tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post7368427139382788386..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: Lost in TranslationPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84709092638403941022009-10-05T03:39:28.050-07:002009-10-05T03:39:28.050-07:00Frank- brilliant. Thank you, I needed to read that...Frank- brilliant. Thank you, I needed to read that.<br />-Jono from NZJono Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10181330340842273820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-48512943809960110592009-10-03T11:35:55.860-07:002009-10-03T11:35:55.860-07:00'preciate the post, Frank. Thanks'preciate the post, Frank. ThanksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-48707088171447125702009-10-03T05:50:57.347-07:002009-10-03T05:50:57.347-07:00Mike and Frank,
I actually lean toward literal as...Mike and Frank,<br /><br />I actually lean toward literal as opposed to dynamic equivalence. But as you have pointed out, Frank, I just don't think it is as cut and dried as some make it out to be.<br /><br />And here's the proof...NO translation, no matter how literal, translates every idiom literally.<br /><br />But I will definitely add Ryken's book to my wish list.<br /><br />And I again recommend <a href="http://systematicsmatters.blogspot.com/2009/09/ryken-and-functional-equivalency.html" rel="nofollow">this article</a> for your reading pleasure.greglonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05514850772020363684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-20097584482292727152009-10-03T05:49:47.033-07:002009-10-03T05:49:47.033-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.greglonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05514850772020363684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-60725593332758526832009-10-03T05:32:17.847-07:002009-10-03T05:32:17.847-07:00I want to think about something here since this di...I want to think about something here since this discussion hasn't quite died off. The methodology GregLong (and others) is recommending seems pretty mundane on the surface. But what would they do if this passage:<br /><br />[QUOTE]<br />Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.<br />[/QUOTE]<br /><br />was translated:<br /><br />[QUOTE]<br />Therefore a person shall leave father and mother and hold fast to his <i>other one</i>, and they shall become one flesh.<br />[QUOTE]<br /><br />And the justification was that in Ex 26, the word historically translated as "wife" is used there to mean "the other of a matching pair" (Ex 26:3,5)?<br /><br />You know: because the statement there is a generalization, and in that generalization it is talking about monogomany in general, and not just hetero monogamy.<br /><br />The answer to that objection will underscore why a methodology of "essentially literal" translation is not only <i>necessary</i>, but the appropriate <i>default setting</i> for handling the original texts.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-36614944561155062882009-10-03T05:21:29.028-07:002009-10-03T05:21:29.028-07:00GregLong:
What we do in day-to-day speech is not ...GregLong:<br /><br />What we do in day-to-day speech is not the same as what God does in delivering the Bible, and that fact has to influence this discussion in some way.<br /><br />There is a distinction between <i>translation</i> and <i>exegesis</i> which we need to maintain.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-78689630179581383422009-10-02T18:36:49.350-07:002009-10-02T18:36:49.350-07:00Riccardi,
Thank you for clarifying what I was tryi...Riccardi,<br />Thank you for clarifying what I was trying to say. You are dead on.<br /><br />Greg and Rick,<br />Have you read Ryken's book? That would indeed answer your objections. He lays out the issues very clearly, and in more space than we have here to work with.<br /><br />Rick, you said,<br /><br />"I am sure there are words or phrases that cannot be translated word for word. So in that case the translater becomes an interpreter. And that is just the English. The Wycliffe translaters were constantly making interpretive judgments."<br /><br />No one argues that no translative judgments must be made at times. The point being made here is that the translators must do their best to simply bring the text over to the receptor language without changing the original words. <br /><br />The translator should not presume that those reading the Bible translation are unable to do the work to figure out what these figures, idioms and wordplays mean, with the end result that the translator (though perhaps well-meaning) does not give the reader the text, but rather the translator's exegesis of the text.<br /><br />In the case of translators out in mission settings (is that what you mean by "Wycliffe translators"?), it would seem it is a slightly different setting, in that they are working on translating the text, and THEN they are also explaining/expounding the text, its meaning and application, to the people they are living among. <br /><br />That is exactly the point being made: If the translator lives, works, and teaches among those he is translating for, he will also be exegeting and explaining that text to the people. But in the case of the Bible versions that come out, those two functions (translation and exegesis/ exposition) are the responsibility of two different people: the translator and the preacher/teacher.dwitzkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01073349479436216262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-32258299433173267102009-10-02T17:02:11.239-07:002009-10-02T17:02:11.239-07:00I am sure there are words or phrases that cannot b...I am sure there are words or phrases that cannot be translated word for word. So in that case the translater becomes an interpreter. And that is just the English. The Wycliffe translaters were constantly making interpretive judgments.Rick Fruehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05879848568892457571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-22050308464597064422009-10-02T16:01:14.962-07:002009-10-02T16:01:14.962-07:00Rick,
Your response presupposes that the interpre...Rick,<br /><br />Your response presupposes that the <i>interpretation</i> (not translation) of that idiom is the task of a translator. I'm saying it's the task of the Bible student and Bible teacher. <br /><br />Seriously, if you haven't read Ryken's first book on the subject, acting like you've refuted the arguments for essentially literal translation theory is not the way to go. And further conversation isn't helpful, because you wind up making arguments that he's already refuted.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21571029907482873982009-10-02T14:43:51.112-07:002009-10-02T14:43:51.112-07:00Spanish:
The donkey is talking about ears.
