Translation Day 9: livering things that make you happy

Advisor Notes - Wolwale Onnele (Luke 9:18-27)

9 Days of Translation Checking

Today is Day 9 of this celebration of checking Luke in the Onnele translations last month. Thanks to everyone who viewed the posts and the few who left comments. This is taking too much of my time right now, so I will not keep this series officially going. But I will continue these posts as often as I can to relate more of the 70+ translation stories that I took note of last month.

When we came to Luke 9:24, that was a verse that was hard to translate. Here is what the NASB says…

For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it.

The first draft of the Onnele translations all looked something like this (with literal English back translation)…

Le mana samo wola ye laip wone’ni, laip wone’ni ese fafaile. Mana fei samo wola ye laip wone’ni ka yupene ki, laip wone’ni ese uporo.

If a person really livers [= thinks] continuously life of him/her, life of him/her will be ruined. Person [who] not really livers [= thinks] continuously life of him/her and follows me, life of him/her will be good.

A couple notes on this first draft…

• This followed pretty literally the Tok Pisin source text that had been prepared from the back translation of another vernacular translation in the region and had gone through an exegetical check by three translation advisors.
• The biggest differences from the pidgin source text is the lack of prepositions and equivalent conjunctions in Onnele.
• Another main difference is that the pidgin source text for “wishes to save his life” was wari tumas long laip bilong em, which means something like “is very concerned/preoccupied about his/her life” (tumas means ‘very’ and does NOT mean ‘too much’). However, the way the Onnele languages express this idea is with the word wola ‘liver’ used as a verb. It is generally used as a verb to mean ‘think about’. Note that the constraints of the Onnele language make it very difficult to talk about ‘saving’ even when it is talking about one person saving another person from immanent death, although that is a little easier. It is more difficult when the meaning, as in Luke 9:24, refers to saving oneself. However, Papua New Guineans are masters of implied information. To “really think about something” clearly means in Onnele that the person is placing a priority on the preservation of his life or on the things that contribute to a good life.
• Note that the Onnele first draft uses the word laip a total of four times. That is a borrowed word from Tok Pisin that obviously comes from the English word ‘life’. Onnele has many such pidgin words that have come into their vernacular languages, just as Old English incorporated words from Scandinavian and Norman contact. However, in our translations we aim not to borrow words from Tok Pisin if there are perfectly normal ways to express the meaning in the Onnele heart languages. So I wanted to ask about ‘laip’.
• Finally, although the Tok Pisin source text may carry the correct meaning and may be sufficient for producing that meaning in some of the 11 languages in our translation project, it was questionable if this first draft clearly expressed the proper sense of this verse. The biggest concern was the part that read “Person [who] not really livers [= thinks] continuously life of him/her and follows me…” What exactly is being negated in that clause? Is it just that the person doesn’t really think a lot about his/her own life, or is it that the person doesn’t think continuously about his/her life? The true sense of this verse should be that the person actually loses all concern for this present life on the basis of following Jesus. The first draft of the Onnele translation left too much room for ambiguity, excuses, and rationalizing one’s (dis)obedience to the call of Christ.

The revised draft of the Onnele translations now reads more like this…

La mana samo wolaye ommo ese yangke wone aiyem, mana namo ese fafaile. Ka mana fina empo samo wolyumalo ommo ese yangke wone waiye uporo ka yupene ki, mana namo ese waiye uporo.

If a person really livers [= thinks] continuously the things that will make him/her happy, this person will be ruined. And the person who really liver loses [= purposely forgets] the things that will make him/her exist good and follows me, this person will exist good.

