swear, vow

The Hebrew and Greek that is translated as “swear (an oath)” or “vow” is translated as “God sees me, I tell the truth to you” (Tzeltal), “loading yourself down” (Huichol), “to speak-stay” (implying permanence of the utterance) (Sayula Popoluca), “to say what he could not take away” (San Blas Kuna), “because of the tight (i.e. “binding”) word which he had said to her face” (Guerrero Amuzgo), “strong promise” (North Alaskan Inupiatun) (source for all above: Bratcher / Nida), “eat an oath” (Nyamwezi — source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext), or sswa nak/”drink an oath” (Jju — source: McKinney 2018, p. 31).

In Bauzi “swear” can be translated in various ways. In Hebrews 6:13, for instance, it is translated with “bones break apart and decisively speak.” (“No bones are literally broken but by saying ‘break bones’ it is like people swear by someone else in this case it is in relation to a rotting corpse’ bones falling apart. If you ‘break bones’ so to speak when you make an utterance, it is a true utterance.”) In other passages, such as in Matthew 26:72, it’s translated with an expression that implies taking ashes (“if a person wants everyone to know that he is telling the truth about a matter, he reaches down into the fireplace, scoops up some ashes and throws them while saying ‘I was not the one who did that.'”). So in Matthew 26:72 the Bauzi text is: “. . . Peter took ashes and defended himself saying, ‘I don’t know that Nazareth person.'” (Source: David Briley)

See also swear (promise) and Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’, or ‘No, No’.

addressing God

Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed. The first example is from a language where God is always addressed distinctly formal whereas the second is one where the opposite choice was made.

Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight

Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.

As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator 2002, p. 210ff.), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.

In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.

Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”

In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.

Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking (source Philip Noss).

In Dutch and Western Frisian translations, however, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.

See also female second person singular pronoun in Psalms.

Translation commentary on Numbers 11:12

Did I conceive all this people? Did I bring them forth …?: These two questions are rhetorical and again ironic as well. Good News Translation renders their intention by means of an exclamation, saying “I didn’t create them or bring them to birth!” The Hebrew verbs rendered conceive and bring … forth are normally used to refer to pregnancy and giving birth. In Hebrew both verbs are reinforced by the presence of the independent pronoun for I. A rendering that reflects this emphasis is “Did I myself conceive all these people or did I myself bring them to birth?” (similarly Buber). Of course, Moses didn’t, and he blames the LORD for placing the whole burden upon him. It was the relation between the LORD and the people of Israel that was like the relation between mother and child (so Noth, page 86).

That thou shouldst say to me, ‘Carry them in your bosom, as a nurse carries the sucking child,’ to the land which thou didst swear to give their fathers: Good News Translation changes Moses’ quote of the LORD to an indirect one, and this may be necessary for clarity in most languages, but not necessarily all. The direct speech personalizes the burden that Moses is feeling and reacting to. Ironically, he can even cite the LORD’s words when giving him this onerous assignment! Translators should use the manner of expression that is most natural and forceful in their language. The Hebrew expression for Carry them in your bosom means “carry them on your chest.” Languages will have their own expression for carrying a newborn baby. New Jerusalem Bible says “Carry them in your arms.” Another possible model is “Carry them close to your heart.” As a nurse carries the sucking child is a simile that compares how Moses must take the Israelites. The Hebrew word for nurse has no particular medical connotations as may be imagined by some readers of the English term. The root meaning for this Hebrew word is “faithfulness,” so it refers to someone who could be counted on for support and help. This word is masculine in Hebrew, so it does not carry the meaning “foster mother” (De Nieuwe Bijbelvertaling), although the reference to a sucking child (“nursing child” in NET Bible) might suggest this. More accurate renderings for nurse are “caretaker” and “foster father” (NET Bible). The land which thou didst swear to give their fathers refers to the land of Canaan that the LORD promised with an oath to give to the Israelites’ ancestors. Their fathers means “their ancestors” (Good News Translation) in this context. Moses distances himself from the people by saying “their ancestors” instead of “our ancestors.” A model for this last half of the verse is “Why should you tell me to act like a caretaker and carry them in my arms like babies all the way to the land you promised to their ancestors?” (similarly Good News Translation).

Quoted with permission from de Regt, Lénart J. and Wendland, Ernst R. A Handbook on Numbers. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .