MAP — Modular Aggregation of Principles for Bible Translation

Extracted text from TTGManual5ne.pdf:

United Bible Societies ASIA-PACIFIC REGION

TRANSLATOR TRAINING MANUAL

United Bible Societies Asia Pacific Region Translator Training Manual Trial Edition 2004, 2006 United Bible Societies This material may be shared with, and used by anyone directly involved in training Bible translators, provided due acknowledgement is made.

United Bible Societies Asia-Pacific Regional Translation Office GPO Box 1445, Brisbane, QLD 4001 Australia Preface

The training of translators is one of the primary responsibilities of Translation Officers both of the National Bible Societies and of the United Bible Societies. Over many years, UBS and UBS staff have produced a number of books, some of which have become standard textbooks for translator training worldwide. These books include E.A.Nida and C.R.Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1969); J. de Waard and E.A. Nida, From One Language to Another: Functional Equivalence in Bible Translation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1986); R. Omanson (ed.) Discover the Bible (United Bible Societies,2001); and most recently T. Wilt (ed.) Bible Translation: Frames of Reference (Manchester: St. Jerome, 2003). However the current challenges faced in training translators in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly in terms of context and of theological and general educational background, together with developments in linguistic and translation theory, have meant that much of the earlier material is not easy to use directly. Nor does it cover all of the practical aspects of training. This manual has been produced in response to the felt need among Translation Officers in the Asia-Pacific region for practical, contextually relevant resources to use in translation workshops.

A working group from Asia-Pacific regional translation staff, consisting of Dr. Anicia del Corro (convenor), Dr. Maksal Hynniewta, Mr. Norm Mundhenk and Rev.Dr. Graham Ogden, was given the task of preparing and compiling materials which could be used in translation workshops in the region. Through exchange of drafted chapters, and occasional meetings they have produced this collection of these teaching resources in the areas of linguistics, biblical studies, translation procedures and project structure and organisation, together with notes on a number of passages which are suitable for practice translation in workshops..

The manual is intended primarily as a resource for Translation Officers, rather than as a textbook for trainee-translators. It is not suggested that the units be taught precisely in the order presented here. Everyone has their own teaching style and preference for the order and priority of components of a training syllabus. But Translation Officers will find here resources on most of the core elements of such a syllabus.

Discretion is necessary in the selection and presentation of this material, particularly with regard to the educational background of the students. In particular units like Causes of Textual Variants and Biblical Studies and Bible Translation should be used only with those who can profit from such relatively advanced material. Other units, especially those in Section Four: Translation Principles, are written with the audience of trainee translators in view and could easily be handed out to classes as resources. Similarly the Checklist of Some Important Biblical Terms and the unit on Divine Names could be distrubuted as they stand, for students reference and classroom use. The Practice Passages provide notes to help Translation Officers prepare trainees to translate these passages within the workshop situation. They supplement such material as is available in the Translators Handbooks.

This present volume remains a Trial Edition. It is offered in the hope that it will be of benefit to Translation Officers in their task of training. The committee welcome feedback from any who use it. Comments and queries should be directed to the UBS Asia-Pacific Area Translation Coordinator, Daud SoesiloaspATCO@ubs-translations.org

Stephen Pattemore, Editor, June 2006 Note: This electronic version is hyperlinked through a brief Table of Contents at the front and a more detaild Table of Contents at the end.

Table of Contents

Section One: Introduction Unit One: Some Basic Questions Answered .......................................................................... 1 Unit Two: Ideology and Translation ...................................................................................... 3

Section Two: Language Unit Three: Introduction to Language .................................................................................... 5 Unit Four: Language and Society .......................................................................................... 9 Unit Five: Semantic Domains and Bible Translation .......................................................... 16 Unit Six: Discourse Analysis ............................................................................................... 27

Section Three: Biblical Studies Unit Seven: How the Bible Came to Us ............................................................................... 33 Unit Eight: Causes of Textual Variants ............................................................................... 43 Unit Nine: Bridging the Gaps .............................................................................................. 49 Unit Ten: Checklist Of Some Important Biblical Terms ..................................................... 57 Unit Eleven: Divine Names ................................................................................................. 60 Unit Twelve: Biblical Studies and Bible Translation .......................................................... 63

Section Four: Translation Principles Unit Thirteen: Implicit and explicit information .................................................................. 68 Unit Fourteen: Translating Figurative Language ................................................................. 90 Unit Fifteen: Where Do We Find Words We Dont Have? ............................................... 101 Unit Sixteen: Bible Translation Frames ............................................................................. 120

Section Five: The Translation process Unit Seventeen: Structures and Procedures ....................................................................... 144 Unit Eighteen: Revising Older Translations ...................................................................... 154 Unit Nineteen: The Use of Computers in Translation ....................................................... 163

Section Six: Practice passages Practice Passage One: The Book of Ruth .......................................................................... 167 Practice Passage Two: The Book of Jonah ........................................................................ 185 Practice Passage Three: Mark Chapter One ....................................................................... 195 Practice Passage Four: John Chapter Nine ......................................................................... 204 Practice Passage Five: Pauls Letter to Philemon .............................................................. 213

Detailed Table of Contents ................................................................................................... 218

[Go to Detailed Table of Contents]

1 SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION UNIT ONE [Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents] Some Basic Questions Answered 1.1 Why do we need a translation? The Word of God is for all. This is the reason why the Bible Society movement sees its mission as making the Bible available to the peoples of the world in languages they understand, in formats they appreciate and at prices they can afford. If we believe the Bible is for all, these three basic functions of the Bible Society movement naturally follow. But why do we think the Bible is for all?

One of the greatest facts about human history is that God has revealed himself to human beings. Gods graciousness is seen in his choosing to have a relationship with the people whom he created. God inspired different people to record the way they experienced this relationship in various forms. They expressed these in various forms, such as historical accounts, songs that expressed their emotions, and things that God had taught them, including what God said he would do in the future. These writings are found in the different books of the Bible.

As God chose to have a relationship with people, he made it clear that he wants to be understood. The ultimate proof of this is that God sent his Son, Jesus Christ, who through his life communicated Gods message of love for everyone. Jesus spoke a human language, just like all the other writers whom God inspired. The people who wrote the Bible wrote mainly in Hebrew and Greek because those were the languages used in the places where they lived.

Unfortunately, ancient Hebrew and Greek are known by very few people today. This is the reason why we need to translate the Bible into modern languages so that Gods message of love and salvation can be understood and accepted by everyone. 1.2 What is Bible translation all about? The ultimate goal of Bible translation is to make the message of the Bible understandable to those who cannot read the Bible in the original languages. Translation strives to represent the intentions of those who wrote the source text so that those intentions will be understood and appreciated by people today.

Every Bible translation must meet at least three basic requirements, each of which can be described as a dimension of faithfulness. These are faithfulness to the original text, faithfulness to the receptor language, and faithfulness to the whole Christian community.

