Young' Literal Translation

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by uhdum, Feb 25, 2008.

  1. uhdum

    uhdum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just checked out this antiquated translation for the first time the other day. For some reason, I enjoyed reading through Genesis 1 and a few other of my favorite chapters.

    Anyone else have opinions on this old translation? I realize its textual basis is that of the KJV.

    I just found myself strangely enjoying the beauty and "uniqueness" of the language :laugh:
     
  2. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    I consult it once in a while.
    Just the other day I found something interesting in it.

    There is a particularly odd difficulty in the translation of Psalm 16:2 that Young’s Literal translation correctly translates from the Masoretic text.

    Thou hast said to Jehovah, ‘My Lord Thou art;’
    My good is not for thine own sake;

    YLT

    Most other translations of the text read:

    I said to the LORD, “You are my Lord;
    I have no good besides You.”

    HCSB/NAS95

    I said to the LORD, “You are my Master!
    Every good thing I have comes from you.”

    NLT

    All the major versions depart from the reading of the Masoretic text by adding a letter to the Hebrew text at the end of the first word.

    Amar-t [you said…] verses Amar-ti [I said…]

    Rob
     
  3. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    I would be remiss if I failed to mention that the KJV correctly translates this verse.
    Ps 16:2 O my soul, thou hast said unto the LORD, Thou art my Lord: my goodness extendeth not to thee; (KJV)
     
  4. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,970
    Likes Received:
    128
    Well in a way, its only half hearted,
    The addition of "Oh my soul..." negates its literally correct translation.


    Rob
     
    #4 Deacon, Feb 25, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2008
  5. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    So which one missed it? Aside from the failure of the AMP and NLV to differentiate between "LORD" or "Jehovah" and "Lord" (Adonai)? Is the text actually all that clear? I refer you to the footnotes of the HCSB.

    Remembering that the words in italics in the KJV and NKJV, at least (in brackets in some others), are words 'added' with the intent of 'giving an easier understanding' by the translators that are not found in the text, in this, is it possible that another rendering might actually be more accurate?. BTW, doesn't scripture say something about "adds to", or is only that "takes away" part that is important??

    Robert Young supposedly used the purported same textual basis as that of the KJV, and I'll accept that as stated. I'm fairly sure not a single poster on the BB ever knew him personally, FTR.

    Ed
     
    #5 EdSutton, Feb 25, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 25, 2008
  6. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Yes, the YLT is translated from the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the KJV. It is in fact too literal, so that unless you know your English very well and your Greek and Hebrew at least a little, you will be led astray at times. Plus, due to Young's desire to be completely literal, occasionally the YLT has some really weird, even completely wrong renderings.

    Having said that, if you do know at least your English grammar well, you'll be able to follow the YLT and get benefit from it as you examine the grammar or rephrase the sentences in your head. So that's why it seems fresh to you.

    One school of modern linguistics has a theory that there is a universal grammar in the mind of humanity, meaning that the grammar of one language can be reproduced in another language according to certain principles. This is one reason Bible translators talk about "equivalence" so much, since the main proponent of this theory is Noam Chomsky, one the teachers of famous Bible translator and theorist Eugene Nida, I believe. I agree with Chomsky's theory, even though the guy is a flaming liberal (both religious and political)! So anyway, the YLT can be followed by paying attention to the universal grammar in your mind! :type:
     
  7. uhdum

    uhdum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    Universal grammar? Cool. I do often follow strange voices in my head :smilewinkgrin:
     
  8. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Don't we all! :laugh:
     

Share This Page

Loading...