Gender-Sensitive Bible Translation

[Deacon]

...that title is a little too much for me!

That was a book that referenced some of John H. Walton's works that I value highly. I thought I'd give it a whirl-- the title is bigger than the ideas in the book.
___________
The Treatment of References to Israel’s God
Two examples of the Revised Jewish Publication Societies Gender Sensitive translation of יהוה

Exodus 6:1-3 RJPS Then GOD said to Moses, “You shall soon see what I will do to Pharaoh: he shall let them go because of a greater might; indeed, because of a greater might he shall drive them from his land.”

וָאֵרָא | VA-‘ERA’ ["I appeared”]​

God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am GOD. I appeared to (footnote 1) Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but did not make Myself known to them by My name GOD [יהוה]. (footnote 2)

(footnote 1) 6:3 appeared to Or "communicated with"
(footnote 2) 6:3 יהוה This divine name is traditionally not pronounced; instead, Adonai, lit. “(the) Sovereign,” is regularly substituted for it.​

Deuteronomy 7:6-11 RJPS
For you are a people consecrated to the ETERNAL your God: of all the people on earth, the ETERNAL your God chose you to be the treasured one.(footnote) It is not because you are the most numerous of peoples that GOD grew attached to you and chose you—indeed, you are the smallest of peoples; but it was because GOD favored you and kept the oath made to your fathers that GOD freed you with a mighty hand and rescued you from the house of bondage, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Know, therefore, that only the ETERNAL your God is God, the steadfast God who keeps this covenant faithfully to the thousandth generation of those who show love and keep the commandments, but who instantly requites with destruction those who are disloyal—never slow with those who are disloyal, but requiting them instantly. Therefore, observe faithfully the Instruction—the laws and the rules—with which I charge you today.​

(footnote) 7:6 the treasured one Lit. "for Him a people of treasure."​

 

[Deacon]

In this passage the KJV added the masculine gender to the passage (the Hebrew word for "lips" is feminine).

Personally I think the THE MESSAGE version provides one of the best translations for today's reader!

COMPARE

Proverbs 24:26 (AV 1873)
Every man shall kiss his lips
That giveth a right answer.

Proverbs 24:26 (NKJV)
He who gives a right answer kisses the lips.

Proverbs 24:26 (ESV)
Whoever gives an honest answer
kisses the lips.

Proverbs 24:26 (NASB 2020)
One who gives a right answer
Kisses the lips.

Proverbs 24:26 (NASB)
He kisses the lips
Who gives a right answer.

Proverbs 24:26 (NET)
Like a kiss on the lips
is the one who gives an honest answer.

Proverbs 24:26 (NIV)
An honest answer
is like a kiss on the lips.

Proverbs 24 26 (RJPS)
Giving a straightforward reply
Is like giving a kiss.

Proverbs 24:26 (Goldingay)
He kisses with the lips,
the one who speaks back with straight words.

Proverbs 24:26 (Robert Alter)
With lips does he kiss
who answers in forthright words.

Proverbs 24:26 (MSG)
An honest answer
is like a warm hug.

Rob

 

[Deacon]

Although the Revised Jewish Publication Society’s- Gender Sensitive Edition is clearly identified as “GENDER-SENSITIVE”, it is not greatly different in this aspect than many other popular translations.

The NASB (2020) has perhaps more gender changes than others… but I’ve not quantified that observation.

I find that the manipulation of gender has been present from the very beginnings of our English translations.

Compare the NASB(2020) translation of Proverbs 29:1 with the KJV (AV1873):

A person often rebuked who becomes obstinate
Will suddenly be broken beyond remedy. (NASB)​

He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck,
Shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy. (AV 1873)​

The word “person” or “man” translates the Hebrew word, “ish”. Both translations are possible; neither is incorrect. However the KJV added the “he” as indicated by the translators use of itallics.
The KJV has a tendency to add the masculine gender to passages. (Look through the book of Proverbs in the KJV and observe where the translators italicized “man”.”

BUT then compare the two versions in verse 29:3!

Rob

 

[Deacon]

The translation of this passage (Psalm 127:3-5) is all over the place!

בָּנִים - transliteration banim
Hebrew = son's, children


Psalm 127:3-5 (Revised JPS - Gender-Sensitive Edition)
Sons are the provision of GOD;

the fruit of the womb, divine reward.​

Like arrows in the hand of a warrior

are sons born to a man in his youth.​

Happy is the man who fills his quiver with them;

they shall not be put to shame
when they contend with the enemy in the gate.​

Psalm 127:3–5 (ESV)
Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord,
the fruit of the womb a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior
are the children (note) of one’s youth.
Blessed is the man who fills his quiver with them!
He shall not be put to shame
when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.

(note) or sons​

Psalm 127:3–5 (NASB 2020)
Behold, children are a gift of the Lord,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one’s youth.
Blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them;
They will not be ashamed
When they speak with their enemies in the gate.

Psalm 127:3–5 (AV 1873)
Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord:
And the fruit of the womb is his reward.
As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man;
So are children of the youth.
Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them:
They shall not be ashamed,
But they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.

 

[Deacon]

Psalm 127:3-5: Regarding the gender-inclusive use of "children" in many popular translations and the gender-specific use of "sons" by the RJPS (and NRSV).

Commentators that provide their own translations of the original text generally translate the word as "sons".

The passage uses many masculine terms, i.e. "arrows", "warrior", "quiver", "enemies in the gate."
John Goldingay in the Baker Commentary on Psalms (vol 3. p.503-4) writes:

"The psalmist would have granted that daughters were also a possession from Yhwh and were among the fruit of the womb that were Yahweh's reward; there is no direct suggestion in the OT that (for instance) the birth of a daughter would be unwelcome, and there are many indications of an awareness of the importance and responsibility of daughters and mothers in their own right and not merely in their potential for actual capacity to bear children (sons!) (for instance, Deut. 5:14; 12:12, 18). But in connection with the matter vv.4-5 go on the discuss, in the social cont3ext it is sons that are significant. Thus NRSV is right not to gender-inclusivize v.3 ..."​

Chalk one up for the RJPS here!

Rob

​

 

[Deacon]

Here is a recent article on the subject by Dave Brunn, an International Bible Translation Consultant with Ethnos360 (formerly New Tribes Mission), who serves as an adjunct consultant for Wycliffe Bible Translators in Asia and Africa.


Gender in Bible Translation: A Critical Issue Still Mired in Misunderstanding [LINK]
by David Brunn
Themelios, Volume 49 Issue 1 (April 2024)
The Gospel Coalition

Conclusion
The discussion of gender in Bible translation does not need to be contentious, and it does not need to be confusing, especially if we come together and acknowledge a few observable realities:

(1) Every major English Bible translation replaces masculine forms with gender-neutral forms in many contexts, not only in places where “the constraints of the target language” require it, but in many other places as well. Often it is simply a judgment call on the part of the translators of both literal and nonliteral versions.

(2) Sometimes a notably nonliteral version reflects a masculine form from the source text, even though some literal versions exchanged it for a gender-neutral term.

(3) Many of the contexts where literal versions translated a masculine Hebrew or Greek term with a gender-neutral term are comparable to contexts where nonliteral versions employed the same practice, only on a more consistent basis.

(4) Every major English translation that has a “general gender-neutral policy” only replaces masculine forms with gender-neutral ones in places where the translators consider the context to apply to males and females collectively.

(5) Grammatical gender (masculine, feminine) is not the same as semantic gender (male, female). Every first-century native speaker of koine Greek understood this intuitively, but most native English speakers do not—including many who have studied koine Greek as a dead language. Native English speakers who learn Greek gain a cognitive understanding of the distinction between grammatical and semantic gender, but not necessarily an intuitive sense, because their heart language, English, does not have a comprehensive grammatical gender classification system like other Indo-European languages. This is probably the main reason the gender debate has been most prominent in the English-speaking world. Much of the confusion and controversy about gender in Bible translation stem from the fact that most native English speakers assume that grammatical “masculine” is equivalent to semantic “male.”