Faithfulness to the original text means that the translation must represent as closely as possible the intentions present in the original text. In practice most Bible translations have followed one of two different approaches. Some translators make the linguistic forms of their translation as close as possible to the forms of the original text. Other translators give priority to making sure that the meaning of the translation reflects the meaning of the original text. Both groups would argue that their approach is the best way to be faithful. These two approaches are often referred to as formal and dynamic (or functional) equivalence, respectively.

Faithfulness to the receptor language means that the translation must not only be clearly understood but it must fit the receptor language standards of good, natural language, in a style appropriate to the contents. The Bible Society recognizes the need for a translation to be 2

Basic Questions

understood by its intended audience, otherwise the whole endeavour is useless. To be comprehensible, a translation must use language in the way that it is used by the intended audience. Language that is unnatural makes a translation difficult to understand. This applies to both syntactic forms and vocabulary.

Faithfulness to the whole Christian community reflects Bible Societys commitment to serve the whole church. It is therefore expected that Bible Society translations do not express any bias to a particular doctrinal position. Some doctrines are very well entrenched in the biblical text and these should be translated accurately. However, the translation should not try to accommodate a particular doctrine or view which may be favoured by the translator or the intended audience or by some but not all denominations or confessions within the receptor community.

In most cases, Bible translations are done because churches have expressed the need for a particular translation. The Bible Society fulfils its role as an arm of the church and serves as custodian of the biblical text. Sometimes, the Church requests the Bible Society to initiate a translation project. At other times, the Bible Society itself may sense the need for a particular kind of translation. In both cases, the Bible Society may call for a consultation to validate this possible need. The Bible Society tries its best to have a good representation from the different churches or other groups that have an interest in such a translation. The consultation is the venue to discuss the type of translation, whether formal or dynamic, whether a new translation is to be done or simply a revision of an existing one and other similar matters. Throughout the project, there is usually a close cooperation between the BS and the churches, and many times resources are shared by both.

One requirement of Bible Society translations is that the translators must be native speakers of the receptor language. Because of this, translators may have a wide range of educational attainments. Some may have doctoral degrees while others are high school graduates. However, because Bible translation is not usually taught even in universities or seminaries, all translators are trained for their work in translation workshops. Bible translation begins with the provision of adequate training for translators, enabling them to work independently to produce a good translation.

A common fear among Bible users is that a translation might embody the biases of the translator. That is why the Bible Society has developed a translation process which ensures the objectivity and high quality of a translation. The draft translation produced by a translator is reviewed by at least four different people in four different stages before it is finalized and then approved by the supervising Translation Consultant.

Bible translation today uses the latest technology to assist translation teams to produce a good translation. Computer software has been developed especially to assist Bible translators. This assists in attaining the Bible Societys goal of producing error-free Bibles.

[Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents]

3 UNIT TWO [Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents] Ideology And Translation

2.1 Ideology: our world view and the world of the Bible Ideology refers to the beliefs, myths and symbols of a social movement, social class or group. Individuals typically share the belief systems of the communities to which they belong. Ideology includes not only the ideas of such groups but also their plans for putting those ideas into action. So one might well ask what this has to do with Bible translation. There are two possible perspectives on ideology as it relates to the Scriptures. On the one hand we can talk about the ideology of the biblical books and writers/editors, the beliefs and ideas present in the text of Scripture; on the other hand we can focus on the ideology of the ones doing the interpreting and translating. For our purpose here we shall focus on the latter and leave the former to a study of biblical ideologies or theologies.

Those of us engaged in Bible translation do not belong to the two primary biblical cultures of Old and New Testaments. We belong to a historical period different from that of the biblical worlds. Bible translators come from cultures very different from those present in the pages of Scripture. We are very much products of our own times and cultures. We also have differing theological experiences, and these too impinge on our understanding of the text and thus on its interpretation and translation. Our own theological predispositions, our cultural heritages and those things that give us our identity contribute to our ideologies. Inevitably we bring these to the task of translating, though for the most part we are not conscious of the impact they have. Translators may think that they should be completely objective in dealing with the biblical text. However, that is not always, if ever, possible since we inevitably bring to the task our own cultural baggage.
2.2 Conscious ideological bias Some people would consider the word ideology to be something negative, but it need not be. None of us is without a set of beliefs that affects the way we see ourselves and the world; that is our personal ideology. However, it can give rise to some problems that Bible interpreters and translators should try to avoid first, the conscious desire to find in the biblical text ideas and notions that we wish to find there and to justify, and secondly the unconscious importing into the text of ideas that are foreign to it but which are part of our own worldview. It is very easy to impose our own perspectives on a text and then to see the text as confirming them. Some feminist interpretations, some liberation theologies, post-colonial studies and personal doctrinal understandings, all can read into the text the views they seek to sanction or support. This can be quite overt and deliberate. For example: We may find it difficult to accept the notion that people in OT and NT experienced domination by evil spirits. This could lead us to render those texts that speak of them in purely psychological terms. The pre-scientific picture of a three-level universe such as we have in Genesis is something we might wish to modify by the way we translate because it doesnt fit with modern scientific knowledge about the universe. The NT evidence for a doctrine of the Trinity may be imposed on the OT so that wherever it speaks of the spirit of God, as in Genesis 1.2, we translate it in such as a way as to mark it as a reference to the Holy Spirit. (In English this is usually done by using a capital letter for the word Spirit.) However, good translators do not seek consciously to bring personal agendas or doctrinal views into their translation. They are careful to render the text as it is. 4

Ideology and Translation

2.3 Sub-conscious ideological bias The other problem for translators to confront is not so much the cultural and personal views of which we are conscious, but those we might unsuspectingly bring to the text. For example: In a society where consumption of alcohol has caused a major social problem and the church has taken a stand against it, the translator may feel the need to avoid the term wine in favour of grape juice.
Where a translator has a particular view of the nature of Scripture it may lead to harmonizing passages which differ from one another an example might be in translating an OT passage quoted in the NT so that it agrees with the wording of the NT text. The term chosen for baptism may reflect our denominational allegiance. We choose the term we are familiar with from our church tradition even though other terms may also be exegetically appropriate. Translators may fail to recognize that throughout the Scriptures there is a development of thought with regard to certain theological ideas. This can influence their translation. A case in point is the emerging understanding of what happens after death. For example, in the OT Sheol is the place to which all dead persons go regardless of whether they are good or bad. Failure to appreciate this could lead to imposing NT ideas of Hell on the rendering of the term Sheol - see Psa 9.17 and many examples in KJV and NKJV.

Many other examples could be given but these are enough to demonstrate that the translator is heavily influenced by many factors. Translators may import their own cultural views and other values into their renderings of the biblical text without being aware that they are doing so. It is easily done when one is not fully aware of the differences between ones own world and that of the biblical text. 2.4 Faithfulness and sensitivity to context For a Bible Society translator who seeks to be faithful to the meaning of the texts, any attempt to slant the translation according to personal theological or political views must be rejected. Translators are called to render the meaning of the text within the guidelines of responsible scholarship and in a manner that is not sectarian. It is a task that calls the translator to become more aware of those factors that can distort the meaning of the original text and to ensure that they are minimized. These personal agendas cannot be totally eliminated when their influence is unconscious, but translators must endeavour to keep them to an absolute minimum.

