1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Translating grammatical forms

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by John of Japan, Mar 13, 2013.

  1. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well put.
    An interlinear is the most literal we can get. Next to that is Young's Literal Translation, which at times makes no sense in English.
    The version used by almost all conservative churches in Japan was done with Lockman Foundation money and the translation principles of the NASB.
     
  2. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    think that is why for the really serious study of the bible, we need to learn at least the basic of the Hrebrew/Greek grammar, enough to be able to use original languages tools such as lexicons, dictionaries etc!

    for while translations can be very helpful, still no substitute for the 'real thing!"
     
  3. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I would only rephrase your comment to be "the original thing" instead of "the real thing," since I believe a valid translation is the word of God.
     
  4. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    yes, that would be the better word to use there!
     
  5. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    JoJ,does form = meaning? Is it the same thing?

    Is it possible to capture all nuances when you are translating? Translating is a give-and-take process;isn't it? You have to make choices between things when the alternative might be acceptable as well.

    The proponents of the ESV(by that I mean the Preface and Grudem,Ryken &Co.) claim that every possible nuance is packed into their translation. You don't think you are able to do that with yours,do you? You have to settle for a compromise at times;don't you?
     
  6. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes, form = meaning.

    Illustration: The Paul makes a semantic point from grammatical form in Gal. 3:16--"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."
    No it is not possible to capture all nuances when translating. That is why it is so important for hermeneutics to go to the original Greek and Hebrew for a full understanding of the meaning of the text.
    "Every possible nuance" is not the same as "every nuance." We do our best to get "every possible nuance" into Japanese, but make no claim to having gotten "every nuance" into Japanese, because the differences between Greek and Japanese grammar don't allow that. Therefore once again, this hightlights the importance of the original languages in Biblical hermeneutics.
     
  7. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Won' some of the Nuances being taken and translated into the receiving language though be different due to the 'bias" of the transaltors in regards to trying to mke the Bible speak in what they think it should have said, or would say based upon today, rather than what it said and meant tothe original readers of it?

    and is this the area in translation of the scriptures where theTniv/Niv 2011 has received heat for their decisions made in rendering into english, as they have sought to make sure thebible speaks to both male/female, and try to not make it offend Christian feminists as sounding 'too harsh?"
     
  8. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,913
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Advocating ear tickling over accurate translation is without merit.

    Luke 8:43 offers several options for translation. The first word "and" could be translated "now" to indicate a change of topic. However, "and" is the most probable meaning of the word. So this could be filed under improving the style rather than translating the style.

    Next we get a hemorrhage, or an issue of blood, or a flow of blood, or an issue of a flow of blood. But is she having a flow of blood, or is the idea she had a flow of blood from twelve.

    Does the text really say 12 years or does it say from 12. Did she start flowing at age 12, or had the flowing been occurring for 12 years.

    Next the CT brackets the idea of having spent her living, apparently going with the idea it was added to harmonize with Mark. The dreaded NIV and NASB leave it out, the KJV includes it.

    If it is an addition then reference to the doctors goes away, at least directly.

    Next "no one was able to restore her health" seems to best capture the grammar.
     
  9. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A good translator tries to ignore his or her own biases when translating. However, there are times when theological presuppositions must govern a rendering.
    I've read a little on this, and I certainly don't have any feminist leanings. However, there are times when anthropos (as compared with aner, which is always "man" or "husband") can be translated as "human" or "person," but that's as far as I'll go in that direction.
     
  10. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Huh?? :confused:
    This is not really a grammar problem as per the OP, but is about a lexical unit.
    This is extremely simple Greek grammar, merely two nouns, one of them nominative and the other genetive: "an issue of blood."
    This is a prepositional phrase, apo plus the genetive. It doesn't mean "from the age of 12," since later in the passage we have a 12 year old girl (5:42), and the phraseology is different. The prepositional phrase means "for 12 years."
    This is a problem of textual criticism, and does not follow the OP, which is about translating grammar.
    Translating it this way takes away the force of the passive verb. As the original passive stands, she was the one trying to be cured, and could not be, therefore it leaves open the possibility that she was fooled by quacks. However, making it an active verb means none of the doctors could cure her, leaving out the possibility that she was deceived by quack doctors, as the nuance of the original has it.
     
  11. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Agree with you on this, but think the Tniv went overboard, as their group had stated that a purpose in translating the revision was to make sure the "bias" that might be seen still in the text 1984 was updated, so to not offend those in circles thinking the bible is anti female! So agenda drove their revision partly!
     
  12. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And I agree that agenda, especially such an agenda, should nor drive a Bible translation.
     
  13. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    We may not all agree with JoJ's individual statements, but I believe that God has put this drive in his heart:

    "... Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God".


    HankD​
     
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Exactly! Thank you, Hank.
     
  15. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,913
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not really

    Ear tickling is without merit. You should agree rather than question.

    Choosing the best word in English, to convey the original message should reflect both the Greek grammar and construction. Here we have a topic change, thus some translators go with "now" but "and" most accurately presents the original.

    That is your choice but a flow of blood more closely reflects the actual meaning of the Greek word used.

    Yes "from 12" is a prepositional phrase. To change "apo" which means out of or from or since, to years is without merit.

    It relates to the meaning of "no one" of the doctors versus no one including Jesus.

    No it reinforces the passive verb and includes the nuance.
     
  16. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Please enlighten me as to how rendering a Greek passive as an English active verb "reinforces the passive verb."
     
  17. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,913
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No one was able to restore her health is not the same as no one restored her health. To be restored is passive, thus was able creates the passive nuance. The idea is she was not able to be healed by any, thus no one was able to restore her health captures the nuance and the grammar.

    1)flow of blood

    2) since 12 years

    3) no one was able to restore her health.
     
    #37 Van, Mar 27, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 27, 2013
  18. jonathan.borland

    jonathan.borland Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    2
    Funny, my dad recently presented a paper on this textual problem. Here it is for anyone interested: "The High Cost of Physicians: The Textual Criticism of Luke 8:43."

    What do you think?

    Sincerely,

    Jonathan C. Borland
     
  19. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I suggest that you really need to study grammar more. "was able to restore" is not passive. "To be restored" is passive, but "to restore" is just a normal infinitive. :type:
     
  20. Van

    Van Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Messages:
    26,913
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Someone needs to study grammar more. How about "by no one was she able to be restored to health.”
     
    #40 Van, Mar 27, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 27, 2013
Loading...