The Translation of Ὑποκριτης in the Gospels as Osatotsε in Dangme Bible Translations
Ebenezer Quaye 
& Jonathan Edward Tetteh Kuwornu-Adjaottor
Issue: Vol.6 No.7 2024 Article 3 pp.125-133
DOI : https://doi.org/10.38159/motbit.2024673 | Published online 30th December, 2024
© 2024 The Author(s). This is an open access article under the CCBY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Translating from one language to another is a difficult task. Words, phrases and other expressions are socio-culturally or contextually defined and more so, they assume new meanings through both diachronic and synchronic time effects. The nuances in meaning when ideas are carried from one linguistic setting to another is another challenge in translation work. This becomes more challenging when one attempts to find equivalences in translations. This work looks at the word, osatotsε, being the Dangme word for the Greek, ὑποκριτης of the biblical text, especially, in the gospels. Osatotsε (O sa [kε]to tsε) in Dangme, literally or basically means “rotten (spoilt) but hidden owner (person).” Although this translation for all intents and purposes largely fits the contexts in which it is used, especially in the gospels, it does not fully translate the word, ὑποκριτης. This basically affects the interpretation of the texts in which osatotsε finds itself in terms of meaning and usage. This paper discusses ὑποκριτης and osatotsε by using lexical analysis and the mother-tongue to underscore the challenge of equivalence of translating words from one language into another. It emphasizes the need for a corresponding footnote (commentary) in subsequent publications of the Dangme Bible, Ngmami KlϽuklϽu Ͻ to the word, osatotsε to make its usage in preaching and teaching more efficient and effective. This work seeks to redefine the meaning of ὑποκριτης in Dangme translations although osatotsε, to a large extent but not absolutely, fits the contexts in which it is used in biblical texts, especially, in the gospels. This paper, therefore, puts forward that ὑποκριτης is a broader terminology as compared to osatotsε as an equivalence in Dangme translations.
Keywords: Osatotsε, ὑποκριτης, Equivalence, Dangme language, Linguistic analysis
Cheung, Andy. Functionalism and Foreignisation: Applying Skopos Theory to Bible Translation, PhD Thesis, University of Birmingham, 2011.
Cheung, Andy. A History of Twentieth Century Translation Theory and its Application for Bible Translation. Journal of Translation. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University Journal of ISS 9(1), (2013): 1-15.
Hafida, Belkacemi. Functionalist Approaches to Translation: Strengths and Weaknesses. The Algerian Journal of Humanities 1(2), (2020): 23-37.
Hermans, T. 1996. “Norms and the Determination of Translation: A Theoretical Framework.” In Translation, Power, Subversion. Edited by Roman Álvarez and Maria Carmen Africa Vidal Vidal. pp. 25-51. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Holmes, J S. The name and nature of translation studies. In Van den Broeck R. Translated! Ppapers on literary translation and translation studies. Pp. 67-80. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1988.
Holz-Mänttäri, Justa. Translatorisches Handeln. Theorie und Methode. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia. Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae, 1984.
Jakobson, Roman. Selected Writings: Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry. Edited by Stephen Rudy. New York: Mouton Publishers, 1981.
Jakobson, Roman. “On linguistic aspects of translation.” In Lawrence Venuti (ed.). The Translation Studies Reader. pp. 138-143. Second edition. London and New York: Routledge, 2004.
Kenny, Dorothy. “Equivalence.” In Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha (eds). The Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. Second edition. pp. 96-100. London: Routledge, 2009.
Mojola, Aloo O. and Ernst R. Wendland. “Scripture Translation in the Era of Translation Studies. In Bible Translation: Frames of Reference edited by T. Wilt. pp. 1-25. Manchester: St. Jerome, 2003.
Naudé, Jacob A. Translation Studeis and Bible Translation. Acta Theologica 1, (2000): 1-27
______. An overview of recent developments in translation studies with special reference to the implications for bible translation. Acta Theologica Supplementun 2 , (2002): 44-69.