In many modern English language translations there is a conscious decision to use what is called inclusive language. This may not be appropriate in other languages but if the translator is influenced by an English model text this tendency may be adopted without sufficient thought being given to its relevance in the target language and culture. For example, the translators of the NRSV decided to adopt the use of plural pronouns to avoid the use of masculine pronouns when the reference was to both men and women. But if this device is simply copied from the NRSV it may not be at all appropriate in a receptor language with a very different way of using pronouns.

[Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents]

5 SECTION TWO LANGUAGE UNIT THREE [Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents] Introduction To Language

3.1 Defining Language What is language? It is a system of arbitrary vocal symbols used in human communication. These symbols may be produced vocally or visually.

Why a system? Because language is ordered, systematic. It is characterized by patterns that show regularity of occurrence. In this sense it is rule-governed. Because it is governed by a set of rules, a person can say new things, which have never been heard or never used before, but which conform to the rules and so can be understood by people who know the rules.

Why arbitrary? There is no intrinsic connection between a thing and its name. Every word that is used for a particular object or concept is chosen as part of convention. But many times, this is done unconsciously.

Why vocal? The primary form of language is that which is spoken, thus vocal. There are other forms by which language is used such as the written form, or with the use of signs.

Why does it use symbols? It is in the nature of language that it uses symbols, or things that will stand for other things. Thus, the sounds combined to form the word BOY (b, o, y) stand for the meaning of BOY. Can you imagine what would happen if language was not symbolic? Youll have to have a boy to show to your listener whenever you need to refer to one.

Why human?
Language is used by people. There are other forms of communication, but when one says language, what is meant is that which people use.

Why does it have to be used in communication?
Can you call it language if you are the only one who can use it? 3.2 Terms used in connection with language DIALECT is a variation of a language. If one language that one speech community uses has regular differences from that spoken in another community, and these two communities understand each other, this is a case of one language having two variants, or two dialects. Dialects can differ in the sounds used, in intonation, how words are formed, vocabulary and even in syntax. Are you aware of any reference in the Bible about geographical dialects? See Judges 12.6, Matt 26.73.

Can you identify some dialects in your language? 6

Introduction to Language

In another situation when the speakers of the two speech communities do not understand each other, what may be supposed to be two dialects are actually separate languages. The criterion used here to identify if the dialects belong to one language or not is mutual intelligibility.

In Bible Translation, how important is it to choose the right dialect in the translation?

STANDARD LANGUAGE is a variety of a language that is written, acceptable to the learned, not limited to any particular region and functions in a community as the appropriate norm for communication, in activities of social prestige and as a symbol of identity, pride and unity.

NATIVE LANGUAGE is the language that a person acquires as a child in a natural setting. Because of this, the person is usually most proficient and most expressive in this language.

FIRST/SECOND LANGUAGE refers to the order by which languages are acquired by an individual. Thus, the first language learned in childhood is the first language, and the second one is the second language, and so on. In a country or region where there is a dominant foreign language, this language is usually learned as a second language such as English in the Philippines, Spanish in some parts of Mexico and Guatemala, and French in Haiti. In a multilingual country, the national language most often becomes the second language of the people who have a different native language.

In the Bible Society context, one of the qualifications required of Bible translators is that they be native speakers of the receptor language. Do you think this is important? Why?

LINGUA FRANCA When two people who speak different languages need to communicate with each other, they need to resort to another language which both of them know. This third language is the lingua franca. This term is actually derived from a medieval trade language called Lingua Franca used in the Mediterranean region and largely based on Romance languages with elements of Greek, Arabic and Turkish. In the modern world, it is fair to say that English is one of the most important, if not the most important lingua franca since it is spoken by a large sector of the world population.

In multilingual situations, some people think that it is best to do a Bible translation first in the lingua franca because this means that more people will have access to Gods word while other translations are being done. What do you think?

PIDGIN is a speech variety that develops when speakers of two or more different languages come in contact and have no shared language by which they can communicate, but still have to learn to communicate within a limited period of time. There are no native speakers of a pidgin but once it becomes more stabilized in a community and children grow up using this language variety, then the pidgin becomes a CREOLE.

Do you know of any pidgin or creole in your country? Do you think it is all right to have a Bible Translation in a creole?

LIVING/DEAD LANGUAGE As long as a language has at least one surviving native speaker, that language is alive. But as soon as the last native speaker dies, the language dies, too. Active usage by a growing population, especially of children, is the sign of life for a language.

The Hebrew and Greek used in the Bible are considered to be dead languages. The Hebrew language was revived upon the formation of the nation of Israel. The Greek of the New Testament has now evolved into modern Greek.

Are you aware of languages that show signs of dying? Should the Bible Society embark on projects involving such languages? Introduction to Language

3.3 Notions to be remembered, misconceptions to be discarded Are there superior languages? Many people think that there are, and for this reason, people desire to know how to speak these languages, such as English. But their reasons vary as to why a particular language is perceived as superior. For some, it is the size of the population that uses it. For others, it is the prestige that accompanies the use of that language. Again for some, it is the existence of a written grammar of that language. And still for others, it is the availability of terms found in that language, which are absent in other languages.

For the first three reasons given, it is actually the society that uses the language that is being evaluated and not the language itself. It is in the fourth reason that a language is pitted against another language. So as the argument goes, English has many more technical terms for example computer than, say Tagalog, a Philippine language. But I can use the same argument to show that the English language lacks some words in a particular domain, such as in agriculture, when compared to Tagalog.

Thus there are no superior languages, and no inferior languages. All languages are adequate to the needs of the speakers of that language. Tagalog does not have a word for snow because there is no snow in the Philippines where Tagalog is spoken. Every concept or anything from the material culture that is significant and therefore needs reference would have a word for it. Inversely, if the word is not there, it means that it was not needed.

All languages have a complex structure, no matter how few the speakers are. And every language has a history that would show its relationship with other languages.

Why is it important for Bible translators to know that their language is not inferior to any other language?

Are some languages more beautiful than others? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or in the ear of the listener, as far as language is concerned. It is all relative. What sounds beautiful or euphonic to some may be the opposite for others. When it comes to beauty, nothing is absolute.

Who can say when a sentence or a part of it is used correctly or not? The native speaker of that language can. The native speaker has the competence to tell when a word or an utterance is acceptable in a language. They are the ones who have the ability and intuition to declare something as grammatical or not.

However, you might have heard native speakers of English say, We was there. This is a deviation from the standard language, and, from the point of view of some people, it is sub- standard. But if it is part of the dialect of a community of native speakers of English, then from the point of view of their particular dialect it is still correct.

Does this concept of correctness in any way affect the confidence of the translator?

