On the Monopoly of the Union Igbo Bible

Despite these negative perceptions of Union Igbo, one wonders why the UIB maintained some monopoly until 1966 when the NT of the Igbo Living Bible appeared and 1988 when the complete ILB was published (Nkwoka 2000: 327). Several factors contributed to this, one of which is the negative attitude of educated Igbo to their language, already highlighted above. Another is the change of language of instructions in missionary schools from Igbo to English and the orthography controversy (Oyali 2015a: 402 – 404). Though the CMS-run schools used Igbo as the language of instruction, the Roman Catholic Mission (RCM) opted for English instead. The choice of English was predicated on the economic benefits that

125

went with proficiency in English. What is more, the 1882 ordinance which favoured English above indigenous Nigerian languages and stipulated that missions would not receive government subvention unless they used English as the language of instruction further made matters difficult for the CMS. Hence, faced with the prospect of losing their converts to the rival RCM, the government policy for English language and the fact that English has become a status symbol and meal-ticket, the CMS had to accede that “no up-to-date gentleman would now think of using his own language to express himself” (Ekechi 1972:

178). This distracted attention from further studies of Igbo, including making new translations of the Bible.

The other factor that drew attention away from Igbo was the orthography controversy. As noted above, the CMS did their translations and publications in the Lepsius orthography and when the government introduced the “African orthography” in 1927, the CMS rejected it. Oraka (1983: 34) identifies the following as some of the reasons the CMS gave for rejecting the proposed orthography: 1) it would mean spending money to re-write all the texts already produced in the Lepsius orthography, 2) it would create some confusion and difficulty as it would amount to learning to read and write anew, and 3) it would slow down the development of a literary Igbo as no typewriters had then been configured with the newly introduced characters. To further worsen the situation, the RCM accepted the new orthography, a move that is said to be inspired by the desire “to discredit and negate any earlier endeavours of their archrival: the CMS” (Igboanusi 2006: 165). Nwadike (1983:19) records that publishing companies like Oxford University Press refrained from publishing in Igbo pending the resolution of the orthography and dialect conflicts, while those that did publish in Igbo could not find buyers due to divided loyalties to the orthographies. They had to abandon the project. The orthography controversy is also cited as one of the factors that delayed the publication of a Catholic translation of the Bible in Igbo: “In the face of no one generally accepted orthography, it was not conducive for the Roman Catholic Mission to translate or publish works especially enduring works like the Bible and related literature in Igbo” (Adiele 1996: 102).

These developments ensured the complete monopoly of the UIB, until several historical incidents heralded a new wave of Bible translations into Igbo.

126 3.1.2.3 The Igbo Revised Edition

The need for the Igbo Revised Edition (IRE) was predicated on three factors, as explained in the Okwu Nkọwa⁵⁷of the complete IRE published in 2007. One is the need to have the Bible in the current Standard Igbo dialect. In an interview with Ogharaerumi, Bishop A. O.

Iwuagwu, a key figure in the IRE project, says that the IRE is made in “Common Igbo⁵⁸” because this dialect is current and more acceptable to the wider generality of Igbo people (Ogharaerumi 1986: 300). This became necessary because of the artificial nature of Union Igbo, which resulted in its rejection by majority of the Igbo. The second factor is the need to update the Bible with current Igbo words and idioms. Considering that it was almost a century between the publication of the complete UIB and the IRE, a lot of new words have entered Igbo and/or gained currency in the language and this should be used in the new translation in replacement of the archaic, unpopular and/or non-idiomatic words and expressions in the UIB. A third factor is the need to have the Bible in the current standard Igbo orthography. As observed earlier, the orthography controversy discouraged writing in Igbo, and with its relative⁵⁹ resolution, there is need to have the Bible in the official standard orthography.