A few notes about the changes…

• Le was changed to La. Both words mean something like ‘if’, but this is why Papua New Guineans are in the driver’s seat and I’m not. They know intuitively what sounds right to their ears even when both words would carry the right meaning.
• The continuous marker -ye was combined with the verb rather than being written separately. This is simply a spelling convention that we are trying to follow consistently. For any linguists out there, this morpheme always seems to hang with the verb. For another morpheme -pu which might seem at first glance to be structurally equivalent to -ye since it means [+completed] rather than [+continuous], we are writing that separately because it does not always hang with the verb. It can actually come at the end of the verb phrase or the end of the whole clause. Some might analyze it as a clitic.
• Notice that we are no longer borrowing the word ‘laip’. The Onnele translation now refers to the person who “livers the things that will make him/her happy,” and it talks about the person himself/herself being ruined or existing good. The original Greek text has a sort of play on words with multiple senses of the word ψυχή psuche ‘soul/life’. In talking about seeking to save or losing one’s own life, the meaning seems to point not primarily at the preservation from death, but of a certain quality of life that is self-seeking at the core. But regarding the result of either seeking to save or losing one’s status in the good life, the ultimate end is self-ruin or preservation from death, respectively. This is made clear in the following verse: For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself? (Luke 9:25 NASB) Therefore, the translation is now a bit less literal in terms of word-for-word correspondence, but it is much more clearly meaningful and accurately reflects the significance of the original.
• The conjunction ka was added. Ka literally means ‘and’ so that is why it wasn’t originally included for the Tok Pisin conjunction that means ‘but’. However, the Onnele translators later realized that ka fits appropriately here, and its usage is a bit more broad than English ‘and’ and Tok Pisin ‘na’.
• The relative pronoun fina ‘who’ was added. It was probably okay without it, but this makes the sentence flow more smoothly and clearly.
• The verse now reads samo wolyumalo ommo “really liver loses [= purposely forgets] the things…” The meaning now is clearly an intentional activity of the person and cannot be confused with a more passive experience of life that may have been a possible interpretation of the first draft.

Translation Day 6: Like people who exist one liver

9 Days of Translation Checking

Today is Day 6 of this celebration of checking Luke in the Onnele translations last month. Did you find the verse in Luke 8 that could refer to people who only have one liver?

In the Parable of the Sower, at Luke 8:15, the NCV reads…

And the seed that fell on the good ground is like those who hear God’s teaching with good, honest hearts and obey it and patiently produce good fruit.

For this idea of “good, honest hearts,” earlier drafts of the Onnele translation included this phrase (with literal English back translation)…

pinuma e fa sam naine wolpun uporo

people who really exist good liver-stomachs

When I checked over these earlier drafts, I was quite happy with the overall translation of the verse, but I wasn’t quite sure about this one phrase.

The reason I wanted to ask the translators about this phrase here was that I was familiar with the use of wolpun uporo “good liver-stomachs” in other contexts. They often use this phrase to refer to a general state of happiness or contentment, perhaps a peaceful state that derives from having needs met and lacking any interpersonal tension. But is that what this verse is talking about?

I didn’t think so. This verse refers to people who have an “honest and good heart,” and therefore, they retain the word when they hear it and patiently bear fruit. It’s the concept of honesty that I didn’t see in the Onnele translations. Of course, some might argue that honesty isn’t really in the original Greek text either.

The words in Greek that describe the state of their hearts are two words — καλός kalos and ἀγαθός agathos — that are both most commonly translated as ‘good’. You can imagine that the use of such words throughout the development of the Greek language would have a rich history in relation to ethical, political, philosophical and religious ideas. However, the word καλός kalos may be thought of more in terms of being ‘healthy, fit, useful’–the same word used to describe the soil–but in the Synoptic Gospels it is regularly used to describe people who through repentance show evidence of divine power guiding their conduct. On the other hand, ἀγαθός agathos has more to do with spiritual and ethical ‘excellence, worthiness’ and is applied most aptly to the absolute goodness of God alone.

Yet in many ways, these words are near synonyms and acquire the greatest significance from the contexts in which they are used. It is the immediate context of Luke 8:15 that makes me quite happy with English versions that use the word ‘honest’ to translate καλός kalos in this verse, even though that is a fairly rare translation of this word. The people with “good and honest hearts” in Luke 8:15 stand in stark contrast to the people who received the word with joy but allowed the worries, wealth and pleasures of this life to crowd out the word (v. 14).

The picture in v. 14 describes a double-mindedness that tries to hang onto both the will and word of God AND the self-centered cares of this world. That can only be done by receiving God’s word with a dishonest heart. One either hears the true message and fools oneself into thinking that he will make space for God to accomplish his purpose, or one misinterprets the word in an attempt to reconcile the all-consuming message with the interests that continue to consume one’s thoughts and aspirations. Thus, the person with a καλός kalos ‘good, healthy, fit, and useful’ heart is the one who hears the message without deceiving oneself or being dishonest with the clear meaning of God’s word. The theme of honesty in the face of God’s expressed will also continues in the next paragraph…

Everything that is hidden will become clear, and every secret thing will be made known. So be careful how you listen. Those who have understanding will be given more. But those who do not have understanding, even what they think they have will be taken away from them. (Luke 8:17 -18, NCV)

When I explained to the Onnele translators how this idea of honesty fits within the surrounding context, they immediately knew that their expression pinuma e fa sam naine wolpun uporo “people who really exist good liver-stomachs” was not sufficient. They explained that it referred more to a passive experience of life and did not express the kind of single-minded outlook and action towards the word of God that this text must be talking about. But what could they say instead?

