True/False Scholars can use SAME hebrew/Greek texts Amd STILL Have Different Wording!

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by JesusFan, Jun 16, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    A team of scholars/experts can use either the TR/MT/CT as basis for their translations into English and yet STILL come up with a variation in words used...

    That does not mean they had textual differences/variations, but learned people expert in translation still can have differences in actual words used?

    that even a "literal" translation cannot actually be a "word for word" rendering, even for ole 1611 KJV?

    That the scholars who used same texts as 1611 team in NKJV can still have difference in wording/phrasing etc, and not be wrong/ in error?
     
  2. gloopey1

    gloopey1
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    You have raised a very legitimate concern. While I am not a KJV-only person, I am concerned that many modern translations choose a thought-for-thought rather than word-for-word approach to translation. Ultimately, who can know what someone thousands of years ago was thinking when they said something? I believe that Christians should stick with literal translations of Scripture and treat idiomatic versions as "commentaries."
     
  3. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is my concern also...

    Can we have an accurate understanding of all of the cultural idioms/ways from those times? Will we try to "read" into the text modern ways of viewing topics so much that we lose actually what author intent was?

    Will it be that we have a Bible that is good to read and understand, but weal in theology areas, or else one that has done so much accomodating to try to be readable that we have a culture that just does not take time to get understanding of deeper things of the faith?

    NIV/NLT etc are good bibles to read and good for newly saved, but do think need to balance with something like a NASV/NKJV bible!
     
  4. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Question: 1 Kings 2:10...should it be taken word for word, or on a thought basis? :)
     
  5. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Both!

    As those who know that sleep refers to death in Bible usuage can read and understand

    new converts better off with Dynamic version here!

    Just depends the level of bible knowledge at that point!

    Trick question, have to remember this while we debate on the Cal/Arm Board!
     
    #5 JesusFan, Jun 16, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 16, 2011
  6. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some word for word translate it "rested". My point is in today's culture and in the 21st century this particular passage should be translated using the dynamic model. This is not to say that other passages dealing with death / sleep should follow suit, particularly the one where Jesus resurrects the dead girl He said metaphorically was "sleeping", as that is both the thought and formal understanding of that particular text. I believe the best approach utilizes both.
     
  7. preachinjesus

    preachinjesus
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    7,406
    Likes Received:
    99
    That's absolutely true. Stick three scholars in different rooms, give em all the same chapter of Scripture UBS4 and they'll all come out with translations.

    I think I understand what you're asking here...often differences in translation are due more to how we take specific phrases and idioms than anything else. Given that they are all English speaking scholars the major issue is translating a text from an inflected language (Greek or Hebrew) into a noninflected language (English.)

    that even a "literal" translation cannot actually be a "word for word" rendering, even for ole 1611 KJV?

    That the scholars who used same texts as 1611 team in NKJV can still have difference in wording/phrasing etc, and not be wrong/ in error?[/QUOTE]
     
  8. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,208
    Likes Received:
    192
    Never mind different translators, the same translator can have a different rendering on two different days (or the same day, for that matter!), and still be translating literally, word-for-word.

    As we translate the TR into Japanese, my translation partner's biggest gift is that he can say the same thing in different ways. That's also sometimes a frustration as I try to figure out which way he said it is best.

    As for the ability to translate something in two different ways being wrong, it's not at all wrong. It's just the nature of language. Note the following translations of the same Aramaic original, talitha cumi:

    Mark 5:41--"Damsel, I say unto thee, arise."

    Luke 8:54--"Maid, arise."
     
  9. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,208
    Likes Received:
    192
    This is an idiom. Both literal and DE translators must deal with idioms constantly. Generally both kinds of translators deal with idioms in a similar way.

    My own principles for translating idioms with a literal method:

    1. Search for the same idiom in the target language. If there is no identical idiom,
    2. Think about whether or not the idiom conveys the right meaning in the target language and can thus be used as is. If that won't work,
    3. Search for an equivalent idiom in the target language. If there is none,
    4. Abandon the idiom and translate with an equivalent expression.
     

Share This Page

Loading...