Do languages change? The constant thing about language is change. Language change is a result of the change that occurs in the individual, the individuals in the society or just about any aspect in the society. Thus, the more changes there are in the society, the more changes in the language also.

Do you speak like your grandmother? Probably not, and you will easily note differences between your use of language and hers. Some linguistic changes are more obvious than others and 8

Introduction to Language

vocabulary is one such example. Reading a book written at least fifty years ago will allow you to spot archaic words easily. Phonological changes in language take longer to be noticed. The Great English vowel shift covered a period from the Middle English period (1100-1500) continuing into the eighteenth century. Semantic change is very subtle and it is for this reason that the Bible translator should take particular interest in this. One good example is the word gay. This used to mean bright, happy but in many variations of English it now means homosexual.

Why do you think some people want to retain archaic forms of language? Can language be corrupted? Or enriched, or improved?

What are the two ways to analyze language? The two ways are diachronic and synchronic. In diachronic analysis, one looks at a description of the language as it changes through time. For example, a comparison of Middle English and Modern English would necessarily take a diachronic approach. This is also called a historical approach.

A synchronic approach looks at the characteristics of a language at a given period of time. For example, a description of how interrogatives are formed in Modern Tagalog would be considered synchronic. This is also called a descriptive approach.

A good linguistic analysis of any language must include both historical and descriptive analyses.

Can you force people to use language in a particular way? Yes, you can. This is usually done by people or by an institution who think they have the competence and authority to establish a standard how language is to be used. For example, literature boards of some communities, language enthusiasts who have a strong opinion about language use, and writers may want to revive archaic, obsolete words, continue to use such words and try to impose their usage in any way that they can.

There are times when it may be necessary to impose rules about language, for example, in standardizing a spelling system, or in order to implement a consistent way to transliterate proper nouns. But a prerequisite to any such prescription should be a good linguistic analysis of the language.

Do people sometimes impose their rules on the use of language in Bible Translation? Yes, indeed. Because the Bible is the word of God, convictions run deep. Preaching is not confined to the pulpit but encroaches on translation as well.

Many times theological terms are expected to be translated in words that are formal and literary rather than popular and ordinary even if the latter are more easily understood. Examples of these words are: justification, sanctification, election, grace.

Read: Why translate the Bible to educate or to communicate? in Wonderly (1968), pp. 47-49.

References: Grady, William and Michael Dobrovolsky eds. 1996. Contemporary Linguistic Analysis. Toronto: Copp Clark Ltd. Wonderly, William, L. 1968. Bible Translations for Popular Use. London: UBS.

[Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents]

9 UNIT FOUR [Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents] Language And Society

4.1 Language and speech People constantly use language, an ability that is unique to them. People use language not because they are able to but because they need to. As social beings, people need to communicate with others.

As people communicate with others, the biological being is transformed into a social being. This process is called socialization. The person ceases to be just a breathing individual but becomes a part of a family, a peer group, a church, a nation, in fact a part of humanity. When this happens, the individual is exposed to a system of behaviour prevalent in the society. It is at this point that the use of language is aptly called speech. The speech behaviour of individuals will make them project themselves as unique individuals while participating in a particular society. 4.2 Norms People can say whatever they want and can say it in whatever way they prefer. However, there are ways that language is used, which the society has identified as good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable. This normative system, whether known consciously or unconsciously, is composed of rules which influence people as they use language to interact with one another.

In a small town in Indiana, it is perfectly all right to say, We was there. But people who have been exposed to the kind of American English spoken in the wider American community would frown upon this and call it ungrammatical. Thus, the system of norms which operates in this small town is different from the system that operates in Standard English.

When native speakers of the English language ask the question, How are you?, what is the usual answer? Do people always mean what they say? [In fact this is an example of a conventional greeting. The speaker may have little interest in the state of health of the listener but is simply being polite. Other languages will perform the same function by using different forms of words.]

From the many possible ways of addressing people, there is a system by which one term of address is used depending on the type of social relationship a person has with the other. A certain physician by the name of Dr. John Smith can be addressed differently, as: Dr. Smith by his patient Doc by a lawyer Smith by another doctor Sir by a younger person Mac or Buddy by a construction worker who stops to ask the time Smitty or John by a close friend Sonny, dear, or Dad by different members of his family What accounts for the shift from one form of address to another?

The way people use language reflects the social relationship that exists between the speaker and the listener. For this reason, you cannot interchange the different forms of address above. To do so would be a violation of the system of rules for the choice of forms of address. 10

Ideology and Translation

4.3 Factors that determine the choices made in language use: There are a number of factors that determine the choice of term or variety of language used. These are: the relative status of the speaker to the hearer, a persons social or geographical background, the speech situation and the speakers intention.
4.3.1 Relative status of the speaker to the hearer: What are the factors that affect the relative status of the speaker to the hearer? These are: age (particular honorifics are used to address older people); gender (a male person may be more careful about his language in the presence of women); socio-economic status (in some societies, the English language may be used to show off.); education (the university professors choice of vocabulary would greatly differ from that of a taxi driver.); rank (a general may call a corporal by his surname.)

Bert is a 15-year-old high school student. He sees a number of people at school. How do you think he would say hello to: Mr. Reyes, his teacher; Lily, his classmate; Tony, his best friend and Max, the storekeeper? 4.3.2 A persons social and geographical background The place where a person is born, reared and lives determines the kind of language used by that person. Thus, a person becomes a speaker of a particular language, and within that language, a particular dialect. Geographical dialects are variants of a language based on the geographical location. This is one of the things over which an individual does not have very much control. Aside from the geographical dialect, there are also social dialects used by people in the same social group who share many characteristics. People from the same profession usually share an occupational dialect because they have many common terms. Another word for this occupational dialect is jargon.

Who do you think would use the following terms to mean death: died, expire, went to be with the Lord, passed away, kicked the bucket, fall asleep, check out?

Sometimes, a speech variety is used by a group whose members wish to conceal themselves or some aspects of their communication from non-members. This secret language is called an argot. It started to be used in the 17th century as the speech variety used by French beggars and street merchants, and later was applied to the secret language of criminals. The gay lingo is one such example of an argot. It is used by members of the male homosexual community. Some examples of expressions in the English language which arose as part of this argot are: butch very masculine for a woman, macho for a man; come out disclosing ones homosexuality; in the closet relating to concealing of ones homosexuality. Note, however, that some of these terms have subsequently become part of more general English, broadening their domain of usage

Slang is casual, playful or even irreverent speech characteristic of a particular group. It is the informal or faddish usage of nearly anyone in the speech community. The term was first attested in English in the mid-eighteenth century. At that time, it was used in reference to special vocabulary used by any set of persons of a low or disreputable character. Now it is often applied to aspects of the language of adolescents or others who are perceived as speaking non-standard varieties of a language. The non-standard variety usually gives the users a group identity distinct from the rest of the community.

The vocabulary of slang changes rapidly: what is new and exciting for one generation is old- fashioned for the next. Old slang often either drifts into obsolescence or becomes accepted into the standard language, losing its eccentric colour.

