The Bible Translator

In a 1979 article in The Bible Translator, Harold Fehderau developed a basic theoretical outline for what subsequently became common practice in many Bible translation projects—consulting both a formal “base” translation and a functional “model” translation in the language(s) of wider communication in the region. The starting point for this approach is the fact that most translation projects worldwide did not (and still do not) work directly with the source languages, but rather work(ed) with the biblical text by way of a single intermediate translation in the language(s) of wider communication within the local context. The clear advantage of this practice is that translators will by definition be translating from the text they are best able to understand, which presumably gives them the best chance to represent the original text well. But there are pitfalls to this method, some of which Fehderau alluded to in his article. One such pitfall will now be examined, from a consultant visit to the Tojolabal translation project being carried out in southern Mexico.

The program “Digitization of Old Chinese Bibles,” likely the largest digitization program for Chinese Bibles ever undertaken, began in August 2014 under the auspices of the Digital Bible Library (DBL), an initiative of the United Bible Societies with the aim of gathering, validating, and safeguarding Scripture texts and publication assets (https://thedigitalbiblelibrary.org/home/). The completion of Phase I in April 2016 also marked the launch of Phase II of the program. By the time the present article is published, a majority of twenty-two Chinese Bibles (full or New Testament) will have been full-text digitized and uploaded to DBL for wider distribution. The final goal of the digitization program is to digitize all thirty-three extant complete Chinese New Testaments or full Bibles—whether in Wenli (classical) Chinese or Mandarin Chinese—published prior to the 1950s. The purpose of the article is to report on this program, what it entails, and the challenges it faces.

The present paper highlights the importance of attending to the ancient textual tradition within the process of translation. It argues that many of the scribes of the NT manuscripts perceived their own work in a similar light to many Bible translators today, since they considered clarity of communication to be one of their goals. For this reason, they often made emendations of a sort similar to those that are recommended to contemporary translators. Translators are able to derive benefit from attending carefully to the NT textual tradition to learn how ancient scribes understood the text and sought to communicate its meaning clearly to their readers.

The traditional translation of the Greek word ἀληθής as “true” or “accepted as fact” in John 8.17 appears to suggest a legal stipulation which would pose serious legal problems if used in judicial proceedings. This raises the question whether the translation is true to the mark. The paper suggests that ἀληθής might have a slightly different meaning in John 8.17 and should be translated as “trustworthy.”

This article applies Lakoff and Johnson’s cognitive metaphor theory to the key terms of death and resurrection in the Scriptures and examines the translation of these terms into languages with a traditional Buddhist culture whose worldview is different from that of the Bible. The present analysis indicates that in the conceptual system of the biblical authors, the concept of death is metaphorically described as sleep while resurrection is pictured as waking up and standing up. However, in the Buddhist worldview the concept of the resurrection is absent and the concept of death is not always metaphorically extended as sleep. This article discusses the practical possibilities and limits of the representations of these metaphorical extensions in three Buddhist-context translation projects of the Institute for Bible Translation in Russia: Buryat, Kalmyk, and Tuvan. It also offers some suggestions about searching for their possible representations in the target language.

Adoniram Judson’s 1840 translation of the Bible into Burmese (Myanmar) remains the most used version amongst Protestants in Myanmar. This article examines in detail Judson’s translation of the book of Zephaniah, comparing it with the Hebrew text, in order to assess translation tendencies and identify specific areas that revision would need to address. The analysis reveals that Judson’s translation is of a high standard due to his thorough scholarship. Nevertheless, several areas emerge where improvement could be made. One is in passages where biblical scholarship has made advances in the understanding of texts since Judson’s time. The Judson Bible also has a restricted vocabulary in places where it could be expanded, and in other passages Judson gives a free translation which at times could be improved to translate the Hebrew text more clearly. Another area for improvement is consistency in translating some words and phrases.

Containing one of the highest counts of hapax legomena for the length of text in the Hebrew Bible, the book of Esther has posed certain challenges to translators. Three of these hapax legomena (טהב, רד, תרחס) have been particularly difficult and unsatisfactorily translated as kinds of stone as adornments to the banquets in the palace in Susa. Various commentaries offer differing translations of different kinds of stone, whilst arguing such translations. This paper argues that these hapax legomena describe royal carpets that, in line with motifs from Greek literature, function as a comedic device in the Hebrew text of Esther. Translating טהב, רד, and תרחס to refer to carpets best fits the etymological evidence and literary style of the banquet scenes.

This paper suggests that the difficulties associated with the interpretation of Ps 90.5a (זְרַמְתָּם שֵׁנָה יִהְיוּ) can be resolved if a זמר/זרם metathesis and the ligature ם = נו is assumed. These assumptions result in the reading זְמַרְתָּן וְשֵׁנָה יִהְיוּ, meaning “You trimmed them [i.e., the years of life], and a sleep they are,” which provides a cogent grammatical text, making only minimal changes to the MT. The verse contains three metaphors that describe human longevity by comparing it to the shortness of a nap (שֵׁנָה), the dawn (בֺּקֶר), and the transience of a blade of grass (חָצִיר).