That said, the story of the IRE has some bearing with the Second Vatican Council of 1962 to 1965. Before Vatican II, it appeared there was some unwritten but observed prohibition of Catholics from reading non-Catholic books, especially the Bible (Adiele 1996: 105). So, the Igbo Catholic faithful were not reading the UIB. Adiele observes that the Second Vatican Council influenced the translation of the IRE in two ways: 1) it relaxed the ban on the use of Protestant books especially the Bible that bore no imprimatur and nihin obstat, and 2) it introduced three Scripture readings at Sunday mass. Thus, there is increased demand for scripture readings during mass and the only Bible available in Igbo at the time – the UIB –

57 Literally “explanatory statement”. The points are presented in Igbo, what is given here is a paraphrase in English.

58 Another term for “Central Igbo” discussed in detail in Section 1.2.2.

59 Even though there is an official orthography, backed by law and used in school examinations, there are still calls for reviews of this official standard. For example, Echeruo (1998) suggests what he calls the New Standard Orthography (NSO), which has not been approved (yet) as the new standard, yet he uses same in his dictionary and other writings in Igbo

127

became the only available option. So, when the decision to revise the UIB was made, and it was also agreed that it be an inter-confessional translation, the Igbo Catholic faithful readily and fully supported the idea.

In addition to the fore-going factors, the impetus to have an inter-confessional Igbo Bible can be traced to the founding of the Bible Society of Nigeria (BSN) at the instance of Dr.

Akanu Ibiam, the first indigenous Governor of the defunct Eastern Region of Nigeria. Dr.

Ibiam had, in February 1965, initiated consultations with representatives of most of the Christian denominations on the need to form a national Bible Society in Nigeria, and this resulted in the inauguration of the Society in February 1966. As stated on the website of the BSN⁶⁰,

The Bible Society of Nigeria is a non-profit-making interdenominational Christian organization whose sole mission is to meet the scriptural needs of every Nigerian in general, Christian Churches and Confessions in particular and to help people interact with the word of God.

BSN is not a Church and does not have bias for or against any particular Church denomination. We serve the Churches by providing the Bible which they need in their task of soul winning. We are partners with the Churches in fulfilment of the Great Commission.

We strive to break any known barrier that makes the word of God inaccessible to Christians. This we do by translating the Bible into different Nigerian Languages, publishing and distributing them.

Here, it is seen that the BSN is not biased towards any specific denomination, which explains their embarking on an inter-confessional Bible translation project. It is also seen that the BSN engages in Bible translations on the one hand, and in making the translations devoid of known barriers on the other hand. Such barriers could be linguistic, as seen in the case of the IRE. In the Okwu Nkọwa of the complete IRE, it is stated that “[w]e also

60 http://biblesociety-nigeria.org/about-us/the-church-bsn/, accessed July 12, 2016.

128

consulted earlier translations to give clearer meanings in areas that lack clarity of meaning.

Borrowed words are also written the way they are used today” (my translation). Though the technique for giving the clearer meaning is not explicitly stated here, the analysis in the next three chapters accentuate this. The statement also alludes to the idea of a spelling convention or standard, which was non-existent in earlier times, as translators spelt words the way they deemed fit.

The first phase of the IRE project started under the chairmanship of Benjamin C. Nwankiti, who was later consecrated Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Owerri. A prominent representative of the Igbo Catholics in the committee was Anthony Ilonu, who also was later made the Roman Catholic Bishop of Okigwe. The inter-denominational makeup of the committee and the proposed translation were believed to help “bridge the gap between the Protestants and Roman Catholics in Igboland” (Ogharaerumi 1986: 303). The translation committee had started work on the translation when the Nigeria-Biafra War broke out in 1967 and translation work stopped.

By the end of the war in January 1970, Benjamin C. Nwankiti had been made Bishop in 1969, and his increased workload forced him to give up his role in the committee. Rev. Dr.

(later Bishop) A. O. Iwuagwu of the Anglican Church became the new chairman while Rev.

Dr. Anthony Ilonu remained the representative of the Catholic church in the committee.