In a book, Contemporary Linguistic Analysis (1996), the following examples were given as slang in American English.

morphological change where the suffix ing is shortened to in (e.g. looking > lookin) Introduction to Language

hoss stud; muscular male
eddie ugly guy
wilma ugly girl
gagger disgusting person

Do you think there is room for slang words or expressions in Bible translations? 4.3.3 Speech Situation The factor that accounts for the most variety in the speech of a particular person is situation. This refers to the context that the speakers are in. A situation is defined as a speaker and listener relating to each other in a particular way, communicating about a particular topic in a particular setting. People who are fighting use a variety of language peculiar to that situation. Any shift in a speech situation will produce a shift in the way language is used. Such a shift could be produced by a change in topic of conversation, setting or change in the emotional relationship between the speaker and the hearer.

Can you think of characteristic words or phrases used by a pastor ministering to his flock?

4.3.4 Formality One aspect of situation that will cause differences in the way language is used is formality. In general, four levels of formality in situation can often be distinguished: formal, regular, casual and intimate. (Individual languages may have their own set of levels, more or less complex than this.)

In a formal situation, the hearers mainly listen and if they respond, they do so in a stereotyped way. The speakers purpose is to inform or to impress and he or she tends to assume an attitude of detachment, expecting minimal participation from the audience. Full grammatical constructions are used, nothing is left out, more learned vocabulary is used, and there is an elaborate sentence structure in an effort to show the relationships between the different items of information being communicated. Examples of such are sermons and lectures to a large audience.

What do you think is the speech variety that characterized the language of Paul as he defended himself before King Agrippa in Acts 26? Is this (close to) formal language?

A regular communication situation is typically an exchange of information between relative strangers. Each participant supplies background information, as the response of the other becomes necessary in order to be understood. The speaker usually depends on the listeners response to determine whether he is being understood. This type of speech also tends to use fuller forms rather than ellipsis (leaving things out). And example of this regular speech is in a first meeting between two people for a job interview.

In Acts 10.17ff, when Peter speaks with the men sent by Cornelius and later on with Cornelius himself, do you think the speech variety is regular or casual?

Casual speech also often involves an exchange of information but among friends and acquaintances. The speaker treats the hearer as an insider by assuming that there is common information with the hearer, and therefore does not need to supply as much information. The casual uses a lot of ellipsis compared to the fuller constructions of the regular variety.

Before the boys who made fun of Elisha were killed by two bears in 2 Kings 2.23, what kind of speech variety do you think did they use? 12

Ideology and Translation

Intimate speech is used between the closest of friends, not so much to exchange information as to share feelings. It involves the use of abbreviated expressions which are in many cases private ones known only to the participants themselves.

Examine Genesis 42-45. Can you detect any difference in the language used between Joseph and his brothers before and after he tells them who he is? Look at the way they address each other, and the honorific words they use.

In William Wonderly, Bible Translations for Popular Use, p.17 classifies three contemporary English Bible translations according to the differentiation above: J.B. Philipps, The New Testament in Modern English as tending toward regular or casual, The New English Bible as formal and Todays English Version as casual. 4.3.5 Written language By virtue of the medium used, written language tends to be rather formal. This can be attributed to the fact that written language is more permanent, having a concrete physical character which provides a more secure basis for evaluation than does spoken language. Because of this, people are more careful with their use of language when they write, than when they speak. And because of this care, the language user inevitably is inclined to become more formal.

Just as in a formal speech situation, the writers cannot immediately interact with their audiences. But in addition, writers are unable to convey meaning through modification of their speech, such as intonation, loudness and through body language. When a person speaks in a particular setting, a number of things can be present in the physical setting which can allow the speaker to use demonstratives or to simply point to something, this may result in fragmentary or elliptical sentences. Writers are unable to do this and therefore need to use fuller expressions.

Certain types of elaboration, such as literary or rhetorical embellishments, are acceptable and often desirable in written style, while elaborations in the direction of slang, jargon and substandard usage are generally unacceptable except when used in dialogue to portray character types. Thus in a novel it is common to find that the narrative is in a fairly formal style, while dialogue between characters contains significant use of slang and other sub-standard language, as well as ellipsis.

There is an existing translation of the Bible in Classical Arabic. However, in recent years, a good meaning-based translation was produced in Modern Arabic. The translation was not readily accepted. However, when the meaning-based translation was put in audio, the people welcomed the translation. What do you think is the reason for this? 4.3.6 Intention Very closely related to situation is another factor that determines language variety, namely intention. Every speaker has a goal in mind and that is the reason why various linguistic features are used. Because of intention, every available feature of the language is used to achieve the effect desired, whether it is to impress, to praise, to enhance ones status or simply to be pleasant and logical. One aspect of intention is what Peter Farb (1974) calls word play. He defines it as an interaction according to well-defined rules in which something is at stake that both speakers are attempting to win. Consider the following dialogue between a jeepney driver in Manila and a traffic officer. After committing a traffic violation the following conversation ensues:

Prrk (sound of a whistle from the traffic officer) Driver speaking to himself: Oh no! The parak saw me. (parak is a Tagalog slang for policeman.) Traffic officer approaches and says: All right. Let me see your drivers license. Introduction to Language

13 Driver: Oh, Officer, Im so sorry. The truck in front of me is too tall that I did not see the red light.

How does this interaction show that intention influences a change in language?

What sort of intention is behind the way language is used in 2 Kings 18-19?

Consider Amos 7; Joshua 2.1-7; Nathan before David; Judges 16.15 (Delilah) 4.4 Sociolinguistics and related terms Viewing language as we have been doing is part of the study of the sociology of language, also known as sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics examines the interaction between the use of language and the social context where language is used. From this point of view, the form of language is never separated from the context in which it is used. Sociolinguistics can be divided into various types. One such classification distinguishes between a descriptive (or synchronic) approach of examining language variation between different communities at a given point in time, and a dynamic (or diachronic) approach of studying the change in language usage over time. 4.4.1 Descriptive sociolinguistics Descriptive sociolinguistics tries to provide an answer to the question who speaks what language (or variety), to whom, when and for what purpose? Others call this the ethnography of speaking. This approach tries to describe language use and the behaviours that go along with it, and to show the systematic nature of alternations between one variety and another. In order to understand language use in such a framework, it is necessary to consider other linguistic features such as pitch, loudness, quality of voice and intonation. Examples of extra-linguistic features are gestures, eye contact and distance between speakers.

It is one thing to know the structure of the language, but only a person who truly knows the language would know the right time to say something. Such a person has internalised the accepted patterns of interaction within a community.

How might loudness or gesture modify meaning?
4.4.2 Dynamic Sociolinguistics In order to fully understand why we use language the way we do, one has to go beyond the what and the when, and go to the why of things. Dynamic sociolinguistics tries to account for changes in the way language is used over time. What gives rise to changes, why do they spread and what influence do such changes have upon other structures of the language?

What do you think is the meaning of cool to teenage English speakers? Young adults? Older people?

