A Comparative Study of Thai and Chinese Terms Referring to Jesus in Contemporary Bible Versions

Jinnawat Tummueangdon; Pattama  Kasearn; Chantima  Chainan; Natruja  Laebua; Pornruedi  Bunlai

Authors

Jinnawat Tummueangdon Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University
Pattama Kasearn Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University
Chantima Chainan Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University
Natruja Laebua Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University
Pornruedi Bunlai Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University

Keywords:

Bible translation, Jesus, parallel translation comparison, Thai–Chinese translation, religious terminology

Abstract

This exploratory study compared how terms and expressions referring to Jesus are represented in the Thai New Contemporary Version (TNCV; International Bible Society, 2001) and the Chinese Contemporary Bible (CCB; Biblica, Inc., 2011). The study does not assume that the CCB was translated from the TNCV; rather, it conducts a parallel comparison of two modern translations. The corpus comprised the four canonical Gospels, totaling 89 chapters. Seventeen names, titles, kinship expressions, and role-denoting terms were selected purposively because they (a) referred directly to Jesus, (b) recurred or carried substantial theological significance, and (c) yielded an identifiable Thai–Chinese correspondence in the same verse or discourse unit. Analysis operated at two levels: lexical comparison of the term pair and verse-level interpretation of its narrative and theological function. Five strategies adapted from Newmark were used as heuristic categories: literal translation, free translation, addition, transference or transliteration, and cultural substitution. Descriptive counts showed seven literal items (41.18%), four cultural substitutions (23.53%), three transliterations (17.65%), two additions (11.76%), and one free translation (5.88%). Because the sample contains only 17 distinct types, the percentages summarize this bounded exploratory dataset and are not inferential statistics or token frequencies. The analysis distinguishes historical word formation from synchronic textual function: 基督, for example, has a transliterational history but functions in the selected contemporary versions as the conventional counterpart of พระคริสต์, whereas 道 is interpreted through both its Chinese conceptual history and its function in the context of John 1. The findings indicate that no single strategy guarantees theological adequacy; adequacy depends on terminological continuity, verse-level context, intertextual relations, and reader knowledge. The study offers a replicable framework for larger corpus-based and reception-oriented comparisons of Thai and Chinese Bible translations.

References

Athitthanukun, N. (2018). A comparative linguistic study of Thai translations of Christian religious terminology in Catholic and Protestant Bibles [Master’s independent study, Thammasat University]. Thammasat University Press.

Baker, M. (2018). In other words: A coursebook on translation (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Biblica, Inc. (2011). 圣经：当代译本 [Holy Bible: Chinese Contemporary Bible]. Biblica.

de Waard, J., & Nida, E. A. (1986). From one language to another: Functional equivalence in Bible translating. Thomas Nelson.

Eber, I., Wan, S.-K., & Walf, K. (Eds.). (1999). Bible in modern China: The literary and intellectual impact. Steyler Verlag.

International Bible Society. (2001). พระคริสตธรรมคัมภีร์ไทย ฉบับอมตธรรมร่วมสมัย [Thai New Contemporary Version Bible]. IBS Publishing.

Konthong, N. (2023). Strategies for translating Christian terms from English into Thai in the novel A single thread by Tracy Chevalier. Journal of Liberal Arts, Thammasat University, 23(1), 435–436.

Naudé, J. A. (2005). On the threshold of the next generation of Bible translations: Issues and trends. Meta, 50(4). https://doi.org/10.7202/019851ar

Newmark, P. (1988). A textbook of translation. Prentice Hall.

Nida, E. A. (1964). Toward a science of translating. E. J. Brill.

Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1969). The theory and practice of translation. United Bible Societies.

Ringmar, M. (2007). Roundabout routes: Some remarks on indirect translations. In F. Mus (Ed.), Selected papers of the CETRA Research Seminar in Translation Studies 2006. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. http://www2.arts.kuleuven.be/info/bestanden-div/RINGMAR.pdf

Rosa, A. A., Pięta, H., & Maia, R. B. (2017). Theoretical, methodological and terminological issues regarding indirect translation: An overview. Translation Studies, 10(2), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781700.2017.1285247

Saibua, S. (2010). Principles of translation. Thammasat University Press.

Toury, G. (2012). Descriptive translation studies—and beyond (Rev. ed.). John Benjamins.

Washbourne, K. (2013). Nonlinear narratives: Paths of indirect and relay translation. Meta, 58(3), 607–625. https://doi.org/10.7202/1025054ar

Zetzsche, J. O. (1999). The Bible in China: The history of the Union Version or the culmination of Protestant missionary Bible translation in China. Steyler Verlag.

Zhu, S. (2020). On the choice between semantic translation and phonetic translation in the translation of names: Hu Yilu’s On translation of names and Zhang Shizhao’s On the meaning of translation names. Journal of Foreign Languages, Yan’an University, (6), 44–48.