







































AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         139 
 

FIDELITY EROSION: BACK-TRANSLATION ANALYSIS OF SOME 

SELECTED VERSES OF THE BIBLE NSO VERSION 

       

Rainbow Emeka Chinweuba 

Eden Life Bible Church, 

Life Crescent Okoti-Odekpe,  

Ogbaru L.G.A, Anambra State 

Email: emmyrainbow6@gmail.com 

 

Abstract 

This study investigates the washing away of meanings during translation 

process and the cause of this erosion. The research makes use of back 

translation technique to show how culture and some linguistic tendencies such 

as ambiguity, limited vocabulary lexical mismatch, word order or structural 

mismatch affected the translation of English Bible (King James Version) to 

the Igbo Bible (Bible Nso version translated by Thomas J Dennis). To achieve 

this, the research adopts the theory of sense translation also known as 

descriptive theory. Some verses of the Bible Nso were randomly selected and 

back translated to contemporary English for analysis through content analysis 

method. This research reveals that there are some loss of meanings or erosion 

of meanings during translation process of the Igbo Bible, of which when back 

translated to English does not produce the same effect as the original source, 

whereas, the ultimate goal of a translation is to give same sense effect to the 

target language as the source language. Random sampling method was used to 

select some verses in the Bible cutting across the old testaments and the New 

Testament. The findings of this work shows that cultural factors as well as 

linguistic factors such as ambiguity, limited vocabulary or lexical mismatch, 

word order or structural mismatch, figurative expressions are the major cause 

of the washing away of meanings.  

 

Keywords: Fidelity Erosion, Back Translation, Lexical Mismatch 

 

Introduction 

Translation has been part of communication system in the world and 

inevitable because of the multi lingual structure of the world. The ultimate 

goal of a translator is to transfer meaning from one language to another, and to 

efficiently do this, there are linguistic and cultural nuances to be put into 

consideration. When the correct meaning is transferred the translation is said 

to be fidelity. Fidelity or faithfulness according to Munday is ‘‘the extent to 

which a translation accurately renders the meaning of the source text without 

distortion’’ (12). Therefore, when there is inaccuracy or distortion of meaning 

in the translation which may be as a result of cultural or linguistic tendencies, 

then, the situation is termed Fidelity Erosion which was first coined by Prof. 

Enoch Ajunwa. 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         140 
 

The Holy Bible in Igbo (union version)also called “Bible Nso” translated by 

Rev. Thomas J. Dennis with his committee including some Igbo indigenes. 

This was translated by having recourse to different dialects which include: 

Onitsha, Owerri, Unwana, Arochukwu and Bony keeping idoms and proverbs 

common to all, intended to be a sort of “central” or “compromise” Igbo, 

playing the role of a literary medium to the Igbo people (Oraka, 17). However, 

many Igbo speakers faulted the combination of various dialects in this 

translation.But whether there are faults in the combination of dialects in the 

translation is not the concern of the research, but the language in general. 

Ajunwa posits:  

Translation can be viewed at one or more levels. In the first 

level, the translation is done directly from the source language 

(SL1) into a target language (TL1). Then the second level, the 

TL1 now becomes the source language (TL2). The English 

translation of the Bible is TL1 to the original source languages 

which are Hebrew and Greek respectively. (30) 

 

There are many translations of the Bible. The Bible first existed in the Hebrew 

language andGreek before any other lanugage. The Igbo translation was 

directly from English and not from the original Hebrew translation. So, 

thispaper concentrates on the two languages, which are the English language 

(source language) and Igbo language (target language). Although back- 

translation is employed to back translate the Igbo Bible text to English 

language to determine the extent of fidelity erosion in the Igbo Bible 

translation. The cause of this fidelity erosion which in other words is the 

problem of translation forms the bases of this paper. Back- translation is a 

technique used to evaluate errors or extent of fidelity erosion in any translated 

document. 

 

Fidelity Erosion  

The theory of fidelity erosion was propounded by Professor Enoch Ajunwa in 

his book, A Textbook of Translation: Theory and Practice published in 2014. 

