The Bible Translation Imbroglio

The Bible Translation Imbroglio Tomasz Paweł Krzeszowski Abstract The present paper is concerned with a comparison of selected versions of the texts constituting what is commonly called the Bible as an object of philological studies including comparisons of numerous original and translated versions respectively, as a historical source by means of the usual methods of verification and as a sacred text revealed by God Himself to help people gain salvation. This approach treats the Bible as the “Word of God”, that is the way in which God speaks to people. The focus is laid on the first approach with a special stress on divergences among numerous selected translated versions of the Bible including Greek, Latin, English, Polish, and occasionally other languages. Thus, whatever is said here will concern what can be attested in the course of examining and comparing the relevant texts, i.e. what can be found in these texts rather than what these texts may refer to in the world at large, i.e. what occurs outside these texts. Keywords Bible
Historical source
Philological study
Translation 1 Introduction The present paper is concerned with a comparison of selected versions of the texts constituting what is commonly called the Bible as the main sacred text of Judaism and Christianity. The Bible can be approached in at least three fundamentally different ways: 1. As an object of studies, which include comparing numerous original and translated versions—respectively called source texts and target texts—by means of standard analytical and comparative techniques used in linguistics. 2. As a historical source by means of the usual methods of verification confronting the contents of the Bible with ascertained and confirmed data derived from other independent sources providing evidential data confirming or refuting what is T. P. Krzeszowski (&) University of Social Sciences, Łódź, Warsaw, Poland e-mail: t.krzeszowski@uw.edu.pl © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (ed.), Cultural Conceptualizations in Translation and Language Applications, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43336-9_2 15 16 T. P. Krzeszowski said in the Bible. This sense includes verifying information about the world at large embracing the validity of biblical statements concerning cosmology, biology, history and other branches of knowledge acquired and accumulated over centuries preceding and following the times when the Bible came into existence. 3. As a sacred text revealed by God Himself to help people gain salvation. This approach treats the Bible as the “Word of God”, that is the way in which God speaks to people. In what follows the focus is laid on the first approach with a special stress on divergences among numerous selected translated versions of the Bible including Greek, Latin, English, Polish, and occasionally other languages. Thus, whatever is said here will concern what can be attested in the course of examining and comparing the relevant texts, i.e. what can be found in these texts rather than what these texts may refer to in the world at large, i.e. what occurs outside these texts. 2 The Bible—The Largest Translation Series Christianity, one of the three major “revealed” religions, is closely connected with sacred texts in which the Supreme Being conveys His message to people through His prophets. The most outstanding among them are Moses, Jesus Christ and Muhammad. The respective texts are The Hebrew Bible (Tanakh—Tora. Neviim, K’tvim –1400 (?)-400 (?) B.C.), Old and New Testament as two parts making up all versions of The Christian Bible (Old Testament, New Testament—4000 B.C.—96 A.D.) and the Quran as the holy book of Islam. Notably, Muslims believe that Islam is “the complete and universal version of a primordial faith that was revealed many times before through prophets including Adam, Abraham (Ibrahim), Moses and Jesus.” (from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). However, it must be noted that, Christianity stands out by claiming that its most important prophet was not merely a human being speaking on behalf of this Supreme Being, but His incorporation and at the same time His first and only son, who—with the Holy Ghost/Spirit—is one of the three persons constituting the Holy Trinity.1 Various controversies inevitably arise in connection with fundamental doctrinal and theological differences in understanding the allegedly divine sources of these sacred texts. All issues that might inhere in cross-theological controversies are beyond the scope of my present concerns. But even restricting the research to comparing numerous original and translated versions of the Bible, one faces a formidable number of linguistic problems, especially in view of the fact that to most readers the Bible is available only in one of translated versions. 