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).
The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “village” or “town” in English is translated in Noongar as karlamaya or “fire (used for “home“) + houses” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
Following are a number of back-translations of Mark 6:6:
Uma: “So, Yesus expressed-surprised / was-critical-of them for they did not believe. That’s why he couldn’t do many surprising things there. The only thing he did was to lay-hands on several sick people to heal them. Yesus wandered around paying-visits-to villages and teaching people.” (Source: Uma Back Translation)
Yakan: “He really wondered as to why the people there did not believe in him. So-then Isa went covering/throughout the villages in that land/place and he taught/preached there.” (Source: Yakan Back Translation)
Western Bukidnon Manobo: “Jesus was very much amazed because the people in that village did not believe in him. Jesus preached in every one of the other neighboring villages.” (Source: Western Bukidnon Manobo Back Translation)
Kankanaey: “And he was amazed due-to their not believing in him. Then Jesus went traveling-around the many-towns teaching.” (Source: Kankanaey Back Translation)
Tagbanwa: “Jesus was amazed that they didn’t believe. Jesus then went all over the barios in that place and taught there.” (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.
oligois arrōstois epitheis tas cheiras etherapeusen ‘(by) laying his hands on a few sick ones he healed (them).’
arrōstos (6.13; 16.18) ‘powerless,’ i.e. ‘sick,’ ‘ill.’
epitithenai tas cheiras (cf. 5.23) ‘to lay hands upon.’
therapeuō (cf. 1.34) ‘heal,’ ‘cure.’
ethaumasen (cf. 5.20) ‘he marveled,’ ‘he was surprised.’
dia tēn apistian autōn ‘on account of their unbelief’: most English translations (cf. also Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale, Lagrange, O Novo Testamento de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo. Revisdo Autorizada) have it ‘at their unbelief’ translating dia not as cause but as the object of the surprise of Jesus.
apistia (9.24; 16.14) ‘lack of belief,’ ‘lack of trust’ in Jesus (cf. faith, confidence, in Jesus, 2.5; 5.34). In this context the word describes the unwillingness of the people of Nazareth to believe that Jesus could work miracles.
kai periēgen tas kōmas kuklō didaskōn ‘and he went around among the adjacent villages teaching.’
periagō (only here in Mark) ‘go about,’ ‘make a tour.’
kōmē (6.36, 56; 8.23, 26, 27; 11.2; cf. agros 5.14) ‘village,’ ‘small town’; in general smaller than polis ‘city’ but larger than agros ‘hamlet’ – cf. especially 6.36, 56.
kuklō (cf. 3.34) ‘round about,’ ‘around’: here modifies tas kōmas ‘surrounding villages.’
Translation:
Could evidently means that though Jesus had the power to perform miracles, in Nazareth he was unable to use his power because of the lack of faith on the part of the people.
For mighty work, see 6.2.
Few is a relative word, which receives its meaning from the context. In other languages there are often equally arbitrary delimitations. For example, in Tzeltal the equivalent of few is ‘two or three,’ but this does not mean literally two or three, but as in the case of English few acquires its meaning from the context; compare ‘a few people in town’ and ‘a few people in our living room,’ obviously capable of quite different meanings.
Unbelief may be rendered as a phrase ‘they did not believe’ or ‘they did not have confidence in him.’
Villages would imply the hamlets surrounding Nazareth, e.g. ‘he went around from hamlet to hamlet, teaching the people.’
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.