He uses the word erosion which he said is ‘‘the gradual wearing away of rock 

or soil by physical break down, chemical solution, and transportation of 

material, as caused by water, wind or ice’’(22). He then applies this to 

translation by saying that: 

 Erosion takes place if the level of fidelity is reduced during a 

translation process by such factors as the translator’s shallow 

knowledge of one or both languages, his shallow knowledge of 

the subject-matter being translated, faulty translation tools 

being used, lack of professional training and exposure, as well 

as intellectual, cultural and linguistic factors. (22) 

 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         141 
 

In the words of Ajunwa, ‘‘Fidelity means the extent to which a translator 

accurately transfers meaning of a source language text into a target language 

text without distorting, violating or betraying the message as well as the style 

of the source language’’(17). The question is if absolute fidelity is achievable 

in translation. On this Nida has this to say: 

If we insist on a translation without any loss of information, 

therefore, not only translation, but also all communication will 

be effectively be impossible, because no communication 

whatsoever…may take place without some loss or gain of 

information. The loss or gain of information is an integral part 

of the process of communication. (47) 

 

Attempting to review a translated work will definitely be in order since many 

scholars such as Newmark have posit that translated work can ‘‘usually be 

improved’’ and to him ‘‘there is no such thing as perfect, ideal or correct 

translation’’ (6).  

 

Concept of Back Translation 

According to Language Scientific, “Back- Translation” is the practice of 

taking a translated document and translating it back into the original language 

as a means of checking the accuracy of the translation (par, 4) 

Comparison of back- translation with the original text is used as a check on 

the accuracy of the original translation, as carried out in this paper. 

 

Theoretical Framework 

To properly articulate the dynamics of the cultural and linguistic problems of 

translation in the Igbo translation of the Bible (Bible Nso version) from the 

English version, this study engages the theoretical expositions of the theory of 

sense also known as interpretive theory of translation. The concept of fidelity 

in translation is within this framework with different studies applying it in 

different aspects. 

 

Faithfulness to word-order and linguistic styles of the source language are 

almost against this theory of sense translation. Given to this, this research is 

not in any way trying to advocate for exactitude of word-order and other 

linguistic style between the source language and the target language, but 

upholds the concept of equivalence where meaning and sense is the ultimate 

goal of a translation. 

 

The interpretive theory of translation or theory of sense as we may call it, was 

developed by Danica Seleskovitch and Mariana Lederer (researchers at the 

Ecole Superieure d’Interpretes et de Traducteurs (ESIT) at the University of 

Paris III). According to the theory, the ultimate goal of a translator is to 

translate text and not the languages. Hence, interpretation as the name of the 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         142 
 

theory implies, is the understanding speech and rewording that understanding 

in a different language. 

 

However, Jungwha Chon explains that ‘Interpretative theory is built upon four 

pillers: command of the native language, command of the source language, 

command of relevant world and background knowledge and command of 

interpretive methodology’’(par,7). He further elaborate on interpretive process 

to state that it is inaccurate to say that a paper is “French” or “English”, that 

the graphic signs the paper carries are not meanings but rather symbols and 

that the meaning of the symbols are in the reader’s or listener’s mind. If it is 

so, comprehension of linguistic and non linguistic (such as culture) knowledge 

of the source language is required to understand the speaker’s intention. 

 

Therefore, fidelity or faithfulness is to the speaker’s intention and not to the 

source language. In other words, the concept of fidelity in translation is when 

the speaker’s or writer’s intention is rendered in a target language irrespective 

of the graphic symbols. Fidelity erosion then means when the speaker’s 

intention is not well represented in the target language. 

 

Based on this theory, this research tends to expose how culture and linguistic 

tendencies caused fidelity erosion in the Bible Nso version of the Igbo 

translation. Since some of the selected verses could not tally in meaning with 

the source language, or not clearly understandable in the target language or 

unambiguous statements in the source language becomes ambiguous in the 

target language, therefore there is need for this research, as to determine the 

cause and suggest possible solutions.  

 

Cultural Problems  

There is no difference between culture and language, they are like indivisible 

twin compass, even if one stretches them; they are still welded together at 

their joint.  In Psalm chapter 23:5,let us review the role of culture. 