1 The dogma about the Holy Trinity is one of the most mysterious and difficult religious doctrines ever conceived. The Bible Translation Imbroglio 17 The Bible is the most translated book of all times. According to various sources at least one book of the Bible, over time, has been translated into about 3000 languages, with the New Testament existing in well over 1300 versions, and the entire Bible in over 531 languages.2Moreover in many of these languages the Bible exists in more than one version, and particular versions may be based on different source texts. For example, the total number of British and American versions of the Bible (at least its fragments, such as the Psalms and the Gospels) amounts to the overpowering half thousand! It is reasonable to expect that in various ways and to varying extent, all these translations distort the meaning and the form of the original version(s) because of the inevitable “grapevine effects” inherent in every translation Krzeszowski (in press). Perhaps the most devastating of these effects manifest themselves in ruining the theological integrity and textual cohesion of the two Testaments making up the Christian Bible. Inconsistency in translating various linguistic expressions, especially lexical and phraseological units, constitutes a particularly noxious case contributing to this kind of disintegration. Numerous vernacular versions of the Bible differ not only when compared with one another, but also in respect of the degree of consistency with which identical lexemes and phrases are translated in the two Testaments. The overall state that emerges from such comparisons fully deserves being called “the translational imbroglio”. 3 Preliminary Example—‫ה‬ ֙ ‫[ ְיהָו‬YHWH]—Yud, Het, Vav, Het In the Hebrew version of what Christian versions of the Bible call ‘Old Testament’ <GOD> is most often referred to by three words: ‘elohim’, ‘adonai’ and YHWH (Yahveh, Yehovah). The first two of these words may be used to refer to various gods while the third one is a proper name of the God of Israel. It is these three words that are regularly rendered by the two Greek words heoϛ and jtqioϛ in the Septuagint and by the two Latin words ‘Deus’ and ‘Dominus’ in the Vulgates. In modern language target versions corresponding lexical equivalents of these Greek and Latin words are easily available and are regularly used. However, in a number of vernacular target versions based on the original Hebrew texts rather than on the Septuagint or one of the Vulgates, other lexemes, more accurately rendering the source lexemes can be found. This inevitably causes translation problems and results in a number of inconsistencies. 2 These figures are based on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/). 18 T. P. Krzeszowski The tetragrammaton JHVH in translated versions of the Bible appears as Jahvey, Jehovah, Jehoveh, Wahvey, YHVH, YHWH, Yahve, Yahveh, and Yahweh. However, In brief, the tetragrammaton ‫—יהוה‬YHWH is rendered as o heo1, jtqio1, derposa, Dominus, the LORD, Jehovah, the Lord, Yahweh, GOD, Jehowa, Pan, PAN, Jahwe, WIEKUISTY, Jahwe (-Bóg), Gospodzin’, ‘Bóg’, Tym KTÓRY JEST Ja jestem, Tym, «Który jest», Ja jestem, TEN, KTÓRY JEST brzmi Jego imię, «Ten, który jest», brzmi Jego imię», LORD, Lord, Jehovah, Yahweh, ‫יהוה‬, Hashem, Yah Veh, God, The LORDE, The Lorde, HERR, Jehova, the Eternal, L’Eternel, Le Seigneur, El SEÑOR, Jehová, and Yahwe knows what else. 4 The Grapevine Metaphor (Paradigm) of Communication and eo ipso Translation The “grapevine paradigm” suggested above is consistent with Reddy’s conceptual “conduit metaphor” (Reddy, 1979). However, by analogy with Reddy’s alternative proposal called the “toolmakers paradigm”, I prefer to refer to my own proposal using the word ‘paradigm’ rather than ‘metaphor, mainly because, unlike in the case of the conduit metaphor, which is exemplified by a great number of conventional expressions, so far there exist virtually no conventional linguistic expressions that would be coherent with either the toolmakers paradigm or with the grapevine paradigm suggested here. Still, the conduit metaphor appears to be a necessary element of both these paradigms: both conceptualize communication as sending, both involve senders and recipients and both conceptualize ideas, messages, thoughts, etc., as things. The difference is that of complexity. As originally described, both the conduit metaphor and the toolmakers paradigm concern simple communication events, which may be called nuclear. They involve only one idealized abstract sender and one idealized abstract recipient. By contrast, the grapevine paradigm embraces very long and complicated complexes of communication events which involve an indefinite number of recipients-becoming-senders. The key word ‘grapevine’, used in this paradigm, is explicated as “an informal person-to-person means of circulating information or gossip” (Merriam-Webster), or as “The informal transmission of information, gossip, or rumor from person to person”. (The Free Dictionary). The grapevine does not have any definite pattern or direction. It can be effective horizontally, vertically and even diagonally. Davis (1969) distinguishes four basic types of grapevine communication, two of which, namely Single Strand Chain and the Cluster Chain, are immediately relevant to our present concerns (Fig. 1). The Bible Translation Imbroglio 19 Fig. 1 Grapevine pattern—single strand chain (quoted after Davis 1969) This type of grapevine communication is implemented in the popular social game called ‘grapevine telephone’, ‘grapevine