Their minds were clearly working. They turned their attention away from me and engaged each other with energy as they tossed words and phrases backand forth. Some ideas seemed promising but just didn’t quite work. Other suggestions simply got a laugh and they moved on. I suggested that they think more about other idioms that involve the wola ‘liver’ or puna ‘stomach’ since these have proved to be so rich already for many other emotions and behaviors. After all, this verse does talk about having a good and honest heart, and I didn’t want them to lose their own idiomatic reference to the locus of their inner selves.

And then one of them suggested wolwokera.

They all stopped talking about other ideas as they each contemplated wolwokera. They were all thinking to themselves, some of them mumbling silently as they considered how wolwokera might fit into the sentence. Heads started nodding and they began giving approving smiles to one another.

Okay, I knew what the literal meaning was. That’s wol ‘liver’, and wokera ‘one’. It meant ‘one-liver’. But what did it really mean? How did they actually use that expression? I tried to ask, but they shushed me as they wanted to figure out first how the whole sentence would read…

Ka, nalale e firipanro pike uporo sa yukaine pinuma e naine wolwokera uporo, ka nupu mi e God ka nuna kero mi namo. E ommo wongkwongkeni yemplekare nu, nu fa neri kero bilip ka nalelwa.

And, the seeds that fell down on the good ground are like people who exist one liver and good, and they hear the talk of God and hold strong this talk. When various things tempt them, they stand strong belief and produce fruit.

And then they explained to me: when a person “exists one liver,” it means that he doesn’t go after different things. This person does not listen to the word of God and still try to go after the things of this ground, because he is intent on only pursuing one thing.

What a blessing it is to work with the Onnele translators, who are not content to simply allow a quick and easy (mis)understanding of God’s word to fill their pages. Rather, with honest and good hearts, they hear God’s word, hold onto it, and patiently produce fruit. And not only the fruit of a carefully worked out translation, but the fruit of the divine will at work in each of their livers.

Tomorrow: “the wind also hears”

Translation Day 2: Do not condemn

9 Days of Translation Checking

Today is Day 2 of this celebration of those last 9 fruitful days of checking the Onnele translations of Luke out in the village last month.

Yesterday, I talked about ‘judging’ in Luke 6:37a. Now it’s time for Luke 6:37b.

The NASB reads, “… and do not condemn, and you will not be condemned.”

As with v. 37a, we again have the problem of not having passive verbs in the Onnele languages. So, once again, we specified God as the subsequent agent. Another feature of Onnele is that we cannot simply say ‘judge’ or ‘condemn’ as intransitive verbs. We have to specify the object of that condemning.

The idea of ‘condemnation’ in the second part of this verse is simply a parallel expansion on the idea of ‘judging’ in the first part, although ‘to condemn’ is stronger than ‘to judge’, and ‘condemning’ implies the status of guilt and deserved punishment.

An earlier draft of the Goiniri Onnele translation read like this…

“Pone ese fei pale eni pai nu uma plai, ka God re ese fei yape pone eni.”

“Do not give heavy to people, and God too will not give you heavy.”

While the idea of giving someone ‘heavy’ started to get at the idea of punishment that is associated with ‘condemnation’, this translation was just way too general. Also, giving ‘heavy’ focused too much on a physical action rather than the verbal assessment of someone else’s action. So the translation now reads…

“Pone ese fei kal mi polo nu uma plai nanrona nu nangke nale fafaile pu fane nu ese nem eni. La pone fei pangke nanrona, sa God re ese fei kal mi yolo pone.”

“Do not shoot talk nothing at people that they made bad skin so they must receive heavy. If you do not do this, then God too will not shoot talk nothing at you.”

So for ‘judging’ in v. 37a, we have “look around nothing at people with sharp liver-stomachs,” and for ‘condemning’ in v. 37b, we have “shoot talk nothing at people that they made bad skin so they must receive heavy.” The latter is an intensification of the former in the same ways that condemning specifies the action of judging.

To ‘shoot talk’ means to accuse, and to do it ‘nothing’ means to do it without consideration of the factors involved.

The phrase ‘bad skin’ is our key term for ‘sin’. The literal word ‘skin’ is commonly used to refer to a person’s behavior, so this refers to bad behavior.

To ‘give heavy’ is retained in this later draft, but it is now related more specifically to the verbal accusation of another person’s supposed guilt.

Tomorrow, we’ll look at how the man possessed by a demon addressed Jesus in Luke 4:33. Sometimes the English versions throw us off.