4.4.3 Linguistic repertoire This is the range of linguistic varieties that a particular person has at their disposal to communicate in different social settings when talking about different topics to different people. These different varieties can include dialects, styles or register and even language. Thus, a person with a wide linguistic repertoire may be able to speak different languages depending on the need of the situation and may be able to adjust the level of speech according to the comprehension level of their audience. 14

Ideology and Translation

Do you think different registers can be used in a Bible translation?

4.4.4 Diglossia Diglossia is a phenomenon where two distinct languages are used by the same group of people. Usually, one is regarded as more prestigious than the other. Consequently, the higher one or more prestigious one is used in formal and public occasions whereas the lower one is used in everyday circumstances.

It could be that the two distinct varieties are separate languages, such as English and Filipino in the Philippines; or distinct varieties of the same language, such as Classical Arabic and the various vernacular forms for Arabic. French is the high variety in Haiti, but Creole is low. Such societies are usually bilingual. But whereas the low variety is known by everyone, the high one is usually acquired through education.

Some scholars believe that after the Babylonian exile, Hebrew ceased to be spoken in everyday life. They say the people commonly spoke Aramaic and only used Hebrew as a language for reading and writing religious matters. That would be a case of diglossia. 4.4.5 Code-switching Code-switching is a common practice in a context of diglossia, where a single speaker can use two or more different varieties of language at different times. In code-switching, speakers change from one language to another in the middle of a speech, or of a sentence, or simply whenever they decide to do so.

In Acts 22.37, there is a record of Paul speaking in Greek to the commander, then switching to Aramaic in v40 as he spoke to the crowd.

What do you think are the possible reasons for code-switching? Could it be the subject matter? Compare situations when you talk about computers and when you would talk about how you would celebrate Christmas in your family. Would you use a different language for each of the topics? Can you predict when a person is likely to switch codes?

Do you think switching codes should be allowed in Bible translations? 4.4.6 Language taboo and euphemism People use language basically for communication. However, there are some things about which people do not talk openly. The linguistic norms of the particular society require that these concepts must be expressed in other ways, either indirectly, or using substitutions. This phenomenon is called language taboo.

Taboo is a word borrowed from the Tongan language, introduced into English first in the accounts of Captain James Cooks expeditions to the Pacific. Its meaning ranges from sacred and consecrated to dangerous, forbidden and unclean. Generally, it means something unapproachable and it is principally expressed in prohibitions and restrictions.

Taboo words in most languages can be grouped into: bodily functions, parts of the body and activities related to sex, body excretions, curse words, negative notions such as disabilities, death and personal names.

The coping mechanism of language to deal with taboo is often through the use of euphemisms. This is a way of avoiding words that may seem offensive, obscene or somewhat disturbing to people. A euphemism is an acceptable way of saying something that is generally not perceived as acceptable. It is an index of what is considered unwholesome or distasteful to talk about. Introduction to Language

15 A euphemism avoids the actual pronunciation of the taboo word. It is the physical structure of the word that has a strong repulsive effect. Languages cope with taboo through the use of borrowed words (comfort room for toilet among Tagalog speakers), an acronym (LBM for loose bowel movement), modified pronunciation (gosh to avoid saying Gods name in English), rewording or rephrasing (sleep with someone for sex act; pass away for death; visually impaired for blind).

In the gospels, the account of Matthew usually avoids word God in the phrase kingdom of heaven.

In the following verses, take note of the language taboo and the euphemistic expression used in the Bible translation you are using: Genesis 4.1, 16.4, 18.11, 24.2, Luke 2.5, John 19.30; 1 Sam 24.3.

References:

Ayto, John and John Simpson, eds. 1992. Dictionary of Modern Slang. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Berstein, Basil B. 1971. Language and Socialization in Linguistics at Large Ed. Noel Minnis. Paladin. Del Corro, Anicia. 1978. Language Taboo. Quezon City: University of the Philippines.
Dobrovolsky, Michael and William OGrady eds.,1996. Contemporary Linguistic Analysis. Mississauga, Ontario: Copp Clark Ltd. Farb, Peter. 1973. Word Play: What Happens When People Talk. New York: Bantam Sagarin, Edward. 1962. The Anatomy of Dirty Words. New York: Paperback Library.

[Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents]

16 UNIT FIVE [Back to Table of Contents] [On to Detailed Table of Contents] Semantic Domains and Bible Translation 5.1 Introduction When people begin to translate the Bible into a new language and culture, they soon meet words and expressions which are hard to translate. This is especially true of terms connected with the culture of the Bible. For example, what should the translator call the Temple in Jerusalem? Some translators have tried expressions like "the house of prayer". What should one call a preacher? Some translators have tried terms like "the one who speaks God's message."

However, if translators try to find new words one at a time as they come across them in their work, they are likely to get themselves into trouble. Let us say that some translators have decided that "house of prayer" is a good way to translate "Temple". But then they come to the word "synagogue". How should they translate this? It is quite possible that they will discover that "house of prayer" would be a better expression for "synagogue", and that they need to find a different term for the Temple.

Similarly, if translators decide to use "the one who speaks God's message" for "preacher", what are they going to do when they have to find a word for "prophet"? When they study the meaning of these terms more carefully, they may find that the meaning of "prophet" is closer to "the one who speaks God's message".

Translators can spare themselves this kind of trouble if they start their search for words in a different way. Instead of looking at these words one by one, they should look at a group of related words together. In this way, they can easily see how the words are alike and how they differ. They can identify the main components of meaning of each word, and decide which of these should be carried across in the translation.

Instead of translating "Temple" alone, and then having to revise everything when they come to "synagogue", translators should study the whole domain of "buildings used for worship" or even "buildings used for public purposes". Instead of translating "preacher" alone, and then having trouble when they need a word for "prophet", translators should study the whole set of words available in the Bible cultures for people carrying out religious functions: priest (including God's priests and the priests of the false gods), prophets, "seers" (as in 1 Samuel 9.9), Levites, disciples, apostles, bishops, deacons, evangelists, preachers, and so on.