telegraph’, or ‘Chinese whispers’.3 The game is played by a group of participants sitting or standing side by side in a row or a circle. The first person as the originator of a message (sender) whispers it into the ear of the next person, who whispers the message into the ear of the next person, and so on. Finally the last person as the ultimate recipient of the message announces it loud. It rarely happens that the message arrives in its original form. On the contrary, the final version is often so distorted that it can hardly be recognized as being somehow related with the original message. As will be shown later this simple version of grapevine may serve as a fairly accurate model of some rather simple communication events and translations. However, Davis specifies a few other versions, at least one of which, namely ‘the cluster chain’ is relevant to other, more complex cases (Fig. 2). In the grapevine telegraph game, in which the single strand version of grapevine communication is used, distortion of the original message may be deliberate to increase the element of fun and entertainment. In real-life grapevine communication highlights the mechanism of gossip. Distortion, which is likely to occur in both real life grapevine communication and in the grapevine telegraph game, is to a large extent rooted in three features of the grapevine communication, namely flexibility, rapid communication and spontaneity (cf. Davis, 1969). Fig. 2 Grapevine pattern— cluster chain (quoted after Davis 1969) 3 Also ‘Russian scandal’, ‘whisper down the lane’, ‘broken telephone’, ‘secret message’, ‘the messenger game’, or ‘pass the message’. 20 T. P. Krzeszowski All three are responsible for what will be called ‘grapevine effects’, which manifest themselves in various distortions of the original meaning. Flexibility manifests itself in the fact that in principle, though not necessarily in practice, “there is no formal control over grapevine, so it is more flexible than other forms of communication” (Davis, 1969: 269 ff). This is consistent with the existence of numerous possible and acceptable translations of source texts technically called translation series. Innumerable translations of the Bible very well illustrate this property of the grapevine. Notwithstanding the fact that the Bible is considered by many to be a sacred text it greatly owes its continued existence to an enormous number of versions in an enormous number of translations. This phenomenal wealth of translations results from the fact that in the unanimous opinion of experts, for example Nida (1964), Swanson & Heisig (2005), Majewski (2015), there is no such thing as a single correct translation (interpretation) of the Holy Scripture. Translated versions are intended to facilitate communication, because the transfer of meaning from the sender to the usually becomes more “rapid”. There is no doubt that from the recipient’s point of view reading and understanding any text translated into a language that is familiar to him is less time consuming than an attempt to read the original text in some unfamiliar language with the obvious necessity to learn it. In the case of the Bible, which was originally written in at least three ancient languages (probably even more), i.e., Hebrew, Koine Greek and possibly Aramaic, the situation is even more complex. In this way the property ‘rapid’ characterizing grapevine communication turns out to be particularly relevant when it comes to establishing analogies between translation and grapevine communication. Spontaneity in grapevine communication manifests itself in the technique of passing information (meaning) from the sender to (the) recipient(s), which consists in passing the relevant information “automatically from the top level of the organization to the bottom level without any difficulty in delivering the message.” (Davis, 1969: 269 ff.). This property of grapevine communication will turn out to be particularly relevant to describing the technique of God’s communication with people through His prophets and through Jesus of Nazareth. Before more is said about translation of the Bible as an element of communication between God and Man, it is necessary to look more closely at what happens when the recipient is not familiar with the language of the original text. In such cases the original text must be translated into whatever language is familiar to the intended recipient. All translational versions in a number of ways “distort the meaning and the form of the original version(s) because of the inevitable “grapevine effects” inherent in every translation” Krzeszowski (in press). Grapevine effects are responsible for the fact that particular vernacular versions of the Bible differ not only when compared with one another, but also in respect of the degree of consistency with which identical lexemes and phrases are translated in the two Testaments. This lack of consistency destroys the theological integrity and textual cohesion of most versions of the Christian Bible and as such is the most noxious of grapevine effects. The The Bible Translation Imbroglio 21 ways in which the word ‘Yahwe’ is rendered in most translated versions of the Bible, used above as a preliminary example, is only one of innumerable cases of the translational imbroglio, which in a major way contribute to ruining the theological integrity between the New Testament as a continuation of the Old Testament. 