According to Adiele (1996: 107), Iwuagwu and Ilonu were assisted by twelve reviewers drawn from various Christian denominations. They include Eze Akanu Ibiam of the Presbyterian Church, Bishop B. C. Nwankiti and Rev. A. I. Eneasator of the Anglican Church, Rev. Dr. G. Igwe of the Methodist Church and Mr. Izima of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, among others. This list indicates that at least five Christian denominations were represented in the translation, viz, the Anglican, Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist and Seventh-Day Adventist churches. It also shows that the team was made up of clergymen as well as lay persons. One obvious gap is the absence of women in this committee, as is also seen in earlier and later committees on Bible translations into Igbo.

Despite the devastating effects of the Nigeria-Biafra War, it is claimed that the manuscripts of translation work done under the leadership of Nwankiti were not destroyed by the war

129

and were handed over to the new team. According to Ogharaerumi (1986: 306), Iwuagwu edited the manuscript inherited from Nwankiti to standardize the style in Common Igbo.

He and his team then translated the remaining portions of the NT that were not translated under Nwankiti. The renewed work on the translation started in 1971 and the NT was launched at Christ Church, Uwani, Enugu on April 10, 1983. In a speech given at the 5^th Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Enugu, the Bishop of Enugu, the Rt. Rev. Dr Gideon Nweke Otubelu reiterated that the translation is aimed at presenting “the message of the NT in the Igbo that is meaningful, and intelligible to the wider generality of Igbo speakers and readers” (Otubelu 1983), further re-affirming the desire to have a Bible that would appeal to Igbo speakers irrespective of their Christian denomination. In the same speech, Otubelu also mentions that the translation of the OT “had been completed and we eagerly look forward to having the whole Bible in a new translation”, but this was not to be until 2007.

The delay in publishing the complete translation is attributed to “logistics and the pressing demands of the new office of the two translators as Diocesan Bishops” (Adiele 1996: 108).

In other words, as Bishops, Iwuagwu and Ilonu were given more responsibilities and so had less time to devote to the IRE project.

Interestingly, this translation is said to have been done from Greek to Igbo (Otubelu 1983), a view also re-affirmed by Ogharaerumi (1986: 307) who states that

[b]eing a mother-tongue Igbo speaker, he [Iwuagwu] was at a great advantage in every way. He teaches Hebrew and Greek at the Alvan Ikoku College of Education. These abilities helped him to translate straight from the original text of the Bible into Igbo. Iwuagwu must have used various translation helps which are produced by the United Bible Societies and the Wycliffe Bible Translators.

It is also stated in the Okwu Nkọwa of the IRE that “[w]e also consulted earlier translations to give clearer meanings in areas that lack clarity of meaning. Borrowed words are also written the way they are used today” (my translation). The impression given here is that the bulk of the translation was done from the Greek and Hebrew texts, and that recourse to the UIB was minimal. However, the opposite seems to be what happened, i.e., the UIB

130

seems to be the major text used in producing the IRE, and the recourse to texts in Greek and Hebrew was done to correct interpretations deemed to have been faulty. This supposition is predicated on several factors. One, on the publication details page, this translation is described as “Igbo Revised Edition”, and a revision presupposes the existence of an earlier text which forms the basis of the revision. Two, the descriptive linguistic analysis in the next three chapters of the lexical items in the corpus used in this study, reveals that there is very little difference between the lexical choices of the IRE and the UIB, unlike the marked differences seen in the other translations studied. The major differences between the IRE and UIB seem to be in the choice of orthography. These notwithstanding, unlike the UIB, the IRE introduces section headings in all the chapters to guide the readers and enhance understanding.

Lastly, it is pertinent to note the translation technique said to have been adopted for the IRE. According to Otubelu (1983), the IRE is

not a word for word translation or formal correspondence translation.

Rather it is a fresh attempt to recapture and convey the meaning, so that the reader or the audience can understand, and have a response that is equivalent to that of the original readers. A translation along these lines is known as dynamic equivalence translation. Short sentences are preferred to long ones. So long and involved sentences are broken and a verse or a passage is restructured where necessary to make the meaning clearer.