King James Version: thou preparest a table before me in the presence of 

mine enemies... 

Igbo Translation: I nedo table n’usoro n’irum n’anya ndi nakpabum... 

Back Translation: You arrange a table in order before me in the presence 

of my oppressors... 

 

Pragmatically, the two sentences in the different versions are not the same 

because the sentence “prepare a table before me...” is a figurative way of 

saying ‘He provides food for me’ or ‘he makes a feast for me’. Because 

“table” is a mytonomy of food in the western and palestine culture.Looking at 

this verse of the Bible, one will find out that the word “table” which existed in  

English also finds its way to the Igbo translation. The question is why is it so? 

According to Chinwuba Culturally, the Palestine kingdom of which Bible has 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         143 
 

its background from has this culture of serving their food on the table and the 

sentence “preparing a table before me” is a popular saying in jewish culture 

which  means ‘serving food for someone’. The English culture has similar 

culture of serving food on the table. And whenever one hears “prepare a table” 

it means ‘providing food’ or ‘serving’ foodin Jewish culture.Contrary to the 

culture of the Palestine and English (westerns),Igbo culture does not have 

‘table’, and so, doesn’t associate with serving food or making a feast. Because 

of this, the translation was very wrong in the sense that the translator used 

word- for- word (metaphrase) and thereby meaning another thing, which is 

‘Arranging in order a table in front of me’. Schonpenhauer quoted by Ajunwa, 

observed that: 

 Not every word in one language has an exact equivalent in 

another. Thus, not all concepts that are expressed through the 

words of one language are exactly the same as the ones that are 

expressed through the words of another. (72) 

 

King James Version: For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to 

fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, 

Father. 

 

Igbo Translation: N’ihi na unu anatagh mo nke ibu-oru ilaghachi n’egwu 

ozo; kama unu natara Mo nke ido-ka-nwa-nwoke, nke ayi neti nkpu nime ya, 

si Aba, Nna 

 

Back Translation: because you did not receive the spirit of slaves to fear 

again; but you have received the spirit of sons by whom we cry Aba Father. 

 

In Romans 18:15, where “Abba Father” was unable to be translated rather it was 

translated as “Abba nna” in the Bible Nso version. The meaning of “Abba” still 

remain a mystry to Igbo speakers. But according to Bible Dictionary , “Abba” is 

Aramaic word for father. Only used by Jews where both parents of a real son 

were Jews, or of a proselyte of the convenant. Not used when the mother was a 

slave.Also according to New concise Bible Dictionary , “Abba” means Aramaic 

word for ‘father’ conveying both warm intimacy and respect; never used by 

Jews for God. But Jesus applied it to God (Mark. 14:36); Paul saw it as a 

symbol of a Christian’s adoption as a child of God (Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:6) 

(‘Complete Christian Dictionary’’) 

 

From the above definitions one will understand that “Abba” means ‘real 

Father’, or intimacy which can be represented in Igbo as ‘mu’.So in Igbo 

translation the word “Abba Father” supposes to be ‘Nna m’ or ‘Nna murum’. 

Again, one may argue that the reason for lifting the ‘Abba’ is to avoid fidelity 

erosion, but nevertheless, the target language audience now views the word as 

a proper name for God, whereas, the word is a determiner to the word ‘father’ 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         144 
 

which the Jews use for their biological father. But Jesus Christ used it for God 

to show the world that God is his biological father. Then in adoption, 

according to Paul, we see God as our real father. 

 

Linguistic Problems   

Culture will not be entirely left out in analysing this linguistic problem, as it 

has roles to play in shaping the language of the people. Under this linguistic 

problem, the selected verses will be categorized and analyzed to answer the 

research question. The categories include; ambiguity, limited vocabulary, 

word orderand figurative expressions.  

 

1. Limited Vocabulary/ Lexical Mismatch  

Understandably, there are languages that are richer in vocabulary than other. 

The Igbo language comprises far fewer words than English. According to 

Steve Frank, the author of The Pen Commandments claims that English has 

500,000 words with German having about 135, 000 and French having fewer 

than 100,000. Although, if it is counted  by the number of words in dictionary,  

 

Korean will be the highest with about 1,100,373 words.  

