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!

Strictly FE / Strictly DE

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by TomVols, Jul 3, 2003.

  1. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does anyone know of a translation that is 100% FE? I don't.

    Does anyone know of a translation that is 100% DE? Perhaps the Message, but would that be about it?
     
  2. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I cannot remember, what does "FE" and "DE" stand for?
     
  3. Rev. Joshua

    Rev. Joshua <img src=/cjv.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2001
    Messages:
    2,859
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tom, the closest I can think of to a "pure" formal equivalence translation would be taking the English text from an interlinear Bible. The NASB would be a distance second.

    The Message leans more dramatically toward dynamic equivalence than any other translation I've read.

    Joshua
     
  4. Forever settled in heaven

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think it is possible to be 100%DE in translation approach n have v literal sounding passages in a version. this may be due to the influence of tradition or it may be accidental (so happens that the closest natural equivalence is a gloss).

    however, it's hard to imagine the converse. to begin with, there isn't any consistently FE version i've seen anywhere, except perhaps an Interlinear, n even then.

    yes, the Message, n possibly the NIV n CEV wld be consistently DE in approach, but there will be vocab n word order that sound FE on occasion, due to the above 2 reasons i mentioned.

    God's Word version, however, is one that is admittedly schizophrenic in its approach--it can't quite decide between DE n FE n so claims as its own the Nida's paraphrase for DE, "closest natural equivalence."
     
  5. Forever settled in heaven

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    Formal Equiv and Dynamic Equiv.

    nother thing abt DE n FE:

    FE: u learn a rule (to "translate" the FORMS in one language to another) n in practice break that rule 90% of the time.

    DE: u learn a rule (to translate the MEANING in one language to another) n in practice obey it above 90% of the time. exceptions wld incl hapaxes, but these r hard anyway for ANYBODY trying to get at their meaning!

    it may not be as "consistently Christian" as some fellas might like it, but hey, it's at least consistent! [​IMG]
     
  6. mesly

    mesly Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would think that Youngs Literal Translation would come as close to FE as you could get (and as unreadable as you could get [​IMG] )
     
  7. mioque

    mioque New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    "The Message leans more dramatically toward dynamic equivalence than any other translation I've read."
    Last week I mentioned to a Dutch Bible scholar that 'the Message' is sometimes mentioned as a translation on Baptist Board and was regaled with a tirade on Americans being cultural barbarians. :rolleyes:
    Apparently it is to distant from the original to be considered a translation, it's a retelling or something.
     
  8. Forever settled in heaven

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    all translation is retelling.

    a possible reason for feeling uncomfortable w The Message is the language, which feels so koine n contemporary it's diff to accept as "bible language."
     
Loading...