______. From submissiveness to agency: An overview of developments in translation studies and some implications for language practice in Africa. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 29(3), (2011): 223–241.
______. Translations of Sacred Texts and the Shaping, Reshaping and Circulation of Religious Knowledge in Monotheistic Religions with Written Traditions: A South African Perspective. Journal for Semitics 29(1), (2020):1-45.
Newmark, Peter. Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pegamon Press,1981.
Nida, Eugene A. Toward a science of translating. Leiden: Brill, 1964.
______.and Charles R. Taber. The theory and practice of translation. Leiden: Brill,1969.
______. A framework for the analysis and evaluation of theories of translation. In: Translation. Applications and research. Edited by Richard W. Brislin. New York: Gardner Press,1976. 47-91
Nord, Christine. Text analysis in translation: theory, methodology, and didactic application of a model for translation-oriented text analysis. Amsterdam/New York, NY: Rodopi, 1991
______. Functional Translation Units. Translation – Acquisition –Use. Pp. 41-50. AFinLA Yearbook,1997.
______. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 1997.
______. Manipulation and Loyalty in Functional Translation. Translation and Power, Special Issue of Current Writing 14(2), (2002): 32-44.
______. Translating as a Purposeful Activity: A Prospective Approach. TEFLIN Journal 17(2), (2006): 131-143.
______. Text Analysis and Translation: Theoretical Foundations, Method, and Didactic Application of Translation-Relevant Text Analysis. Heidelberg: Julius Groo, 2009.
______.Function + Loyalty: Theology Meets Skopos. Open Theology 2, (2016): 566–580.
Parra-Galiano, Silvia. 2005. La revisión de traducciones en la traductología. Thesis, University of Granad, 2005). Retrieved from http://hera.ugr.es/tesisugr/15472905.pdf
Pym, Anthony. Text and Risk in Translation. Maria Sidiropoulou and Anastasia
Papaconstantinou (eds). Choice and Difference in Translation. The Specifics of Transfer. Athens: University of Athens, 2004. 27-42.
Reiss, Katharina and Hans J. Vermeer. General Foundations of Translation Theory.Tübingen: Niemeyer.1984.
Reiss, Katharina. Text types, translation types and translation assessment. Translated by A. Chesterman. . Chesterman, Andrew (ed). Readings in translation theory. Helsinki: Oy Finn Lectura, 1989. 105-115
______. The Critique of Translations: Its Possibilities and Limits. Translated from German by C. Bocquet. Artois: Artois University Press. 2002.Top of Form
Snell-Hornby, Mary. The Turns of Translation Studies: New Paradigms or Shifting Viewpoints? Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2006.
Tanrikulu, Lokman. Translation Theories. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University Journal of ISS 7(1), (2017): 97-108.
Vermeer, Hans J.. Scopos and Commission in Translational Action. Translated by A. Chesterman. In: The Translation Studies Reader. Edited by L. Venuti. London and New York: Routledge, 1989.
______. A Skopos Theory of Translation (Some Arguments for and against). Heidelberg: TextconText Verlag,1996.
Zheng, Wang. Introduction of Functionalism and Functional Translation Theory. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research volume 185, ( 2018): 623-627.
Isaac Boaheng holds a PhD in Theology from the University of the Free State, South Africa. He is a Senior Lecturer in Theology and Christian Ethics at the Christian Service University, Ghana, and a Research Fellow at the Department of Biblical and Religion Studies, University of the Free State, South Africa. He has over hundred peer-reviewed publications.
Boaheng, Isaac. “The Functionalist Approach to Translation and its Application to Translation Management,” Journal of Mother-Tongue Biblical Hermeneutics and Theology 6, no.7 (2024):125-140. https://doi.org/10.38159/motbit.2024672
© 2024 The Author(s). Published and Maintained by Noyam Journals. This is an open access article under the CCBY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
