will be optimally relevant to the audience: that it will yield adequate contextual effects, without requiring unnecessary processing efforts.”
313
The importance of this for the translator is that he needs to uncover the message the author intended to communicate, and then translate it in such a way that
the reader will understand this message. If what first comes to the reader’s mind is a different message, or if he is left groping in the dark for a meaning, then the principle
of relevance has been breached. This raises the further wider question: to which audience are we seeking to
communicate? For what may be relevant and clear to one reader may well be obscure to another depending on his background. What Supyire audience are we translating
for? Christian, Islamic or animist?
Male or female? Adult or child?
Educated or uneducated?
These issues have been aired within the Supyire translation team but have yet to be fully discussed with the churches that are interested in further involvement in
the work. We are presently working on the assumption that the translation is aimed at as wide an audience within the Supyire community as possible; that the Scriptures
will be read and taught in church to build up the believers in their faith and will also be used in evangelism to explain the Christian faith to Muslims and animists. So the
goal is that the Scriptures will communicate with all those who speak the Supyire language fluently, from all faiths, educated or uneducated, male or female. But this
does not mean that the language will necessarily be at a simple level. The rich complexity of the Supyire language should be exploited so that the Supyire
Scriptures will reflect as much as possible the richness and variety of the original texts.
313
Gutt, Ernst-August, Relevance Theory: A Guide to Successful Communication in Translation; USA: Summer Institute of Linguistics and United Bible Societies, 1992, p.24.
7.2 OPTIONS FOR TRANSLATING CULTURALLY UNFAMILIAR CONCEPTS
Although the concept of sacrifice is known to the Supyire, the different types of sacrifice in Lev 1-7 are, to a greater or lesser extent, unfamiliar. This poses a
problem for the translator who is aiming at a relevant, meaningful translation. Wendland
314
outlines various possible strategies to meet the challenge: 1.
Reinterpret a local word. 2.
Create a new local word. 3.
Use a loanword from another language. 4.
Use a generic word to describe the form or function. 5.
Use a descriptive phrase to describe the form or function. 6.
Use a comparison to describe the form or function. 7.
Use a cultural substitute which has a different form from the biblical word, but a similar function.
8. A combination of two or more of the above approaches.
Each of these approaches has its own strengths and weaknesses; and careful consideration must be given as to which would be the most appropriate for the
translation of the Levitical sacrifices into Supyire.
7.3 GENERAL WORDS FOR SACRIFICE IN SUPYIRE
There are two general words often used by Supyire in relation to sacrifice: sun borrowed from Bambara and
sÃraga borrowed from Arabic via Bambara. Although both are originally loan-words, today they are fully integrated into the
Supyire language. So they do not suffer the disadvantages of sounding foreign and meaningless which many loan-words suffer. As they are familiar to the Supyire, they
are an obvious starting place, and I will assess their potential use in translation before going on to look, if necessary, at other solutions.
As sun and sÃraga originated from traditional religion and Islam
respectively, the question arises is whether they are suitable for use in translating the
314
Wendland, Ernst R., The Cultural Factor in Bible Translation, A Study in Communicating the Word of God in a Central African Cultural Context, UBS Monograph Series No. 2; London, New York,
and Stuttgart: United Bible Societies, 1987, chapter 4, pp.57-82.
key term “sacrifice” in the Bible. Would their use not lead to syncretism? In response to a similar issue, Goerling
315
outlines two approaches as unacceptable: 1.
an avoidance of all religious words as a rigid principle because of their associations with concepts which convey meanings that seem incompatible with
Christian meaning; 2.
an uncritical acceptance of traditional religious words as fully usable to express the Gospel.
The question to consider in each case is whether there is enough common ground in the use of a word for it to communicate the message of Bible relevantly
without causing a significant distortion? As noted above p.56, the two words can be used in the same sentence to
refer to the same action. However this does not mean that they are necessarily synonyms in every context. Indeed it seems that
sÃraga can be used in a much wider range of contexts than sun.
When the word sun is mentioned, it immediately brings to the mind of the Supyire listener the whole scenario of animistic worship: fetishes, ancestors and
spirits. It does not collocate with Kile the high God. The question arises whether this is a collocational clash only for Christians who may react strongly against using any
word associated with animism in the translation of the Bible. However, all research to date points to it being a collocational clash for Supyire across all sections of the
community. So sun should not be used in translation in connection with sacrifices to God, but it would appear to be very suitable for occasions in the Bible when mention
is made of sacrifices to local, pagan deities.
S
Ã
raga
, unlike sun, has a very wide range of meaning. Although the Supyire themselves do not sacrifice to God, they have sufficient contact with Islam to be
aware that others do. To collocate sÃraga with Kile would not be shocking to
Supyire ears in the way that collocating sun and Kile would be. The wide semantic range of a word can constitute another problem for the
translator, that is to limit the reference to the type of sacrifice found in the Bible. This problem in the case of
sÃraga will often be immediately resolved by the participants mentioned in the immediate context, for example in the introduction to
315
Goerling, Criteria for the Translation of Key Terms in Jula Bible Translations, p.29.
