Smiley-face or not --your statement was false.
I have been a big supporter of a number of versions other than the NIV. You know it. I have had thread after thread in admiration of other versions. I even had one that comparing the ESV with the 84 NIV --in favor of the former.
Hcsb
Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Robert Snow, Nov 29, 2011.
Page 7 of 7
-
-
-
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Notes on Translation Vol. 9 No. 1 (1995):16-36
Ernst R. Wendland -
-
Market-Language Version
Near the beginning Wendland says:"It will soon become clear that Luther's procedures are much in keeping with the modern principles of meaning-oriented Bible translation,even though they pre-date them by over four hundred years!"
Wendland says that Functional Equivalence means natural or idiomatic.He kept quoting Luther (translated of course) about the sense of the text,according to the sense. Wenland says that Luther's translation (he revised it 5 times in his own lifetime) was sense-oriented.
The author said that Luther wanted to relinquish words and render the sense. Luther:"Words are to serve and follow the meaning,not the meaning the words."
However, "A concern for naturalness must never be allowed to diminish or distort the intended meaning of a given Greek or Hebrew term."
Wenland lists ten propositions that he thinks guided Luther's translation philosophy. The first one is Priority of Meaning. That is,vs. linguistic form.
The second principle Wendland has is Change of Linguistic Form. R.W. says that "you can't except in relatively few fortuitous cases,retain both form and meaning." -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Before I say anything, a note to the readers other than Rippon. Judging from long experience with Rippon, no matter what I say he will reject it and probably question my bona fides to even comment on the subject, and especially to disagree with a scholar such as Wendland. For me to counter that I would have to spend time giving my resume, which seems silly and self-centered, so I won't do that. I will point out though that once when Rippon questioned that I am even a linguist, my old friend and former BWM director Dr. Fred Moritz got on one of the few times he has ever posted here, and pointed out that I'm the genuine article. At any rate....
Having said that, I would like to point out that Wendland is of the modern crop of SIL linguists and translators who have taken Nida's theories to a new level. For example, please note that Wendland has discourse analysis as one of his ten points (a strong emphasis of the SIL people nowadays; see Linguistics and New Testament Interpretation, Essays on Discourse Analysis, ed. by David Alan Black, for essays by SIL people), but it was certainly not a main point of Nida. (My Nida library is in Japan, so I can't determine exactly how much he did talk about it.) So the point here is that the SIL and UBS are in the Beekman/Callow era and have to a certain degree moved past Nida's DE. So Wendland is not that relevant to me on this issue.
Again, Wendland does not say "reader response," but "Monitoring the reception of the message" which is a different thing entirely. So I stand by my stated position that Luther did not seek for reader response and did not speak of it. -
Why can't anyone here ask questions and occasionally have a legitimate objection with what you say?
Functional Equivalence/Dynamic Equivalence was still be practiced long before Nida arrived on the scene. Of course it didn't go by either name. But just because Luther's method did not line up in all the particulars of Nida's prescriptions doesn't negate the fact that a dynamic equivalence was Luther's guiding principle.
From what I have read, a Bible translation by Leo Judd( primarily) and Zwingle was much more literal in contradistinction to Luther's. Luther's version was not done in the same literalistic style as the KJV. I know the two are often compared favorably,but that was only because as Tyndale's version was instrumental for the development of the English language --so was Luther's translation for the German tongue. But after that similarities end. -
My daughter is in the 3rd grade and just turned 9 years old. She has her choice of several different translations to read from and she picks up the NKJV almost everytime. -
-
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
BTW,you are a specialist of sorts when it comes to dishing out insults. Your constant refrain to those who disagree with you is "baloney." That is among the other barbs in your arsenal. When I quote you I usually delete your offensive remarks and get to the substance of the matter. -
preachinjesus Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
What a pointless thread.
-
I suggest that the mods close the thread down. -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
And yes, someone shut this puppy down! -
Page 7 of 7