Trans...Spanish:<br /><br />The donkey is talking about ears.<br /><br />Translation<br /><br />English:<br /><br />The pot is calling the kettle black.<br /><br />(changing the verbiage actually makes it clearer since a word for word translation may lose the meaning)Rick Fruehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05879848568892457571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-29911743965644241722009-10-02T13:28:50.917-07:002009-10-02T13:28:50.917-07:00Greg,
You're just wrong, there. First, your h...Greg,<br /><br />You're just wrong, there. First, your hospital illustration disregards different purposes for writing.<br /><br />Secondly, I did my undergraduate work in Italian literature, and have spent many an hour translating and reading translations. And I can tell you that many translations have left idioms literal because of their respect for what Ryken calls the "otherness" of the text. And if they explain them, they put the explanation in the footnotes. I have an entire file cabinet of photocopied selections from anthologies with a ton of highlighting the footnotes to prove it. ;o)<br /><br />Here's what I think is a good, on-topic-at-this-point-in-the-thread point from Ryken's <i>Word of God in English</i>, which if you haven't read, you should just read. He deals with your arguments.<br /><br />"Shakespeare's text appears on the left page and a 'modern English' version on the right page. The introduction tot he edition of <i>Hamlet</i> reads like a primer on modern Bible translations. The purpose 'is to make Shakespeare fully intelligible to the modern reader.' The Shakespearean text 'has become remote and difficult to understand,' with the result that the text needs to be rewritten in such a way as 'to make it immediately understandable for the reader.' The modernizing produces approximately what modern translations do with the Bible. 'The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune' become 'the trials and tribulations that unjust fate sends.' 'The law's delay' becomes 'the law's frustrating slowness.' <br /><br />One thing is clear: The person who reads the updated version <i><b>is not reading Shakespeare</b></i>. And someone who thinks it <i>is</i> Shakespeare is <b>badly misled</b>" (p. 184).<br /><br />That's my point. And so "our best course of action is to translate literally, wrestle with the meaning, teach the meaning to the uninitiated, and become so familiar with the Bible that the references will become second nature to us" (p. 181).Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-87177044434687939272009-10-02T12:23:35.646-07:002009-10-02T12:23:35.646-07:00I would suggest to you, Mike, that no other transl...I would suggest to you, Mike, that no other translation process takes that approach. If a person works for a hospital translating from English into Spanish for Hispanic patients, he will translate <i>for understanding</i>, not for literalness. In other words, he will translate the meaning of the idioms, not the meaning of the words in the idioms. Same with document translation, etc., etc.greglonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05514850772020363684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-59545489876801262412009-10-02T11:26:32.244-07:002009-10-02T11:26:32.244-07:00Greg,
Without thinking about it too much, I'd...Greg,<br /><br />Without thinking about it too much, I'd say so. If the translator's want to put what they think an English equivalent to the meaning of the idiom in the footnotes, that's fine with me. But I'd say, yeah, give me the meanings of the words.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-34423416265709882822009-10-02T10:33:49.085-07:002009-10-02T10:33:49.085-07:00If only God was powerful and wise enough to make H...If only God was powerful and wise enough to make Himself clear in all languages and through all roughly accurate translations we would not have this problem. BTW - everyone has to rely on another man's definition of Koine Greek because Dr. Koine is not around to explain it. :)<br /><br />In summation, at some point we are forced to have confidence in the Spirit of God. A novel concept indeed.Rick Fruehhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05879848568892457571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-78894751736710602782009-10-02T05:14:30.766-07:002009-10-02T05:14:30.766-07:00So, dwitzki and Mike, what you're arguing is t...So, dwitzki and Mike, what you're arguing is that translators should always give us the meaning of the <i>words</i> in an idiom in the original language, rather than the meaning of the <i>idiom itself</i>?greglonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05514850772020363684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-7006603356875252802009-10-01T23:09:59.010-07:002009-10-01T23:09:59.010-07:00Sorry, that last comment was mine. A friend forgot...Sorry, that last comment was mine. A friend forgot to sign out of his account. Be sure to send all complaints to me and not to him.Mike Riccardihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06748453197783538367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-50750928448193133062009-10-01T23:04:39.097-07:002009-10-01T23:04:39.097-07:00dwitzke: The whole purpose is indeed (as you said)...<b>dwitzke</b>: <i>The whole purpose is indeed (as you said) to make the Scripture accessible to every hearer so they may be taught, exhorted, and make application in their own lives</i>.<br /><br />Exactly right. <br /><br />And to make that point further: when that <i>can't</i> happen is when a translator preemptively decides what a passage means and gives us his interpretation rather than what the text actually says. <br /><br />The passage in the book in the hands of the everyman winds up not being the passage of the Bible, but only what the translation committee <i>thinks</i> should be in front of him.Jakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02919457550859836159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-21443839331475294382009-10-01T20:31:59.208-07:002009-10-01T20:31:59.208-07:00As Frank said, read Ryken's book(s), especiall...As Frank said, read Ryken's book(s), especially the first one. He spends an entire book making some excellent points concerning translation theory and practice.dwitzkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01073349479436216262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-84386277730342818482009-10-01T20:29:27.917-07:002009-10-01T20:29:27.917-07:00Greg,
