Painting by Wang Suda 王肅達 (1910-1963),
Copyright by the Catholic University Peking, China
Text under painting translated from Literary Chinese into English: Raising a Girl
Proof that Jesus is the true God
Image taken from Chinese Christian Posters . For more information on the “Ars Sacra Pekinensis” school of art, see this article , for other artworks of that school in TIPs, see here.
Following are a number of back-translations of Mark 5:41:
Uma: “He held the child’s hand and said to her: ‘Get/wake up, child!’ In the Yahudi people’s language, it sounds like this: ‘Talita kum!'” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “He took the hand of the child and he said to her, ‘Talita kumi.’ In our (incl.) language it means, ‘Girl, I say to you, get up.'” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “And when they were there, Jesus took hold of the hand of the child and he said, ‘Talitha kumi,’ which is to say, ‘Girl, get up!'” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “Jesus took-her -by-the-hand and said in their language, ‘Talita kom.’ It’s meaning is: ‘Young-lady, you (sing.) get-up.'” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Jesus took hold of the hand of the child and spoke saying, ‘Talita kumi!’ That means, ‘Daughter, go ahead, get up!'” (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.
Instead of the masculine form koum of the great majority of modern editions of the Greek text, Textus Receptus, Souter (and Revised Standard Version) have the feminine form koumi (cf. the discussion in Lagrange).
Exegesis:
kratēsas tēs cheiros (cf. 1.31) ‘seizing her hand.’
legei autē ‘he says to her’: the concordance of genders is logical ‘her,’ i.e. ‘the girl’ and not grammatical (since the antecedent tou paidiou ‘the child’ is neuter).
talitha koum: a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic telithaʾ qum ‘damsel arise.’
ho estin methermēneuomenon ‘which is translated,’ i.e. ‘which translated means.’
to korasion (5.42; 6.22, 28), ‘maiden,’ ‘girl’: another use of the nominative form for the vocative case (cf. 5.8, 34).
egeire (cf. 1.31) ‘rise,’ ‘get up.’ Whether this means simply ‘rise from the bed,’ or ‘rise from the dead’ will be determined by the meaning given the statement of Jesus concerning the girl in v. 39.
Translation:
Taking her … he said may be rendered by two coordinate expressions ‘he took hold of her hand and he said.’
Talitha cumi should be transliterated in such a way as to represent the closest sound equivalents in the receptor language. For a discussion of the problems of transliteration, see Bible Translating, 243-46.
For the Treatment of a phrase such as which means, see 3.17.
Little girl is very frequently translated by the same term as is used for child in verses 39 and 40. It is most important that one not employ a word which would imply a person of different age or maturity status.
Arise should be interpreted in this context as ‘stand up’ (see the following verse). It is quite unnecessary, and misleading to translate ‘arise from the dead,’ for note that Jesus was sincerely trying to understate the extent of the miracle (see verse 39).
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.