5 Further Examples of the Imbroglio The examples in this section are intended to demonstrate how the translational imbroglio destroys the theological integrity of the two Testaments making up the Christian Bible. This target is possible to reach owing to the fact that apart from all kinds of historical and religious links between the Old and the New Testaments, which are impossible to consider in the narrow limits of the present paper, the New Testament contains a number of allegedly direct quotations from the Old Testament. All those references are in various ways connected with the same and only God-Yahwe, in Whom the faithful—Jews and Christians—claim to believe in observance of the following words from the book of Isaiah (45:5): ‫הים‬ ִ֑ ‫אֹל‬ ֱ /elohim/ ‫תי‬ ִ֖ ‫ זוָּל‬/zulati/ ‫עוד‬ ֹ֔ /ovd/ ‫אין‬ ֵ֣ ‫ ְו‬/ve
’ein/ ‫ה‬ ֙ ‫ יְהָו‬/YHWH/ (elohim—god) (besides me no) (other) (and no) ([I am] the LORD) Yet, the translation imbroglio may lead one to doubt that this is really true. The examples which follow are intended to justify this doubt. 5.1 Sh/e/ma Israel According to Krajewski (2000) “the most impost important and representative fragment of Tora (The Pentateuch) or perhaps of the entire Tanach (The Hebrew Bible) is the following fragment of Deuteronomy 6:4)”4: ‫מע‬ ַ֖ ‫ש‬ ְׁ (she
ma)—Hear ‫אל‬ ֵ֑ ‫שָר‬ ְׂ ‫יִ‬ (yis
ra
’el;)—o Israel ‫ְיהָ֥וה‬ (Yah
weh)—YHWH (Yahweh) ‫הינוּ‬ ֵ֖ ‫אֹל‬ ֱ (e
lo
hei
nu)—is your God ‫ְיהָ֥וה‬ (Yah
weh)—YHWH 4 Stanisław Krajewski (2000) “‘Słuchaj Izraelu’—Shma Israel”. In: Tora. Pięcioksiąg Mojżesza. Tom I. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Austeria, 455–463. 22 T. P. Krzeszowski ‫חד‬ ָֽ ‫א‬ ֶ (e
chad.)—is one (ve
’a
hav
ta,)—you shall love ‫ְיהָ֣וה‬ (Yah
weh)—YHWH ָ‫היך‬ ֶ֑ ‫אֹל‬ ֱ (e
lo
hei
cha;)—your God ‫ְּבָכל־‬ (be
chol-)—with all ‫ְלָבְבָ֥ך‬ (le
va
ve
cha)—your heart ‫וְּבָכל־‬ (u
ve
chol-)—and with ָ֖‫שך‬ ְׁ ‫ַנְפ‬ (naf
she
cha)—all your soul ‫וְּבָכל־‬ (u
ve
chol-)—and with all (me
’o
de
cha.)—your might. This fragment is an element of the Roman Catholic Saturday Night Prayer (Completorium) in the following word-for-word Latin rendering: Audi, Israel: Dominus Deus noster Dominus unus est. Diliges Dominm Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo et ex tota anima tua et ex tota fortitudine tua. (Officium Divinum. Liturgia Horarum iuxta ritum Romanum. Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis MCMLXXVII. Decima Impressio, 1977). The official English version reads: Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. (The Divine Office. The Liturgy of the Hours. London—Glasgow—Sidney—Dublin: Collins—E. Dwyer—Talbot. 1974). The official Polish version reads: Słuchaj Izraelu: Pan jest naszym Bogiem, Panem jedynym. Będziesz miłował Pana, Boga twojego, z całego swego serca, z całej duszy swojej, ze wszystkich sił swoich. Liturgia Godzin. Pallotinum 1988. In all these versions the lexical contrast between ‘Yahwe’ and ‘Adonai’ is obliterated. Yet, in both English and Polish versions there do exist notable exceptions where YHWH is rendered as one of its transliterations or as some word other than ‘Lord’ and ‘Pan’: Jehovah (American Standard Version), Yahweh (World English Bible), Jahwe (Biblia Warszawsko-Praska), Jehowa (Przekład Nowego Świata—Jehovah’s Witnesses), WIEKUISTY (Nowa Biblia Gdańska), Jahwe (Biblia Tysiąclecia, Wydanie drugie poprawione, 1971, Biblia Poznańska. Wydawnictwo Św. Wojciech, 2009). The tetragram in one of its transliterated versions appears in numerous other English versions of the Shema, for example: Jehovah in Young’s Literal The Bible Translation Imbroglio 23 Translation, Green’s Literal Translation, John Nelson Darby Translation, Julia Smith, Modern Literal Translation, Yahweh in Lexham English Bible, Concordant Literal Version, Rotherham Emphasized Bible, and Yah Veh in exeGeses Companion Bible. 5.2 The Greatest Commandment In Christianity the initial words of Shma Israel are the foundation of what is generally considered to be the “Great(est) Commandment”. These words are quoted verbatim by Jesus when He answers the question asked by one of the cqallasexm (scribes) “poia ersim pqxsη parxm emsokη” [which is the first commandment of all] (Mk 12:28 and Mt 22:36). Jesus answers quoting verbatim two fragments of the Tanach—the beginning of the Shema Israel, quoted above, and a verse from Leviticus (19:18): /kā
mō
w
ḵā/‫עָ֖ך‬ ֲ ‫ ְלֵר‬/lə
rê
‘ă
ḵā/‫ת‬ ָּ ‫הְב‬ ַ ‫אָ‬ ֽ ‫ ְו‬/wə
’ā
haḇ