The translator needs to study these terms not only as they are used in the Bible culture (in the Hebrew or Greek languages), but also as they are used in the language and culture of the translation. Only when the translator clearly understands the differences in meaning between each word in the original language, will it be possible to try to translate those terms into the new language. But translators should not make the same mistake in their own languages, and just choose words one-by-one as they need them. Instead, translators should also look at the whole set of words for the same area of meaning in their own languages and cultures, so as to have clearly in their minds the range of choices that are available and the differences of meaning that they carry. 5.2 The study of semantic domains A group of words which are part of the same area of meaning are called a "semantic domain". As one studies the differences between the words, it becomes clear what types of things distinguish their meanings. These things are "categories of meaning". The specific choices that are available in each category of meaning are called "components of meaning". Semantic Domains

For example, let us say we want to understand the words in the domain of alcoholic beverages in English words such as beer, wine, whiskey, and brandy. As we begin to investigate these words, we will find that there are two important categories of meaning. The first concerns what the drink is made from, and the second concerns the way that the drink is made. In the category of what the drink is made from, there are two components: made from grain and made from fruit. In the category of how the drink is made, drinks can be made by fermenting or they can be made by distilling (which makes the alcohol content much higher). If we put the components of what a drink is made from across the top and the components of how a drink is made along the side, we get the following diagram:

ALCOHOLIC DRINKS (English)

In fact, there are other words in English for alcoholic drinks which could also be studied and added to the list. Two words in particular require that we add extra components to what the drink is made from. The old drink called "mead" is made from honey, and rum is made from sugar cane. If we add these to the chart, it will look like this:

ALCOHOLIC DRINKS:

Let us look at another example. Every language has certain areas of meaning which are highly developed and where there are many words available, while other languages might have only a few options in this area of meaning. The English language is particularly rich in verbs with very precise meanings, giving meanings that are often provided in other languages by adverbs or ideophones (words or expressions with distinctive sounds that function like adjectives or adverbs). For example, there are many verbs in English for different ways of walking. This domain includes words such as amble, hike, limp, march, shuffle, stagger, swagger, stroll, stride, strut, tip-toe, totter, tramp, trudge, and waddle. As we think about the meanings of these words, we find that there are at least three categories of meaning that are important. First, several of these words describe a very precise kind of movement made when walking. Second, some of the words focus on the purpose, that is, the person's reason for walking. Finally, other words focus on the attitude of the person walking. 18

Semantic Domains

One way to display the words in this domain would be like this:

WAYS OF WALKING (English)

categories movement reason attitude / feeling of meaning: when walking for walking of person walking

words:

amble acting as though no purpose / goal

hike to cover long distance limp one foot not working correctly (maybe in pain)

march usually, many people walking in time

shuffle not able to lift feet high (of someone old or sick)

stagger difficult to walk straight (old or sick)

swagger as though very proud of oneself

stroll slowly no particular goal, perhaps enjoying scenery

stride long steps confidently

strut [stiffly?] as though [upright?] on important business

tip-toe using only toes often, so as not to make noise

totter hard to keep one's balance (old or sick)

tramp with heavy step

trudge weary

waddle back and forth gait (someone fat and heavy) Semantic Domains

19 Notice that in most cases the main component of meaning belongs in just one category. In this domain, there are only a few words with components in more than one category. 5.3 Steps in analyzing a semantic domain What are the steps to be followed when trying to understand the various concepts in a particular semantic domain? A study of the different words available in Indonesian for "cutting" will help us to see the procedures for this type of analysis. We will refer at first only to the Indonesian words, without trying to give their meanings in English, because correct senses in another language can be chosen only after we see the components of meaning that the words carry.

Step 1) After choosing the area of meaning, try to think of all the words which belong in this set. For example, if looking for Indonesian words related to cutting, you might think of words such as: belah, cincang, iris, pancung, penggal, sabit, sembelih (You would probably not think of them in this order, but these have been arranged alphabetically)

a) At first, it may not be possible to think of every word in the domain. People may think of more words as they go through the other steps. For example, someone doing this exercise in Indonesian might not think at first of words such as gorok, kupas, sabit, sayat, tebang, tebas. This is not a problem. Extra words can be added whenever one thinks of them.

b) You might not feel very sure about some of the words. An Indonesian speaker might wonder, Does putus belong in this set? How about cukur? Gunting? If you are not sure about certain words, leave them in to start with. They can always be dropped later if it turns out that they do not belong.

Step 2) The next step is to think about the way in which the words that have been collected differ from each other. What "categories of meaning" are needed to distinguish these different words?

When a group of Indonesians began to study these words for "cut", it seemed that there were at least four points that were important:

a) One way that these words were distinguished from each other was by the type of cutting instrument that was typically used in each case. For example, you would normally use a pisau knife or bambu piece of bamboo in order to iris, but to sabit would require an arit or celurit or sabit (various kinds of sickle) and to belah would normally require a parang large knife, bush knife, machete or kapak axe.

b) Another distinction between these words is based on the type of thing that is usually cut. belah suggests some kind of buah fruit or kayu wood, whereas iris suggests ikan fish or daging meat or buah fruit and gorok is normally only used for leher throat.

c) Another important way these words are distinguished is by the method of cutting that is used. For many of these words, a speaker of Indonesian can picture very clearly the action that is implied, although it may be a bit difficult to put it clearly into words. In some cases one almost feels that a video is needed to make sure that the action is understood.

d) A fourth distinction that seems important with these words is the result of the cutting. For example, belah suggests that the result will be several separate pieces. In the case of pancung, the result will be a head separated from the body.

Just as when you are listing the words themselves, there is no need to be too concerned if the list of categories is not completely accurate at this stage. You should begin by suggesting categories that seem important, but as the study proceeds you can always make changes. 20

Semantic Domains

Step 3) Once you have decided on the categories to be used, you can then prepare a chart. The various categories can be listed across the top of the chart, and the individual words can be listed down the left side of the chart. This will provide a matrix which can be filled in. You can then go through each of the words that have been found, listing in detail the components of meaning implied by that particular word in each of the categories.

For example, for the word penggal, the spaces might be filled in like this: Under "instrument used" you might list parang large knife, pedang sword, kapak axe. Under "thing cut" you might mention fruit, meat, or heads Under "way of cutting" you could try to describe the typical action associated with this word. Under "result or purpose" you might write several pieces (in the case where the "thing cut" is a head, there would only be two: a body and a head).

The same kind of information should be filled in for each of the words listed.

Chart: Indonesian words for cut

tool used: thing cut: type of action: words:

belah large knife, ax board, fruit divide into a few parts

cincang large knife, vegetables, meat small quick chops sword

gergaji saw wood sawing movement

gorok to cut someone's throat

iris knife vegetables, fish, slicing (producing fruit small slices)

libas sword body of enemy swinging arm back and forth

pancung machete, sword persons head one swift stroke

pangkas scissors hear snip-snip

penggal large knife, fruit, meat, divide into sections sword persons head

potong all kinds of knives, ax, sword, scissors (this turned out to be the general term for this domain)

sabit sickle, grass grass knife

sayat knife, razor meat to remove skin sharp bamboo

sembelih knife head of animal to slaughter animal for meat

sunat knife, razor, skin for circumcision sharp bamboo Semantic Domains

21 tool used: thing cut: type of action: words:

tebang ax, saw, tree chopping or sawing chain saw

tebas large knife, grass, swinging motion sickle persons head

Note: The Indonesian words are given without an attempt to translate them into English. In many cases there may not be exact English equivalents. But with the information given regarding components of meaning, it should be possible to find the closest equivalent in other languages. Also, this is not an attempt to give an exhaustive analysis of this domain in Indonesian, but only a sampling to demonstrate the procedure.

Step 4) Once the chart is filled in, you need to see whether there is enough information to distinguish all of the different words. If not, you must try to think how those words that are not yet distinguished are actually different in meaning. Perhaps there is another category of meaning that needs to be added to make the study more accurate.

