Mechanics of a Perfect Translation

Ad hominem.

Exaltation.

I have studied Greek and Hebrew for 14 years now, and to think, I find myself explaining the two using English all the time.

Lord, forgive me for using my academic histories in any of these discussions.raying:

 

Best not, that is the job of the Holy Ghost in matters concerning God's word.

 

Sal, yes we do agree. Good going with the bicycle. Would John be on that bike too?:laugh:

John, I see dynamic equivalence being employed all along in translation but not as the dominant philosophy. As old as the KJV is, it has employed such. Just an example.

So we put the "literal" translation is the reader's hand, and what next? Frankly speaking, there is no "literal" translation out there, and there never will be one? Even though the NASB is my preaching bible, I still quote from the NIV and the NLT, which are considered loose to a large degree, the latter more than the former. But even when I do not use either one, I still find myself having to explain words and phrases and concepts.

Because I make points off syntax, I have chosen the NASB. It has maintained the "therefores," etc. But I still see a place for the NIV, NLT and other such bibles. And the KJV in some of its renderings is absolutely magisterial.

Remember, God wants the common man to be able to read his word and understand it.

 

I know this was intended to be a simple example, so it is not my intention by the following comments to ridicule, but just to show that literalness is highly desirable in translation.

We are not presented with the fictional 'original' text that these three faux translations represent. But suppose that the street has a dip or a hill, therefore "down" is an important distinction not included in the third rendering at all.

I have also witnessed the use in English of "up" to mean "away" (so that, "A boy on a blue bicycle rides up the street" could also mean away from the observer) and then conversely, "down" could mean coming toward the observer.

"On the street" is set forward in the third example; could this be positioning be for emphasis? This could emphatically mean that the boy is riding directly upon the pavement or road surface. It is possible to interpret the other two "down the street" as including sidewalks, the gutter, road shoulders, or bike lanes. Typically, when I say that I walked up (or down) the street, I mean my feet were on the sidewalk, not literally in the street with the traffic. "On the street" could be unique is some other way (perhaps the boy normally does not leave his home property, or a cycle track).

The second example specifically places the boy "on" the bicycle. All three tell us that the boy "rides" the bicycle, but that is somewhat vague. Is the boy also the operator of the bicycle? Perhaps he is just a passenger is some manner: is this a tandem bike, or has he 'doubled-up' with a friend by sitting between the handlebars? The context might make it clear.

All three are different with subtle meaning; while this may seem to be ridiculous, it is exactly the extent by which people scrutinize Bible translations.

 

Exactly the point of the topic (Questions About Differences) comparing Isaiah 47 and 2 Kings 19. Two different translations by the KJV revisors of (basically) the same Hebrew text.

 

I don't? Hmmm, first I heard of that.

I didn't know you were applying for a job.

I am sure not to boast. The comment I made was as humble as I know to make it.

I use many of the same textbooks the more conservative Bible colleges use in matters of Greek and Hebrew languages.

I believe God is the only sinless perfection. His Word is sinless in it's operative to expose sin and reveal righteousness.

His word is already perfectly translated everytime the Holy Ghost guides anyone into all truth. That is a bonifide miracle if there ever was one.

What stumps me about, well, it seems rather to be stumping you,this, is that anything you understand concerning the Bible is from an English perception. You are attempting to translate your English understanding into what you understand into modern Japanese. If you understand both languages, then I cannot see why it cannot be done.

Nothing as marvelous as you seem to make this, else how is it you can say you understand the Greek, explain it in English, but have trouble explaining it in Japanese???

Maybe your understanding of Japanese is lacking, I wouldn't know.:sleeping_2:

 

Of course we all want the Utopian concept applied.

"Street" would most likely be understood to be closest to being level due to the fact there were no adjectives describing elevations at all. No distance is suggested, it is only a simple illustrative imperative.

True, and a cultural understanding might need be applied, thus dynamic equivelence should be considered to render a full comprehensive understanding.

The "street" would conclusively include the sidewalks, gutters, etc. Nice examination.

Dynamics again. A literal understanding to possibly include other riders would then need be imperative. No other understanding would be permissable except the boy was on the bicycle to be able to ride the bicycle.

Nothing ridiculous about the mind wanting to establish the scheme of any passage to specifically determine things in any statement. The end result is the boy was riding a blue bicycle on the street in all three instances, regardless of any other suggestions or implications.

 

American Sign Language (ASL) is a short syntax grammar. The Greek is a long syntax grammar. ASL is similar to Greek.

A hearing evangelist, who has a deaf sister, told me that he can’t do both at the same time. I asked him why he said that. He replied that ASL is short sentence, but English is a full sentence. He can’t translate both during he was a speaker at same time. Someone told me that ASL is something that an interpreter can’t explain what ASL is like a big picture. For example, when a deaf person uses ASL for short comment, an interpreter will interpret from this to a long sentence or a few sentences. An interpreter understands what a deaf person said, but this interpreter tries the best to provide clear comments such more details rathar than a sentence.

Well, can ASL be translated to English? OR can ASL be interpreted to English? Keep in mind that the translation and the interpretation are not same. Question: How would you translate from ASL to English?

Japanese language has 50 letters; English language has 26 letters.

How would you translate from English to Japanese? I am not aware of Japanese language. How would you translate from Greek to Japanese?

Does Japanese language have everything that English does not have? Does English language have everything that Japanese language does not have?

 

"Oh Lord! It's hard to be humb..."

Wouldn't pass up the chance!

Ed

 

I am not even fluent in American Southern Hillbilly, so tioanswer that question, NONE.

I fully intend on it.

The differences between a Japanese missionary and an Apostle are numerous. Are comparing the two?

Translation without illumination is apostacy. Thanks for pointing that out!

Divine inspiration of the translation being illuminated in the heart and soul of the translators. There is none other that isn't more than a commentary on the Scripture.

I know a perfect translation is possible, in fact we have it already.

We have what we call differences in accounts due to the cultural mindsets of the time and the different penmen at that time whom God inspired. Modern versionists love to call those discrepencies and mistakes.

Ever wonder why God didn't call on a counsel of any one group of men and by Divine appointment grouped men into different groups to compile a perfect translation?

OK, good point, but then I would have to see what you believe concerning English before I could judge your aility to properly translate into Japanese. I am not suggesting I judge you in that respect, but am only offering my opinion since you asked for it.

Yes, it's called harmony of the Scriptures. That is why we can view other versions and see the mistakes caused by the interpretive allusions to the mind and heart causing disharmony.

I hope your work is an inspiration of God and not merely another work of men.

 

I said as humbly as I know how, not that I was perfect in every way.

Do you really like that much like Snidely's pooch?

 

Wouldn't "perfect" fit into that statement?

....contradicts..>

....contradicts...>

Is it a Buddhist word or Japanese?

Qualifications please?

I thought you didn't like dynamic equivalences?