Here, it is seen that the goal of this translation is not just to transfer the meaning of the source text, but also to evoke a response from the readers similar to the response of the source text’s readers (see Nida’s formal and functional equivalence in Section 2.2.2). It is interesting to note that the next translation discussed – the Igbo Living Bible – is claimed to have been done using the same technique. Yet, the ILB is markedly different from the IRE, as is highlighted in the next section.

131 3.1.2.4 The Igbo Living Bible

The need to translate the Igbo Living Bible (ILB) is summarized in the Nkọwa Mmalite⁶¹ of the complete ILB published in 1988. Here, it is reported that many people desire to continuously read the Bible in Igbo, but they are discouraged from achieving this because of the numerous unclear words in the (existing Union Igbo) Bible. The ILB is then presented as a translation that is devoid of those obstacles to a continuous reading of the Bible, with the following presented as the unique features of the translation:

1) it uses words everybody could understand;

2) in situations where the reader would have difficulties comprehending the passage, two or more words are used instead of one potentially confusing one;

3) in situations where the meanings of the expressions used in the old Bible has changed, which in turn would confuse the present-day reader, such expressions are paraphrased such that the present-day reader would get the meaning;

4) for words in the existing Bible translation that would require a dictionary or glossary before the reader could understand the passage, paraphrases are used instead because many readers do not have the time to consult dictionaries

5) scholars in Greek and Hebrew, the original languages of the Bible, as well as scholars in Igbo linguistics, reviewed this translation to ensure that the standard Igbo dialect and orthography are used. (My translation)

The translation of the ILB started under the auspices of the Living Bible International in November 1972 by a group of Igbo mother-tongue speakers, which included Jeremiah C.

Okorie (Ogharaerumi 1986: 308). Okorie was a graduate of Wheaton Graduate School,

61 Literally “Introductory explanations”

132

Illinois, and one-time Regional Director of Living Bibles International, Nigeria. One major challenge faced in this project, which contributed to the delay in completing it earlier, was the fact that the translators were all part-timers.

Although the ILB project was started four years after the IRE started, the ILB translators were not aware of the existence of the IRE project, nor were the IRE translators aware of the ILB project. It was when the draft version of a portion of the ILB was being tested that a copy got to the Principal of Trinity College, Umuahia, Rev. Canon Onyemelukwe, who later became the Bishop of the Niger Diocese. It was Onyemelukwe that informed the ILB team that there was another translation going on too. Both projects continued anyway, since their philosophies were different.

Inasmuch as both the ILB and the IRE projects started in reaction to the UIB, which was adjudged to be faulty owing to the artificiality of the dialect it is translated into, and also because of the need to use current Igbo words and the current standard orthography, the goals of both translations seem different. On the one hand, the IRE aims at meaning transfer such that the present-day reader of the Bible in Igbo would have the same reaction as the original audience of the Bible texts. On the other hand, the ILB aims at simplicity of Bible reading, because it is believed that that is the only way the present-day readers of the Bible would have a similar response as the original Bible texts audience. Ogharaerumi (1986: 313 – 4) observes that,

[t]o achieve this [ILB’s] objective, there has to be a simplicity of form, description and meaning. A good translation should simplify the material so as to have an expected significance on the least educated person in the receptor culture. To this end, a level of audience is aimed at. In the case of the Igbo, the target is the production of a Bible which will be readable and intelligible to any Igbo mother-tongue speaker who has about four years of formal education either in English or Igbo. The desire is to produce a

"popular" edition which the least educated people in the community can understand.

133

The translation techniques adopted for the Igbo Living Bible are summarized in the five points highlighted above from the Nkọwa Mmalite of the 1988 ILB.

One point that is not so clear is the actual source text from which the ILB was translated. In an interview with Ogharaerumi, Okorie says that they used “a variety of sources” which includes “English, Greek, Hebrew and indigenous texts” (Ogharaerumi 1986: 317).

However, in an email correspondence with the present researcher, Akibom Ofoegbu, an

However, in an email correspondence with the present researcher, Akibom Ofoegbu, an