tā/ as yourself /your neighbour /(but) you shall love The Septuagint renders these two verses making up Jesus’ answer as follows: “osi kpqxsη parxm sxm emsokxm ajote irqaηk jtqio1 o heo1 ηlxm jtqio1 ei1 ersim jai acapηrei1 jtqiom som heom rot en okη1 sη1 jaqdia1 rot jai en okη1 sη1 wtvη1 rot jai en okη1 sη1 diamoia1 rot jai en okη1 sη1 irvto1 rot atsη pqxsη emsokη” [The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.] (King James Bible); jaὶ ἀcapήrei1 sὸm pkηrίom rot ὡ1 reatsόm· [but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.] (King James Bible). It cannot come as a surprise that all Latin versions as well as all vernacular versions, based either on Greek or on Latin versions, also ignore the presence of the tetragram in the original Hebrew text quoted by Yehoshua (Jesus): “Jesus autem respondit ei: Quia primum omnium mandatum est: Audi Israël, Dominus Deus tuus, Deus unus est et diliges Dominum Deum tuum ex tota corde tuo, et ex tota anima tua, et ex tota mente tua, et ex tota virtute tua. Hoc est primum mandatum.” (The Clementine Vulgate). Notably, only in Aramaic Bible in Plain English and in exe-Geses Companion Bible the tetragram transliterated as Jehovah and Yah Veh, respectively, is used: “The first of all the commandments: ‘Hear Israel, THE LORD JEHOVAH your God, THE LORD JEHOVAH, he is One.’ And you shall love THE LORD JEHOVAH your God with your whole heart and with your entire soul and with your entire mind and with all your power.’ This is the first commandment”. And Yah Shua answers him, “The first of all the misvoth is, Hear, O Yisra El; Yah Veh our Elohim is one Yah Veh.” 24 5.3 T. P. Krzeszowski [Yahwe Elohim]– Ktqio1 Heo1—Dominus Deus—Lord God—Pan Bóg For the first time this currently conventional noun phrase appears in Genesis 2:4: el
leh—these to
vl
do
vt—is the account (these generations) ha
sha
ma
yim—of the heavens ve
ha
’a
retz—and the earth be
hib
ba
re
’am—when they were created be
yo
vm—in the day Yah
weh—that the LORD (the proper name of the God of Israel) e
lo
him—God a
so
vt—made e
retz—earth ve
sha
ma
yim—and heaven. These words are rendered as: “Aὕsη ἡ bίbko1 cemέrex1 oὐqamoῦ jaὶ cῆ1, ὅse ἐcέmeso, ᾗ ἡlέqᾳ ἐpoίηre Kύqio1 ὁ Heὸ1 sὸm oὐqamὸm jaὶ sὴm cῆmatsη” (Bqemsom Cqeej Repstacims). “η bibkor cemerexr otqamot jai cηr ose ecemeso η ηleqa epoiηrem o heor som otqamom jai sηm cηm” (The Septuagint). “istae generationes caeli et terrae quando creatae sunt in die quo fecit Dominus Deus caelum et terram” (The Vulgate). “These [are] the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens” (King James Version). “Oto dzieje niebios i ziemi w czasie ich stwarzania, w dniu, w którym Jehowa Bóg uczynił ziemię i niebo” (Przekład Nowego Świata—Jehovah’s Witnesses). “Oto są dzieje początków po stworzeniu nieba i ziemi. Gdy Pan Bóg uczynił ziemię i niebo” (Biblia Tysiąclecia). “Oto narodzenie niebios i ziemi, przy ich stworzeniu, w czasie, w którym WIEKUISTY, Bóg, uczynił niebo i ziemię” (Nowa Biblia Gdańska). Again the Septuagint stands out in that only one lexeme, o heo1, is used rather than some phrasal equivalent of the original Hebrew ‘yahveh elohim’ used in most other target texts, including the Vulgate, where the phrase ‘Dominus Deus’ is used. 5.4 ‫( ְיהָ֣וה‬Yah
weh) ‫אות‬ ֹ֣ ‫צָב‬ ְ (tze
va
’o
vt). This is also a highly conventionalized phrase. It is quoted here because it is an important constituent of “Sanctus”, one of the doxological prayers said during Roman Catholic Masses, where it is rendered as “Pan Bóg Zastępów”. Some other of numerous translations in Polish and English testify to creative ingenuity of their authors: The Bible Translation Imbroglio 25 Kύqio1 sῶm dtmάlexm (The Septuagint) Dominus virtutum (The Clementine Bible) The LORD Almighty (New International Vesrsion, Good News Translation) The LORD of Heaven’s Armies (New Living Version) The LORD of hosts (KJB, New Heart English Bible, JPS Tanakh 1917, NAS 1977, Brenton Septuagint Translation, English Revised Version) The LORD of the hosts (JB 2000) The LORD of Hosts (Berean Study Bible) The LORD All-Powerful (Contemporary English Version) Yahweh of Hosts (Holman Christian Standard Bible) The LORD of the heavenly armies (International Standard Version) The LORD who commands armies (NET Bible) The LORD of Armies (God’s Word® Translation) Jehovah of hosts (American Standard Version, Darby Bible Translation, Young’s Literal Traslation) The Lord of armies (Douay-Rheims Bible) Yahweh of Armies (World English Bible) Hashem Tzva’os (Orthodox Jewish Bible ‫ יהוה‬of hosts (The Scriptures ISR 1978) The Lord of virtues (Wycliffe’s Bible) Pan zastępów (Biblia Brzeska, Biblia Gdańska) Pan Zastępów (Biblia Warszawska) Jahwe Zastępów (Biblia Tysiąclecia, wydanie drugie poprawione, Biblia Poznańska) PAN zastępów z nami (Biblia Jakuba Wujka) ale Pan Zastępów w wydaniu “Vocatio” WIEKUISTY Zastępów (Nowa Biblia Gdańska, Śląskie Towarzystwo Biblie) PAN zastępów (Uwspółcześniona Biblia Gdańska) Pan Zastępów (Later editions of BT) Jehowa Zastępów (New World Translation) Bóg czci (Psałterz Floriański) Bóg mocy (Psałterz Pułwaski) Bóg zastępów (Celkow) Jehowa Pan Zastępów (Aszkenazy). 5.5 ְ‫מְלאָך‬ ֲ (malach) ‫( ְיהָ֖וה‬Yah
weh) of the LORD—Angelus Domini—Anioł Pański Angelus Domini is a catholic prayer said and/or sung daily at noon and at six o’clock p.m. The prayer is devoted to Virgin Mary and commemorates Annunciation, which has its roots in the Old Testament where the birth of Samson (Shimshon) is announced in the Book of Judges (13:1–5) in the following way: 26 T. P. Krzeszowski And there was a certain man of Zorah, of the family of the Danites, whose name was Manoah; and his wife was barren, and bare not. And the angel of the LORD appeared unto the woman, and said unto her, Behold now, thou art barren, and bearest not: but thou shalt conceive, and bear a son. Now therefore beware, I pray thee, and drink not wine nor strong drink, and eat not any unclean thing: For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no rasor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines. (King James Version) ‫מְַלאְַך־‬ (mal