Now looking at how limited vocabularies affect translation, it is obvious that 

when a source language is richer than the target language, it is always difficult 

to translate, sometimes the translator ends up loaning words or use a whole lot 

of sentence in translating one word. Many times it results to fidelity erosion. 

 InGalatians 5:21, “revelling” and “ite-egwu” are two words to be considered. 

The Bible Nso version translated ‘revelling’ as ‘ite-egwu’ which can be back 

translated as just ‘dance’. “revelling” or orgies in another word  is a type of 

dance which can be called “seductive dance” and can be likened to “partying”. 

The dictionary meaning of “revelling” is a wild drunken festivity, especially 

one at which indiscriminate sexual activity takes place which also involves 

dancing. So if ‘revelling’ is a type of dance the Igbo translation for it should 

not be “ite-egwu”(dance), but there is  no vocabulary in Igbo language that 

will be equivalent to the english word. So it becomes a problem. In the Igbo 

translation. While the English translation is talking about a particular type of 

dance,the Igbo version generalised it. The  cause of this mistranlation is 

limited vocabulary. The Igbo language does not have a word for “revelling” as 

type of dance, and to an Igbo speaker the Bible says “do not dance”. This 

fidelity erosion has formed a doctrine among Igbo rural communities where 

English Bible is rarely read, of which the only translation they use is Igbo 

translation.Though one may not blame Dennis who had already justified 

himself by saying that the “poverty” of the language is one of the difficulties 

they encountered during the translation, (Christian Missionary Review, 1983). 

The poverty he meant was poverty of vocabularies. 

 

 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         145 
 

2. Ambiguity  

John Chapter 3:16 shows the ambiguity of the word ‘so’. The word ‘So’ can 

mean more than one thing in English language, it can be  

(a) “such an extent” (adverb) as in “why are you  so angry”, and can also 

mean 

(b) ‘as previously mentioned or described’ as in “I think so”.  

In the context of the Bible passage the word  “so” means “a great degree”, 

which can also means “ very much”.There is a probable washing away of 

meaning in the back translation, caused by ambiguity of the word ‘so’. 

Looking at the sentences in the Igbo version which says thus: “N ihi na 

Chineke huru uwa n’ anya otua...”, one will find “so” being translated as 

“otua”, of which if translated back to english will mean “Like this” while 

the right translation should be “Nke ukwu” which means “very much” or 

“so much” in english. Though some may argue that the ‘so’ in the verse is 

not an adverb of manner but a pointer or demonstrative word to ‘that he 

gave his only begotten son...’ but whichever way the ambiguity of the 

word has posed a problem to the translator.The right translation should be 

“Nihi an Chineke huru uwa n’ anya ke Ukwu” instead of “Nihi na Chineke 

huru uwa n’anya otua”. But nevertheless, ambiguity gives room for 

argument. 

 

3. Word Order/ structural mismatch 

According to Ajunwa (159), Word order is the arrangement of words in a 

sentence in terms of their lexical and structural interrelations. He further 

opines that no two languages are so close as to be lexically and syntactically 

identical. In the other hand, structural mismatch occurs where two languages 

use the same construction for different purpose, or use different construction 

for the same purpose.  

 

Since every language has its unique way of constructing sentence, the problem 

is whether the target language will be faithful to the source and still retain its 

uniqueness or lose some meanings in the process of trying to be unique in its 

construction 

 

Psalm chapter 23:1 

King James Version: The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want 

Igbo Translation: Jehovah bu onye nazum dika aturu; o dighi ihe korom 

Back Translation: Jehovah is the one that feeds me like sheep; I lack 

nothing. 

 

In Psalm 23:1, ‘the Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want’ is translated as 

‘Jehovah bu onye nazum dika aturu’ O dighi ihe korom’. The two languages 

do not have same construction of sentence but they term to serve the same 

purpose. The only likely problem is that during back translation to English 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         146 
 

there will be fidelity of erosion as we have here. The back translation of the 

Igbo version now read thus; ‘Jehovah is the one who feeds me like sheep, 

there is nothing I lack’. 

