The Hebrew, Latin and Greek that is translated into English as “chariot” is translated into Anuak as “canoe pulled by horse.” “Canoe” is the general term for “vehicle” (source: Loren Bliese). Similarly it is translated in Lokạạ as ukwaa wạ nyanyang ntuuli or “canoe that is driven by horses.” (Source: J.A. Naudé, C.L. Miller Naudé, J.O. Obono in Acta Theologica 43/2, 2023, p. 129ff. )
In Eastern Highland Otomi it’s translated as “cart pulled by horses” (source: Larson 1998, p. 98) and in Chichicapan Zapotec as “ox cart” (in Acts 8). Ox carts are common vehicles for travel. (Source: Loren Bliese)
In Chichimeca-Jonaz, it is translated as “little house with two feet pulled by two horses” (source: Viola Waterhouse in Notes on Translation August 1966, p. 86ff.) and in the HausaCommon Language Ajami Bible as keken-doki or “cart of donkey” (source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
It is illustrated for use in Bible translations in East Africa by Pioneer Bible Translators like this:
Image owned by PBT and Jonathan McDaniel and licensed with the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The Hebrew and Greek that is transliterated as “Ephraim” in English is translated in Spanish Sign Language with the sign for “palm tree” referring to the palm of Deborah in the land of Ephraim (see Judges 4:5. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
The name that is transliterated as “Jerusalem” in English is signed in French Sign Language with a sign that depicts worshiping at the Western Wall in Jerusalem:
While a similar sign is also used in British Sign Language, another, more neutral sign that combines the sign “J” and the signs for “place” is used as well. (Source: Anna Smith)
“Jerusalem” in British Sign Language (source: Christian BSL, used with permission)
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.
The speaker continues to be the LORD. In the first part of the verse he speaks in the first person about himself, and in the second part, in the third person about the Messiah.
I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim and the war horse from Jerusalem: These two statements are in parallel with one another, and speak of the total removal of military equipment from both the northern (Ephraim) and southern (Jerusalem) parts of the Promised Land. This is saying in other words that the land will be reunited under the rule of the king who is the Messiah. Many translators will follow Good News Translation and translate Ephraim as “Israel,” but some may prefer to keep Ephraim and explain its meaning in a footnote or glossary entry. Compare also 10.7. It is not entirely clear whether the chariots and horses that are to be removed belong to the people of God or to their enemies. If they belong to the enemies, then the meaning is that the land will be not be attacked again. If they belong to the people of God, then it means that they will need no defenses when the Messiah rules. Commentators tend to hold the second of these views (Chary, Delcor, Petersen).
Cut off is a common Hebrew metaphor meaning destroy or “remove” (Good News Translation). I will cut off is the meaning of the Hebrew text, followed by Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation, New International Version, New Living Translation, Contemporary English Version, Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament, and Hebrew Old Testament Text Project. The ancient Greek and Syriac translations have “he will…,” and this form is preferred by the majority of modern versions, including New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Revised English Bible, New Revised Standard Version, and even New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, which rarely departs from the Hebrew text. In Hebrew there is a difference of just one consonant. The form of the word here has already occurred in verse 6 (“make an end of”).
Chariot is expressed in some languages as “war wagon pulled by horses,” “wagon for fighting pulled by horses,” or simply “a cart of war” (see Hag 2.22). In some languages war horse may be rendered as “soldiers mounted on horses.” The singular terms chariot and war horse stand for chariots and war-horses in general, and will usually be translated as plural, as in the Contemporary English Version model below. Some translators will find it better style to combine these first two lines of the verse as Contemporary English Version has done:
I, the LORD, will take away
war chariots and horses
from Israel and Jerusalem.
The battle bow shall be cut off: Because this statement is passive, it is not clear who carries out the action. In languages where it is necessary to make this clear, translators may assume that the subject is the same as in the previous clause, namely the LORD. The battle bow, though singular in form, stands for such weapons in general, and may be translated as a plural: “the bows used in battle” (Good News Translation; similarly Contemporary English Version, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente).
He shall command peace to the nations: There is some debate about the exact meaning of the unusual expression translated command peace (literally “speak peace,” King James Version). Delcor draws attention to Est 10.3 and Psa 122.8-9, where similar expressions are linked with another phrase meaning “seek good, seek the welfare of.” In these contexts to “speak peace” means not just making good wishes but also making practical arrangements that will ensure that the good wishes are fulfilled. This view fits the context well here. Nothing will be beyond the power of the Messiah when he rules as king. When he intends there to be peace, then it will indeed come about. Peace here has its widest sense of “total well-being,” not merely the absence of war but certainly including that. The nations are all the non-Jewish peoples. This passage echoes other prophecies of the rule of the Messiah, especially Isa 2.4; Micah 4.3-4; 5.10. Good News Translation makes it clear that “king” is the subject of this sentence, referring back to “your king” in verse 9: “Your king will make peace among the nations.” Contemporary English Version has “I will bring peace to nations,” indicating that it thinks the LORD is the subject of the verb, but this does not seem likely. Translators are advised to follow the interpretation of Good News Translation.
His dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth: These words are closely similar to those of Psa 72.8. The expression is a proverbial one and in its totality it refers to the ideal extent of the Promised Land, the territory promised by God to the people of Israel (compare Exo 23.31; 1 Kgs 4.21). His dominion may often be better translated with a verb, as in Good News Translation “he will rule.”
From sea to sea means from the Mediterranean Sea across to the Dead Sea (Mitchell), or perhaps to the Gulf of Aqaba (New Jerusalem Bible footnote), that is to say the western and eastern limits of the land. The River is generally understood to be the Euphrates (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version, Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, 2. Edition, Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente), the idealized northern boundary of the Promised Land. The last phrase the ends of the earth is somewhat ambiguous. In the context of a description of the idealized Israel, it could well refer to the direction not yet mentioned, the south. In this direction there is no obvious natural boundary and a vague phrase like “across the earth” (Contemporary English Version) could be appropriate. Other scholars prefer to see the kingdom of the Messiah covering the whole world, and take this phrase to mean from the Euphrates eastwards as far as land extended. In Zechariah’s day there was no clear understanding of the size of the land mass making up all of Europe and Asia, and it would be quite suitable to think of the Messiah’s kingdom extending in effect beyond the limits of human knowledge. The expression the ends of the earth in English tends to make the native speaker think of the second meaning, which is found in the New Jerusalem Bible footnote (“indefinitely eastwards”) and in Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch, 1. Edition (compare Delcor). Either interpretation is acceptable.
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Zechariah. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 2002. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.