’ach-)—then the angel/messenger ‫ְיהָ֖וה‬ (Yah
weh)—of YHWH ‫ַוֵּיָ֥רא‬ (vai
ye
ra)—appeared ‫שה‬ ָּׁ֑ ‫ָהִא‬ (ha
’i
shah;)—to the woman. The angel was the same “messenger of Yahweh” who, according to the New Testament (Luke 1:19), announced Jesus’ birth to Virgin Mary and in doing so used the same introductory words as those addressed to Samson’s mother. In the New Testament he is referred to either by means of his proper name ‘Gabriel’ (a man of God) or as ‘anioł Pana’ as a direct translation of ἄcceko1 Ktqίot /aggelos Kyriu/. Gabriel introduces himself in the following way: Ἐcώ eἰli Cabqiὴk ὁ paqersηjὼ1 ἐmώpiom soῦ Heoῦ jaὶ ἀpersάkηm kakῆrai pqὸ1 rέ jaί eὐaccekίrarhaί roi saῦsa
[I am Gabriel. I stand in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to tell you this good news.] (Luke 1:19). The phrase ἄcceko1 Ktqίot appears in an earlier passage of the same Gospel (Luke 1:11): ὤuhη dὲ aὐsῷ ἄcceko1 Ktqίot ἑrsὼ1 ἐj deniῶm soῦ htriarsηqίot soῦ htliάlaso1. [And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense] (King James Version). The phrase ἄcceko1 Ktqίot ultimately grounded in Judges (2:1 and 13:3) has received the following renderings in the Vulgates and selected vernacular versions: angelus Domini (The Clementine Vulgate) the angel of the LORD (New International Version) the angel of the LORD (New Living Version) The Angel of the LORD (Berean Study Bible) the angel of the LORD (New American Standard Bible) the angel of the LORD (King James) The angel of the LORD (Christian Standard Bible) The LORD’s angel (Good News Translation) The Angel of the LORD (Holman Christian Standard Bible) the angel of the LORD (International Standard Version) The LORD’s angelic Messenger (NET Bible) The angel of the LORD (New Heart English Bible) The Bible Translation Imbroglio 27 The Messenger of the LORD (God’s Word®Translation) the angel of the LORD (JPS Tanakh 1917) the angel of the LORD (New American Standard 1977) the angel of the LORD (Jubilee 2000) the angel of the LORD (American King James Version) the angel of Jehovah (American Standard Version) an angel of the Lord (Brenton Septuagint Translation) an angel of the Lord (Douay-Rheims Bible) the Angel of Jehovah (Darby Bible Translation) the angel of the LORD (English Revised Version) the angel of the LORD (Weebster’s Bible Translation) The angel of Yahweh (World English Bible) a messenger of Jehovah (Young’s Literal Translation) a Messenger of ‫( יהוה‬The Scriptures ISR 1978) the Malach Hashem (Orthodox Jewish Bible) anioł Pański (Biblia Brzeska) Anioł Pański (Biblia Gdańska) Anioł Pański (Biblia Warszawska) Anyół PANSKI (Biblia Jakuba Wujka 1599) Aniół Pański (Biblia Jakuba Wujka 1923) Anjoł PANSKI (Biblia Jakuba Wujka Biblia-online.pl Anioł Pański (Biblia Jakuba Wujka “Vocatio”) anioł WIEKUISTEGO (Nowa Biblia Gdańska) Anioł PANA (Uwspółcześniona Biblia Gdańska 2007) Anioł Wiekuistego (Celkow) Anioł Boży (Kruszyński) Anioł Jahwe (Biblia Tysiąclecia, wyd. 2 poprawione) Anioł Pański (Biblia Tysiąclecia, wyd. 5) anioł Jahwe (Biblia Poznańska) anioł Jahwe (Biblia Warszawsko-Praska) anioł WIEKUISTEGO (Śląskie Towarzystwo Biblijne) Anioł PANA (EIB.Biblia. 2016) Anioł Jehowy (Biblia Nieświeska Szymona Budnego, ariańska, 1572) Anioł Jehowy (Przekład Nowego Świata, Świadkowie Jehowy).5 5 It is interesting to note that the Annunciation is described in the Quran: [“Behold! the angels said: “O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah;” (Sura 3:45)]. 28 5.6 T. P. Krzeszowski Magnificat and Benedictus The beginnings of Mary’s Magnificat (Luke 1:46–55) and of Zahariah’s Benedictus (Luke 1:67–89) can be respectively traced back to 1 Samuel (2:1–10) and to 1 Chronicles (29:10b): ‫ַחָּנ֙ה‬ (chan
nah)—Hannah ‫תַּפֵּ֤לל‬ ְ ‫ת‬ ִּ ‫ַו‬ (vat
tit
pal
lel)—prayed ‫תאַ֔מר‬ ֹּ ‫ַו‬ (vat
to
mar,)—and said ‫ִלִּב֙י‬ (lib
bi)—”My heart ‫עַ֤לץ‬ ָ (a
latz)—exults ‫ַּֽביהָ֔וה‬ (Yah
weh)—in the LORD ‫ַקְרִ֖ני‬ (kar
ni)—my horn (qeren: a horn [proper name of a location, in other places translated as ‘might’ or ‘strength’] ‫מה‬ ָ ‫ָ֥ר‬ (ra
mah)— is exalted ‫ַּֽביהָ֑וה‬ (Yah
weh)—in the LORD ‫ִּפ֙י‬ (pi)—My mouth ‫ָ֤רַחב‬ (ra
chav)—speaks boldly ‫ַעל־‬ (al-)—against ‫א֣וְֹיַ֔בי‬ (’ō-wy-ḇay)—my enemies ‫ִּ֥כי‬ (ki)—because ‫תי‬ ִּ ‫שמְַ֖ח‬ ָׂ (sa
mach
ti)—I rejoicet ‫תָך׃‬ ֶֽ ‫ִּבישׁוָּע‬ (bi
shu
’a
te