 

The two notable things in this back translation are that firstly, the word 

‘shepherd’ was not translated in one word. The clause ‘the Lord is my 

shepherd’ is not entirely the same with ‘Jehovah is the one that feeds me like 

sheep’ because the original version is metaphor while the back translation is 

simile. Dennis in his unique way presented the verse in simile and in the 

process filtered the meaning. The argument may arise that someone may feed 

you like sheep but not your shepherd. Now, in the Igbo translation as reflected 

on the back translation, the attention has been shifted from ‘The Lord as the 

shepherd’ to the manner in which he is being fed. In other words; it changes 

from apposition to adverb. The closest option in Igbo to this translation should 

be ‘Onye nwem bu onye ozuzu aturu m’. 

 

Secondly, the latter clause ‘I shall not want’ actually changes tense in the Igbo 

translation which is back translated as ‘I lack nothing’. On a careful 

observation, one will understand that the original text is futuristic while the 

back translation is present situation. One may not actually be lacking now, but 

may lack in future. The writer has assurance that as God is his shepherd he 

will not lack anything. 

 

Again, Romans 12:10 presents us with yet another situation where by the 

underlined clause ‘preferring one another’ is translated as ‘nacharanu ibe-unu 

uzo’, which when back translated it will be; ‘make way for another’ has to 

with structural mismatch. The reason for this erosion may be given to the fact 

that the word ‘preferring’ is context bound and unique to the language. In the 

context, according Concise Bible Dictionary means ‘to go before or show the 

way’. In other words, the verse interpretation is to point that ‘you should be 

the first to show respect or honour’. The Igbo translation tries to go with the 

same word order as the English version and on the process produced another 

thing all together. ‘Nacharanu ibe-unu uzo,’ as translated in Bible Nso, means 

to make way for another as in when someone wants to pass through a 

direction you are. Trying to transliterate exactly the word order of the source 

language may do the meaning a lot of damage or produce what the target 

language audience may find difficult to comprehend as seen in this verse. 

 

Figurative Expressions 

Figurative expressions and metaphorical expressions are strictly culture-

bound. Absolute understanding of both languages will help the translator to 

know the equivalent expression to be used. For instance, the Igbo culture sees 

Tortoise as the ‘trickster’ while Ghanian culture sees Anansi the spider and in 

North American Coyote and the Raven are seen as the trickster. Also in 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         147 
 

Europe and South and Central America the trickster can be Fox or Wolf. 

Therefore, to tell an Igbo person that ‘Obi is a tortoise’ will bring to his sense 

that Obi is a trickster and will not have same effect to a Ghanian or an 

American. (Wikipedia, par 7)  

 

In Mark 10:25, ‘Camel’ wasn’t translated and the phrase ‘eye of a needle’ was 

a merely transliterated as ‘anya agiga’. Also the whole expression is figurative 

and so culturally sensitive. Firstly we should know that Camel is an animal 

that carries loads and mostly found in Asia, especially in Palestine desert area. 

Secondly, eye of a needle according to history from Manners and Customs of 

the Palestine, the ‘eye of a needle’ was a narrow gateway into Jerusalem. 

Since camels were heavily loaded with goods and riders, they would need to 

be un-loaded in order to pass through. Therefore, the analogy is that a rich 

man would have to similarly unload his material possessions in order to enter 

heaven. Remember that Jesus said this after he told a rich man who came to 

visit him to sell all he has and share to the poor. The ‘eye of a needle’ is 

metaphorical expression common among the Palestine area. Most theologians 

are made to study the Manners and Custom of the Palestine where the Bible 

culture is set for proper interpretation. Same goes to translators.  

 

If eye of a needle is not literary the needle in which we use to pass thread 

through cloths, then transliterating it as seen in the Bible Nso will affect the 

meaning and thus wash out some meaning. A translator will be said to have 

failed if his translation could not have same effect as in the source language 

culture.  

