Question cocerning the native term for god(s) and imported Christianity

[Richard Smith]

yes it is interesting!

Because "God" is not itself a name and doesn't describe action it was
difficult to translate or use among my Wyandot ancestors.
The Methodist Episcopal missionaries in the 1800's were strict and
uncompromising in their doctrines. Any Wyandot who wasn't convinced
the Book they brought was the word of God was considered of the
 "heathen party". However the Christian Wyandots who were fully converted to
all the doctrines of the Methodists chose to use the descriptive term
"Hamendizhu'  or  Ha'ᵃtemędižu' which translates as
"he speaks with a loud voice" but more accurately conveys:
"He has the Authority"
The Wyandot word for "Jesus" was "Shasus" having no intrinsic meaning
just a wyandotaphone  sound that sounded sorta close to  "Jesus".
The missionaries might have tried giving the meaning of the original
descriptive name Yeshua (He heals,saves) and allowed the Christian Wyandots
to voice that meaning in Wyandot language, But unfortunately
"he heals" would have been the same word used to describe a medicine man!
To the missionaries of this time, medicine people people were of the devil.

ALL Wyandot names described something..until the foreigners arrived and
Christian Wyandots reverted to the English way of giving names:
Robert, Jim, Edward, Jesus, Joe
sounds representing individuals, yet names describing no known action.

see: 
History of the Wyandott Mission At Upper Sandusky,Ohio.Under the Direction
of The Methodist Episcopal Church (1840)  James B.Finley

-Richard Zane Smith
Wyandotte, Oklahoma





On 8/28/08 1:19 PM, "Maxine Baptiste" <mrb1 at EMAIL.ARIZONA.EDU> wrote:

> Hi, as far as I know, the terms used in Catholic prayers are nativized
> terms of
> the English equivalent. sisi kri would be the term for Jesus Christ, san mari
> will be the term for Saint Mary, and the term for God would be the Native word
> for "creator" k'wulncutn. This is interesting, Maxine
> 
> Quoting Chun Jimmy Huang <huangc20 at ufl.edu>:
> 
>> Tabe (greetings),
>> 
>> I have been looking at a copy of Dutch-English-Siraya St. Mattew's
>> for Siraya language revitalization (an indigenous Austronesian
>> language in Taiwan). It was edited by the Dutch missionary Daniel
>> Gravius in 1661. What I have found is that when translating the
>> bible to Siraya, Gravius had kept the native term that referred to
>> god in general, "alid," and used it to refer to the Christian god.
>> Later I realized that the same applied to other indigenous
>> languages in Taiwan. That is, the Presbyterian missionaries that
>> came to Taiwan all kept the native terms for god(s) and
>> incorporated them into their Christian missions.
>> 
>> Curiously, on the other hand, the Spanish Catholic priests who
>> went to the Philippines around the same time had replaced the
>> native terms for god(s) with "Dios".
>> 
>> so the different choices in terms of whether appropriating the
>> native religious terms into Christianity or not (which may lead to
>> significant sociolinguistic consequences). It makes me wonder if
>> such difference in choice is pertinent to (Presbyterian)
>> Protestant vs. Catholics and/or Dutch vs. Spanish.
>> 
>> I'd much appreciate if anyone can share some insights from the
>> American experience or from other regions.
>> 
>> madag ki alilid (thanks very much)!
>> 
>> Chun (Jimmy) Huang
>> PhD candidate,
>> Linguistics, University of Florida
>> Special assistant,
>> Tainan Ping-pu Siraya Culture Association