In this Indonesian study, it was found that after completing the chart, there was not enough information to fully distinguish penggal from pancung. Indonesian speakers had to think, How are these words different from each other? The answer was that they imply a different position of the victim. In the case of penggal, the victim lies down before having his head cut off. In the case of pancung, the victim is still upright (either standing or kneeling). So a new category had to be added to the four categories already being used, "position of the victim".

Once a new category has been added in this way, you should then look over each of the words again, with that category in mind, filling in the spaces. Do the meanings of other words also suggest the position of the thing being cut? Perhaps they do not in every case; this category may only be relevant for a few of the words. In that case you can leave some spaces blank in the chart. In this case, the position of the victim seemed relevant also to the word gorok . The person doing the cutting is ordinarily behind the back of the person whose throat is being cut.

Step 5) Finally, it is good to look over the chart again, trying to see whether all of the words that have been included really belong in this area of meaning. If some words seem out of place here, they can be dropped.

For example, two words originally on the Indonesian list have been omitted from the chart. One is the word putus. Certainly there are times when you might cut in order to putus. But the word itself does not seem to mean a way of cutting. The cutting is simply an incidental way in which to accomplish the purpose of putus, which means to break or sever something.

There was a similar problem with the word kupas. Certainly people sometimes have to use a knife in order to kupas, so there might not be so much question about kupas as there is about putus. But kupas itself refers mainly to the result: removing the skin from something. Although cutting can be required, there are many things that do not need to be cut in order to be kupas (such as ripe bananas and some kinds of oranges).

People often find this kind of study about their own language to be very interesting even though it is about facts that in some sense everyone already knows. The reason for this is that we learn our own language as children (constantly adding more knowledge as adults, of course), and although we "know" what each of the words of our language means and how to use it, the details of how the domains are organized is usually subconscious. It is very interesting for us to discover the detailed way in which language is organized. 22

Semantic Domains

It should also be clear how valuable this kind of study could be for Bible translators. In the case of these words for cutting, once translators know exactly what the meaning of the Bible text is, it makes it much easier for them to select exactly the right word in Indonesian. In fact, it is sometimes valuable to work backwards, from the chart to the Bible. There may be contexts in the Bible which clearly imply a particular word in another language. However, because of the nature of translation, where the translator is working from a foreign language which may not have any word that matches that word in the translators language, the translator may not think of the best word when translating that passage. However, if people who are quite familiar with the Bible look at a list of words in a semantic domain chart, they can often think of Bible passages where these words would be appropriate. Then they can go to those passages and check whether that word has been used in the translation of that passage or not. If not, it may be appropriate to change the translation and to use this more accurate word in that passage. 5. 4 Example of a semantic domain: Carrying things in Hula Let us look at a semantic domain from a different (though distantly related) language, Hula from the southern coast of Papua New Guinea. In this case, an attempt was made to find all the words for ways of holding and carrying different kinds of things. The first attempt at analysis revealed 15 words. Discussion showed that most of the words involved carrying something directly, but two of the words meant that the thing being carried was carried by using a pole. In this case, we first found a major distinction in the domain based on whether or not an instrument (a pole) is used for the carrying. If a pole is used, then there are two different words, depending on whether the pole is carried by one person (maruna) or by two people at either end of the pole (kewa).

A discussion about the meaning of the remaining words suggested that key categories of meaning involved the part of the body used to carry with and the thing carried. Since there were just these two main categories of meaning, it was convenient to organize a chart rather differently from the way suggested above. Here, the various components from one category were put along the top of the chart, and the components from the second category were put along the side of the chart (as with the study of alcoholic drinks in English). The individual words were then placed in the boxes where the two components met.

Three different types of "things carried affected the meaning of the words. Some words implied that someone was carrying something with a handle. Some words meant that someone was carrying a child. And finally, other words suggested that someone was carrying something else (that is, neither a child nor something with a handle). The second category of meaning concerned what part of the body was used for carrying the thing. In this case, there were eight different body parts that were relevant: the head, the shoulder, the arms, under the arm, the back, the hand, the mouth, and the teeth. The result of organizing all this is shown in the chart below.

Semantic Domains

23 WAYS OF CARRYING (Hula)

what is carried: children bags / other things things with handles part of body:

head ripu repa

shoulder guru kavale vua

arms vai pani

under arm kariga kau

back kei kau

hand apigelo api

mouth pamu

teeth koli

As an example of how to understand the chart, if you carry things on your head, that is repa. Or, if you carry a child in your arms, that is vai. Or if you carry a bag, with the handle hanging over your shoulder, that is kavale.

Note that there are many gaps in the chart. This means that Hula does not have a particular word for that combination. There is no word for "to carry a child on one's head" or for "to carry something by holding the handle in one's teeth", or for "to carry things on one's back". Presumably this suggests that these types of activities are not common in Hula culture and that there has been no need to develop words to describe them.

Where might these words be used in the Bible? We would of course need to check with a Hula speaker to be sure that we were using the words correctly, but we might expect that certain words could be appropriately used in the following places: kewa: 1 Chronicles 15.15, where the Levites carry the Ark on poles repa: Genesis 40.16, where the Pharaohs chief baker dreams of carrying baskets on his head vua: Joshua 4.5, where each man is carrying a large stone on his shoulder kavale: 1 Samuel 17.6, where Goliath carries a javelin slung between his shoulders guru: Genesis 21.14, where Hagar carries Ishmael on her shoulder guru and vai: Isaiah 49.22 in the TEV says simply, they will bring your children home; but the Hebrew (see NRSV, for example), is much more specific: the sons will be carried in the arms (vai) and the daughters on the shoulder (guru). Of course this is simply the way Hebrew parallelism works, and should not be understood literally. If such a thing were actually to happen in Hebrew culture, it is highly unlikely that any distinction would be made between the methods of carrying the sons and the daughters! kariga kau: Jeremiah 38.12, where Jeremiah holds rags under his arms, to keep the ropes from hurting him as he was pulled up out of the well pamu and koli: There are various passages where it seems clear that one of these words would be used, but only a Hula speaker could tell us which would seem appropriate to them. For example, Genesis 8.11, when the dove returns to Noah carrying an olive leaf in its beak (would the Hula consider a birds beak to be a mouth or teeth?) And 1 Samuel 17.34-35, where David describes a lion or bear carrying off a lamb from the flock. 24

Semantic Domains

5.5 Comparing meanings of words across languages It will be clear from the examples above that we cannot expect a semantic domain in one language to match very closely the way a semantic domain is organized in another language. It should also be clear that the meaning of a particular word in any given language will depend on how that word functions in relationship to the other words in the domain or domains that it belongs in. This means that the precise meaning of a word in one language will rarely be exactly the same as a word with a similar meaning in another language. This can be a major problem for translators, and it is a good reason why it is helpful for translators to think in terms of semantic domai

UBS Asia-Pacific Translator Training Manual (2006)

Attachments

3 comments