 

Conclusion 

The study has shown that some words and phrases could not make sense to the 

target community because the translators may have wanted to stay faithful to 

the word-order and some linguistic uniqueness of the source language. Some 

fidelity erosions that occured in the translation of the Igbo Bible(Bible Nso) 

were as a result of little knowledge and mastery of Igbo culture and its 

language by the translator(Dennis John Thomas). Most of the fidelity erosions 

caused by different translation problems such as cultural differences, 

ambiguity, limited vocabularies, figurative expressions and unique structure of 

the source language are technically avoidable. For instance, the ambiguity of 

‘Jehovah bu onye n’azum dika aturu’ (Jehovah is the one that feeds me like 

sheep) would have been avoidable, had the translator used the right word for 

‘shepherd’ which is ‘Onye Ozuzu aturu’, then it will be ‘Chineke bu onye 

Ozuzu aturu m’ (The Lord is my Shepherd). 



AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         148 
 

The causes of fidelity of erosion shouldn’t be taken lightly in the process of 

translating because most of them have the capacity to destroy the sense of a 

given work of source language. Ajunwa (25) submits that it is dangerous to 

toy with translation operations because it could result into embarrassing and, 

at time, fatal consequences. The main focus of this research as previously 

mentioned, is to show that there are some fidelity of erosions in the translation 

of the Igbo Bible through applying back translation to English language which 

is the source Language. 

The research also highlighted the causes of these erosions which formed the 

topic of this research: Cultural and Linguistic Problems of translation.  

      

Works Cited 

Ajunwa, E.A. Textbook of Translation: Theory and practice Enovic Limited, 

2014. Print. 

A-Z: New Concise Bible Dictionary, Leicester: Inter-Versity Press 1989. 

Print. 

Baker, M. In other words: A course book on translation: London/New York: 

Rout Ledge, 1997. Print. 

Baker, M. The Routledge Encyclopaedia of Translation studies London/New 

York: Rout Ledge, 1997. Print. 

Basssnet, S. & Trivedi, H. (Eds.) Post-Colonial translation: Theory and 

Practice, London and New York: web 

Bible Nso: The Holy Bible in Igbo, Union Version. Glasgow: Omma Books 

Limited, 2001. Print 

Brrch, D. Languages, Literature, and critical Practices: Ways of Analysing 

text, London and New York: Poutledge 1989. Print 

Chapman, S. Thinking about languages, Theories of English: Palgrave 

Macruillian, New York, 2006. Web 

Chima, A. Tomorrow is Uncertain: Today is commentator and critic. 

Http://www.columtia.edu/../speech.Intml.2017.web 

Catford. J.C.A. Linguistics Theory of Translation, London: Oxford University, 

1965. Web 

Dimitrui, R. Theories and Practice of Translation, Iasi: Institutional 

European. 1984. Web 

Enrique. B. A. Cognitive view on the role of culture in translation, Matrid: 

Complutense University Publication. 2013. Web 

Halliday, M.A.K. ‘’Linguistics and Machine translation’’, in Mcintosh, A. & 

M.A.K Halliday (eds), Patterns of language: papers in General, 

Descriptive and Applied Linguistics, London: Longmans. 1960. Print 

Kesparek. The translators Endless Toil, London Foreman and Company. 

1988. Web 

Komissarou, V.N. Language and Culture in Translation: competitors or 

collaborators? Vol.4, eds Association canadiennede traductologie. 

Canada Numero. 1991. Web 

http://www.columtia.edu/speech.Intml.2017.web


AJELLS: Awka Journal of English Language and Literary Studies, Vol. 7 No. 2, 2020 

 

Chinweuba         149 
 

Munday, J. Introducing translation studies, London: Routledge, 2001. Print. 

Oraka, L.N. The foundation of Igbo studies; University publishing co.1983. 

Print 

Spring Translation: Metaphrase and Paraphrase: Glenvien Illinois London, 

Canbudge University Publication. 2013. Web 

The Complete Christian Dictionary for home and school Califonia. 

International Bible Society. 1990. Print 

Jungwha.C. The Interpretive Theory of Translation and Its Current 

Application: Interpretation Studies, Japan Association of Interpretation 

Studies,2003. Web 

‘Christian Missionary Review’’. Wikipedia 18 July 2019   

 <http://en.wikipedia.or/wiki/Christian_missinary_review> 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


