables. In his teaching, he said,” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
  • Tagbanwa: “Jesus taught many things, using illustrations only. He said,” (Source: Tagbanwa Back Translation)

pronoun for "God"

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 Kouya, Godié, Northern Grebo, Eastern Krahn, Western Krahn, and Guiberoua Béte, all languages of the Kru family in Western Africa, a different kind of systems of pronouns is used (click or tap here to read more):

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.

Translation: Chinese

在现代汉语中，第三人称单数代词的读音都是一样的（tā），但是写法并不一样，取决于性别以及是否有生命，即男性为“他”，女性为“她”，动物、植物和无生命事物为“它”（在香港和台湾的汉语使用，动物则为“牠”）。这些字的部首偏旁表明了性别（男人、女人、动物、无生命事物），而另一偏旁通常旁提示发音。

到1930年为止，基督教新教《圣经》经过整整一百年的翻译已经拥有了十几个译本，当时的一位圣经翻译者王元德新造了一个“神圣的”代词“祂”，偏旁“礻”表示神明。一般汉语读者会立即知道这字的发音是tā，而这个偏旁表示属灵的事物，因此他们明白这个字指出，三位一体的所有位格都没有性别之分，而单单是上帝。

然而，最重要的新教圣经译本（1919年的《和合本》）和天主教圣经译本（1968年的《思高圣经》）都没有采用“祂”；虽然如此，许多其他的圣经译本采用了这个字，另外还广泛出现在赞美诗和其他基督信仰的书刊中。（资料来源：Zetzsche）

《吕振中译本》的几个早期版本也使用“祂”来指称“上帝”；这个译本的《新约》于1946年译成，整部《圣经》于1970年完成。克拉默斯（Kramers）指出：“‘他’的这种新写法（即‘祂’）产生了一个小问题，就是在指称耶稣的时候，是否一律使用这个敬语代词？《吕振中译本》遵循的原则是，在称呼耶稣这个人的时候，用一般的‘他’，而在称呼耶稣神性的时候，特别是升天之后的耶稣，则用尊称‘祂’。”

Translator: Simon Wong

Translation commentary on Mark 4:2 – 4:3

Exegesis:

en parabolais (cf. 3.23) ‘in parables,’ ‘by means of parables.’

polla ‘many things’ (adjectival), not adverbial ‘much’ (cf. 1.45; 3.12).

en tē didachē autou (cf. 1.22) ‘in his teaching,’ i.e. ‘as he taught’: the sense of didachē here is active ‘the act of teaching’ and not passive ‘the thing taught,’ ‘doctrine.’

akouete. idou ‘listen! (impv.) look!’ (cf. 1.2). The second word simply strengthens the note of urgency and demand in the first, and need not be translated literally (cf. Revised Standard Version, Translator’s New Testament, and the majority of English translations which omit it).

ho speirōn ‘the sower,’ ‘the man who sows’ (4.14): the present participle of the verb is to be taken as an active noun.

speirō (4.4, 14, 15, 16, 18, 20, 31, 32) ‘sow’ – only in this chapter, in Mark. The infinitive speirai ‘to sow’ indicates purpose: ‘the sower went out in order to sow.’ It should be noticed that the method employed in sowing was that of scattering the seed over the soil, as the sower walked through the field, and not that of dropping each seed individually into a hole previously dug in the ground for that purpose.

Translation:

For parables see 3.23.

In his teaching may be rendered ‘as he was teaching them,’ in order to emphasize the active process, not the passive content of the teaching.

In many regions of the world this parable causes almost unbelievable difficulty because the method of sowing is not understood. For example, in a great many parts of the world the common process of sowing involves the use of a dibble stick by which a hole is made in prepared soil and in this hole a number of grains are dropped, after which the hole is carefully covered up and the soil sometimes tamped. The idea that a sower would be so utterly profligate as to throw seed broadcast is sometimes interpreted as a sure sign of incurable laziness or even of insanity. The reader then judges that for some of the seed to be lost to the birds, choked by weeds, or ruined by sprouting too soon in shallow soil is only to be expected in view of such an incredibly stupid method of sowing. On the other hand, it is impossible to change the method of sowing as spoken of in this parable, for the parable itself is not understandable except in terms of such a procedure. The only thing that one can do is to make certain that one does indicate that this was broadcast sowing ‘scattering the seed on plowed ground’ (or ‘prepared ground’), ‘to sow-scatter,’ used of upland rice (Amganad Ifugao), and ‘to plant by throwing’ (Highland Oaxaca Chontal). This is much better than implying that the sower was so utterly lacking in judgment that he would have used a dibble stick on stony ground or in a path.

Fundamentally, the translator is confronted by three types of meaning: syntactic (the meanings of grammatical constructions), lexical (the meanings of individual words and phrases), and cultural. The first two he must deal with in terms of the closest natural equivalent (the meanings of concepts within a cultural framework). The latter can only be treated in commentaries, or at best through necessary marginal notes. What he must avoid, however, is deciding upon syntactic and lexical solutions which will make cultural meanings more difficult.

It is not necessary to repeat the lexical items ‘sower’ and ‘sow.’ If this would be stylistically awkward in a receptor language, one may say only ‘a man went out to sow.’

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 .