cha.)—in Your salvation […]” In the Greek version of the New Testament the beginning of Mary’s Magnificat, obviously based on the words printed above in bold script, is rendered as: jai eipem laqial lecaktmei η wtvη lot som jtqiom jai ηcakkiarem so pmetla lot epi sx hex sx rxsηqi lot. The Bible Translation Imbroglio 29 Consequently, in the Vulgates and in the majority of vernacular versions the name ‘Yahweh’ has been ignored and rendered in a number of ways which differ lexically and grammatically, as in the following examples: et ait Maria magnificat anima mea Dominum (Latin Vulgate). Et ait Maria: [Magnificat anima mea Dominum (Clementine Vulgate)]. And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour (King James Version). And Mary said: My soul praises the greatness of † the Lord, […] (Christian Standard Bible). And Miryam said, “My being makes ‫ יהוה‬great, and my spirit has rejoiced in Elohim my Saviour (The Scriptures ISR 1978) And Mary said, “My soul exalts the Lord, and my spirit has begun to rejoice in God my Savior, […] (NET Bible) Tedy rzekła Maria: Niechżeć wielbi dusza moja Pana. A raduje się duch mój w Bogu, Zbawicielu moim (Biblia Brzeska) Tedy rzekła Maryja: Wielbi dusza moja Pana; I rozradował się duch mój w Bogu, zbawicielu moim, […] (Biblia Gdańska) y rzekła Máriá Wielbi duszo moiá Pana (Biblia Jakuba Wujka 1599) I rzekła Marya: Wielbij, duszo moja, Pana, […] (Biblia Jakuba Wujka 1923) I rzekła Maria: Wielbi, duszo moja, Pana, i rozradował się duch mój w Bogu, zbawicielu moim, […] (Biblia Jakuba Wujka, wersja Biblia-on-line.pl) I rzekła Maria: Wielbi, duszo moja, Pana, i rozradował się duch mój w Bogu, zbawicielu moim, […] (Biblia Jakuba Wujka, “Vocatio”) A Maria powiedziała: Chwali moja dusza Pana; i rozweselił się mój duch w Bogu, moim Zbawicielu, (Nowa Biblia Gdańska) I wtedy Maria powiedziała: Moja dusza wywyższa Pana, A mój duch rozradował się w Bogu, moim Zbawicielu, […] (Biblia Przekład Toruński) Maria zaś rzekła: “Dusza moja wywyższa Jehowę, (47) a duch mój nie może się Powstrzymać od niewymownego radowania się w Bogu, moim Wybawcy, (Przekład Nowego Świata—Jehovah’s Witnesses). The beginning of Zahariah’s Benedictus (Lk 1:67–89) can be traced back to 1 Chronicles 29:10b: ‫ָּדִ֗ויד‬ (da
vid)—[…] and David ‫ַוֹּ֣יאֶמר‬ (vai
yo
mer)—said ְ‫ָּב֨רוּך‬ (ba
ruch)—blessed ‫ְיהָו֙ה‬ (Yah
weh)—(are you) Yahwe ‫ֱאֹלֵה֙י‬ (e
lo
hei)—God ‫שָרֵ֣אל‬ ְׂ ‫יִ‬ (yis
ra
’el)—of Israel 30 T. P. Krzeszowski ‫אִָ֔בינוּ‬ (a
vi
nu,)—our father ‫ֵמֹעוָ֖לם‬ (me
’o
v
lam)—for ever ‫ֹעוָֽלם׃‬ (o
v
lam.)—and ever In the Septuagint the beginning of Benedictus reads: Kaὶ eὐkόcηrem ὁ barikeὺ1 Datὶd sὸm Kύqiom ἐmώpiom sῆ1 ἐjjkηrίa1, kέcxm, Eὐkocηsὸ1 eἶ Kύqie ὁ Heὸ1 Ἰrqaὴk, ὁ pasὴq ἡlῶm, ἀpὸ soῦ aἰῶmo1 jaὶ ἕx1 soῦ aἰῶmo1 (Brenton Greek Septuagint). Consequently, in the translated versions presumably based on the Septuagint rather than some Hebrew versions the phrase with the name YHWH has been translated as: et [David] benedixit Domino coram universa multitudine et ait benedictus es Domine Deus Israhel patris nostri ab aeterno in aeternum (The Latin Vulgate). Et [David] benedixit Domino coram universa multitudine, et ait: Benedictus es, Domine Deus Israël patris nostri, ab æterno in æternum (The Clementine Vulgate). Zachariah begins his canticle (Benedictus) quoting David’s words blessing Yahweh. Yet, with a few exceptions (The Scriptures, Jewish Orthodox Bible and Tłumaczenie Nowego Świata—New World Translation), in translated versions, in most cases based only on the Septuagint or on one of the Vulgates, the tetragram YHWH (in whatever transliteration) is ignored and not even rendered by means of any of its possible substitutes. Consequently, the tetragram never appears in the Divine Office (Liturgy of the Hours). Notably, the official liturgical translation of the Magnificat and of Benedictus are recited daily during the Roman-Catholic Divine Office “AS RENEWED BY DECREE OF THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL AND PROMULGATED BY THE AUTHORITY OF POPE PAUL VI”, The text is based on the Clementine Vulgate.6 5.7 Sanctus (including Benedictus qui venit…) The sentence “Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini” [Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord] is a fragment of the mass Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus immediately preceding the transubstantiation rites. The sentence is a frequently mistranslated quotation from Psalm 118:26): ‫הָּבא ָּב֣רוְּך‬ ַ ‫שם‬ ֵׁ֣ ‫ְיהָ֑וה ְּב‬ (Yah
weh) (be
shem) (hab
ba) (ba
ruch) The sentence is often correctly translated as 6 Quoted from the title page of The Divine Office. The Bible Translation Imbroglio 31 Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Jehovah (American Standard Version) Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Jehovah’ (World English Bible)—Blessed is he who is coming In the name of Jehovah, We blessed you from the house of Jehovah (Young’s Literal Translation). However, as part of Sanctus, which is a part of the Roman Catholic mass, it is mistranslated, following the Septuagint and the Vulgates, where jtqio? and Dominus, respectively, appear instead of YHWH in one of its possible transliterations: Eὐkocηlέmo1 ὁ ἐqvόlemo1 ἐm ὀmόlasi Ktqίot· Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini The rest of the Christian Sanctus is also based on the Old Testament text, specifically on the following verse from the Book of Isaiah: ‫ ָקֹ֧דושׁ ָקֹ֧דושׁ ָקֹ֧דושׁ‬/ka
do
vsh/sacred, holy ‫ ְיהָ֣וה‬/Yah
weh/[is] the LORD ‫ ְצָבאֹ֑ות‬tze
va
’o
vt/of hosts ‫ ָכל־‬/chol-/the whole ‫ ָה ֖אֶָרץ‬/ha
’a
retz/earth ‫ ְמֹ֥לא‬/me
lo/is full ‫ ְּכֹבוֹֽדו׃‬/ke
vo
v