(6) Some of the strict guidelines that have been proposed for handling gender in Bible translation are not relevant to many languages around the world, particularly those that are far removed from Hebrew and Greek.

(7) In recent years, even literal translations like the ESV and NASB have taken significant steps toward increased gender inclusiveness, using far more gender-neutral terms than their predecessors, the RSV and earlier editions of the NASB. This seems to indicate that the translators of these versions recognize that masculine English words like “father(s),” “brother(s),” “man/men,” and “son(s)” are less inclusive today than they were just a few decades ago, and, by the same token, are less inclusive than the corresponding Hebrew and Greek terms.

English speakers are blessed to have many high-quality Bible translations of various kinds. I pray that God will help us recognize and embrace the benefits of this incredible blessing, especially as we reflect on the fact that there are still thousands of people groups around the world with no Scripture in their heart language.​

 

[Deacon]

Passover was April 22nd; what better time to study the Song of Songs!
I've never studied through the book so after I read it through I transcribed it by hand from two different versions.
And began Tremper Longman III's NICOT commentary on the Song....

Wow - I've got to get more of his resources!
His commentary is just the best.
Although there are passages where the commentary does get a bit spicy.​

Translators of the book have a variety of difficulties.

• There are many passages where scholars have few clues as to their meaning; words and sentences that don't seem to make sense.
• There are numerous ambiguities that are characteristic of poetry (often concerning whether to translate literally or metaphorically).
• When reading 'Songs' interpreters have a difficult time deciding where one section/poem starts and another begins.
• Confusion also arises concerning what character is actually speaking.

So gender plays a part (albeit a minor part).

We are dealing with gender and low and behold, I come across a passage with a variety of gender references that effect the meaning of the passage.

Let's compare the AV, the NASB2020 and the ESV.

Song of Solomon 2:3–7 (AV 1873) (as instructed, the translators do not provide many helps to the reader)
As the apple tree among the trees of the wood,
So is my beloved among the sons.
I sat down under his shadow with great delight,
And his fruit was sweet to my taste.
He brought me to the banqueting house,
And his banner over me was love.
Stay me with flagons, comfort me with apples:
For I am sick of love.
His left hand is under my head,
And his right hand doth embrace me.
I charge you, O ye daughters of Jerusalem,
By the roes, and by the hinds of the field,
That ye stir not up, nor awake my love, till he please.
​

(In the AV, it appears that the woman is the narrator)
AV - Don't wake up the groom.

Now compare the NASB2020 (the NASB chose to place markers where the translators determined where the characters speak (in this case the "Bride" and the "Groom")

Song of Solomon 2:3–7 (NASB 2020)
The Bride
Like an apple tree among the trees of the forest,
So is my beloved among the young men.
In his shade I took great delight and sat down,
And his fruit was sweet to my taste.
He has brought me to his banquet hall,
And his banner over me is love.
Refresh me with raisin cakes,
Sustain me with apples,
Because I am lovesick.
His left hand is under my head,
And his right hand embraces me.”

The Groom
Swear to me, you daughters of Jerusalem,
By the gazelles or by the does of the field,
That you will not disturb or awaken my love
Until she pleases.”
​

NASB - Don't wake up the Bride!

Lastly compare each with the ESV. (The ESV also chose to add markers identifying the different character's poems)

Song of Solomon 2:3–7 (ESV)
She
As an apple tree among the trees of the forest,
so is my beloved among the young men.
With great delight I sat in his shadow,
and his fruit was sweet to my taste.
He brought me to the banqueting house,
and his banner over me was love.
Sustain me with raisins;
refresh me with apples,
for I am sick with love.
His left hand is under my head,
and his right hand embraces me!
I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
by the gazelles or the does of the field,
that you not stir up or awaken love
until it pleases.

Both the RJPS and Robert Alter use "it".

ESV/RJPS Don't wake up love until it's time.

Rob