The Bible Translator

The key themes of sanctification and regeneration in Ezek 36.25-27 make it an important and well-known passage among theologians and exegetes. However, the translation of מים טהורים in v. 25 as “clean water” in most English versions obscures the rhetorical force of the allusion to certain liturgical practices within the religious context of the source language. This paper considers the semantic connotations of מים טהורים by trying to understand the author’s rhetorical intentions. Historical-liturgical criticism is used to examine the religious context of the source text with a view to suggesting the most accurate English translation of this technical term which would convey its closest range of meanings to a contemporary English-speaking audience.

The past decades have seen an increased sensitivity among Bible translators when it comes to matters of gender, in particular in relation to inclusive and exclusive aspects of language and their rendering in translation. Building on this feminist agenda, it can also be asked, following the lead of masculinity studies in general and its use in biblical studies in particular, what role masculinity plays in texts and their translation. This will be explored in this contribution using the example of the meaning and translation of ἄνθρωπος in Mark 10.7 and 9, which, it will be proposed, is, for gender-sensitive exegetical reasons, best translated as “man” (in the exclusive sense of the word), rather than as “human” (as an inclusive expression).

The Greek word hypomonē frequently has a more active quality than translations such as “patience” or “endurance” suggest. This is particularly the case in the book of Revelation, where some scholars have suggested translating it as “resistance” or “nonviolent resistance.” This article argues that “enduring resistance” is the most appropriate way of rendering this word in John’s Apocalypse. This translation highlights hypomonē as part of Revelation’s call for its audience to engage in nonviolent resistance to the evils and seductions of the Roman Empire.

This article investigates an often-neglected element in Bible translations, namely footnotes and interlinear notes. The notes in Mark from five contemporary Chinese versions are examined through an analytical framework based on Skopostheorie. These notes serve as test cases to illustrate how different versions deal with difficult translational and text-critical issues. In particular the example of the shorter and longer endings of Mark shows the tension between present-day New Testament textual criticism and the conservative mentality of Chinese churches. On the basis of six selected examples, this article concludes that notes should not merely be seen as trivial information but, on the contrary, they can offer a fresh look at the contexts of Bible versions, their skopoi, and their translation decisions. Therefore, in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of Bible versions, investigation of paratextual elements should receive more attention than it presently does.

Different underlying metaphors may be used to think about Bible translation activities. Such conceptual metaphors highlight certain aspects and hide others. Bible translation has often been conceptualized through a ladder metaphor, with a beginning, endpoint, and linear steps to reach that goal. However, in the current context of Bible translation movements, with increased emphasis on sustainability and engagement, and supported by technological advances, alternative metaphors may lead to new insights. This paper explores some implications of ladder-thinking, and suggests some benefits of reconceptualizing Bible translation activities with a wheel metaphor, where the emphasis is on continuing movement rather than “reaching the top.” The metaphors are compared in the contexts of drafting, publishing and distribution, training, planning, and overall engagement with Bible translation movements.

Hospitality as a metaphor for a new paradigm of Bible translation has been put forward by a number of translation scholars. However, the reasons for their suggestion of hospitality as a new way of thinking are anecdotal and intuitive. This paper aims to recontextualize the problem of hospitality in translation theory using verifiable interdisciplinary approaches, namely evidence from cognitive science and anthropology. These interdisciplinary approaches—specifically, Dunbar’s number and René Girard’s mimetic criticism—will provide a more coherent and verifiable paradigm of hospitality for Bible translation.