dov/of His glory (Is 6:3). Notably, in contemporary Jewish liturgy this verse is recited by the cantor during celebrations of Amidah, the central prayer of Jewish liturgy: Kadosh Kadosh Kadosh Adonai Tz’vaot Melo Kol Haaretz Kevodo. In this way the same God is addressed by different names in the same sentence: when mentioned in Psalm 118, He sometimes preserves his His proper name, but when the same sentence is used as a part of contemporary Jewish or Christian laudatory prayers, i.e. Kadovsh and Sanctus, Yahwe is deprived of His name and becomes a mere Adonai, Lord or at best LORD, as any other god. In this way the same God is addressed by different names in the same sentence: when mentioned in Psalm 118, He sometimes preserves his His proper name, but when the same sentence is used as a part of contemporary Jewish or Christian laudatory prayers, i.e. Kadovsh and Sanctus, Yahwe is deprived of His name and becomes a mere Adonai, Lord or at best LORD, as any other god. 6 Consequences of the Imbroglio Some of the mistranslations presented above may be deliberate and are motivated by the doctrinal need to prove the alleged fundamental differences between Judaism and Christianity, as well as between particular denominations within the two great religions. These mistranslations, with notable exceptions plaguing translated versions of The Bible, in a major way contribute to maintaining anti-Semitic attitudes among contemporary Christians. Yet, somewhat inconsistently, Christians, at least 32 T. P. Krzeszowski implicitly, seem to believe that their God is the same Supreme Being as the God of ancient Israelites and of contemporary pious Jews and that the name of this God is YHWH. However, all the adverse consequences of the translation imbroglio, which have their roots in the grapevine effects, have no bearing on the fact that for the faithful— both Jews and Christians—the Bible remains a sacred text. As such, it should not be merely read like any other text, but ought to be experienced as a prayer, meditation and contemplation. For the faithful every contact with the Bible in any of its versions constitutes a fresh religious event. One cannot be detracted from this experience through the overwhelming multiplicity of divergent translations and previous interpretations. Every religious event with the Bible as its foundation is new and unique. The number of such events is incomparably greater than the number of all possible versions of the Bible. Paradoxically, every time the Bible is experienced, it becomes a new version, even if the text itself may remain the same. The faithful believe that God sends His Word as His message to people, and His Word remains unchanged, even if the words carrying this message may be different, unstable and inaccurate. This is why the phrases referring to fragments of the Bible read during Roman Catholic ceremonies are “Verbum Dei” (“Oto Słowo Boże”) or “Verbum Domini” (“Oto Słowo Pańskie”) rather than “Verba Dei” or “Verba Domini”. What always remains constant in all versions of the Old and New Testament, regardless of religions, languages, confessions, denominations and cultures is ALLELUJA!7 References Davis, K. (1969). Grapevine communication among lower and middle managers. Personnel Journal, 48, 269–272. Internet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_translations. Krajewski, S. (2000). “‘Słuchaj Izraelu’—Shma Israel”. In: Tora. Pięcioksiąg Mojżesza (pp. 455– 463). Tom I. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Austeria. Krzeszowski, T. P. (in press). Bible translations as a case of grapevine communication. In I. Lehman (Ed.), Discourses on Culture. 7 The word is a slightly distorted form of the Hebrew hal
lu yah—chwalmy Yah (Yahwe). It is repeated several score times every day by Roman Catholic clergy (priests, monks and nuns) during Liturgy of the Hours and the Holy Eucharist. For example, on the Fourth Sunday of Eastertide “Alleluja” is chanted about 130 times: Evening Prayer I *20 The Office of Readings *17 Morning Prayer *17 Prayers during the Day * 33 (3 x *11) Evening Prayer II *20 Night Prayer * 20 The Mass * 8 (not counting Eastertide hymns) . The Bible Translation Imbroglio 33 Majewski, M. (2015). Cenzura w Biblii. Tygodnik Powszechny, 6 grudnia 2015. Nida, E. A. (1964). Towards a science of translating. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Reddy, M. (1979). The conduit metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 284– 324). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Swanson, P. L., & Heisig, J. W. (2005). Reflections on translating philosophical and religious texts. 1. Religious Texts (by Paul L. Swanson) Revista de Estudos da Religião, 4, 115–136. Tomasz Paweł Krzeszowski Professor Emeritus at Warsaw University; Professor Ordinarius at University of Social Sciences in Łódź/Warsaw. Areas of academic research: contrastive linguistics, cognitive linguistics, axiological aspects of language, metaphor, translation studies. Major books: Early contrastive studies in England (3 editions); Gramatyka angielska dla Polaków (6 editions) [English Grammar for Polish Learners]; Contrastive generative grammar: theoretical foundations (2 editions); Contrasting langauges: the scope of contrastive linguistics, Angels and devils in hell. Elements of axiology in semantics; Time works wonders; The translation equivalence delusion. Meaning and translation.