I think you misunderstood what I was trying ...Greg,<br />I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say (my fault, I am sure). I was trying to communicate what Ryken is arguing in his first book, and I may not have done so clearly. I apologize.<br /><br />What I was trying to communicate was that those translating the Bible from the original languages into the "common language" (whether English, Japanese, Spanish, etc) are to simply TRANSLATE, not exegete, the text. The responsibility for exegesis (= explain the meaning, theologically and expositionally)is tasked to those who are teaching and preaching in the church, as well as to the individual believer as he or she studies the Scripture. The pastor/preacher/teacher is the one who should explain the idioms, wordplays, and nuances to the people as he preaches the word, not the translator.<br /><br />The whole purpose is indeed (as you said) to make the Scripture accessible to every hearer so they may be taught, exhorted, and make application in their own lives.<br /><br />I am in agree with you: The pastor's job is to interpret the text. But in order to do this, he needs to dig into the text (both English and original languages). So, he does some translation, as well. Not re-inventing the wheel, but making sure the wheel is in proper alignment, balanced, and true in its roundness.<br /><br />Just a thought: If we all spoke Koine Greek, then we would not have to work so hard to explain the NT. One layer of difficulty would be removed. But, since we do not speak Koine, we must first explain what this text was saying to the Greek hearers of the first century (context and interpretation), and THEN we can move on to draw out the implications/applications for our people here in the English-speaking world of the 21st century.dwitzkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01073349479436216262noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-43553568880949050482009-10-01T19:28:53.526-07:002009-10-01T19:28:53.526-07:001. Frank said: Third and finally today: You are,...1. Frank said: <i>Third and finally today: You are, for better and worse, stuck with English as your mother tongue. </i><br /><br />Hmm. I for one am exempt from this! (My mother tongue is not English.)<br /><br />2. Good illustration on the KJV's use of "peculiar", Frank. It reminds me of something I read a long time ago that was written by William Barclay (translated into my mother tongue, no less). My memory is a bit hazy right now, but I think Barclay's point was that even though a new believer may misunderstand a verse because of his own ignorance of a word's original meaning, he can still be blessed by God's Word. The example Barclay gave (I think) was Psalm 139:13a, "For thou hast possessed my reins". He mentioned that a certain believer had taken the word "reins" to mean the reins one would find on a horse. However, "reins" used to mean "kidneys" in the KJV era, and the verse of course means something quite different than what the believer had perceived it to mean, yet the verse still made sense to him. (Now, I didn't mention this example to advocate misinterpretation or eisogesis, nor do I agree with Barclay's universalist outlook. I only mentioned it because Frank's illustration reminded me of it, and I think it's simply amazing that God's Word can still bless despite human error! This example perhaps all the more supports the point of Frank's post...?)Susanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08289347868497438542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-17482281674362959562009-10-01T18:19:05.971-07:002009-10-01T18:19:05.971-07:00Oh, I know. Look, do what I do over at my blog (I&...Oh, I know. Look, do what I do over at my blog (I'll give you the URL later, so you can check it out sometime): milk your readers. Ask them if they've found any comment-system they like.<br /><br />If worst comes to worst, we can toss up a post here, poll the masses. We have some pretty smart and savvy readers.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-61342671625510655392009-10-01T17:57:14.365-07:002009-10-01T17:57:14.365-07:00RichardS:
Thanks for pointing out, as I already h...RichardS:<br /><br />Thanks for pointing out, as I already have repeatedly, that we have to translate the Bible from something.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-31287513340181190692009-10-01T17:55:59.443-07:002009-10-01T17:55:59.443-07:00DJP:
They are getting ready to force me to upgrad...DJP:<br /><br />They are getting ready to force me to upgrade.<br /><br />I think I'm going to throw up.FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-8251310394149469052009-10-01T17:55:04.069-07:002009-10-01T17:55:04.069-07:00Scott --
Well, so that we don't rely on my sm...Scott --<br /><br />Well, so that we don't rely on my small-caliber ordinance, Calvin was of the mind that this Psalm was actually constructed as a memory aid -- building each 8-line section on one letter of the Hebrew Alephbet. It was meant to be memorized.<br /><br />If we concede that you simply cannot translate Ps 119 as an alphabetical acrostic in English, what other obstacles are there to translating this Psalm?FX Turkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16798420127955373559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-24600569754414943532009-10-01T17:21:22.253-07:002009-10-01T17:21:22.253-07:00Yeah; and now we'll never get to go to Halosca...Yeah; and now we'll never get to go to Haloscan so you can, either.<br /><br />/c:DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.com