Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | ESV opinion poll | Ps 119:105 | srbaegon | 33682 | ||
Hank, Just to follow up on this comment--I mentioned your remarks to a Bible translation list and received this response: Quote The main concern I have with the ESV is the poor quality of its English. I am an English editor and believe that English Bibles should be written in grammatical, good quality standard English. Grammar includes following not only the syntactic rules of English but also the lexical rules of English. The ESV, like most other FE [Functional Equivalent] translations, breaks many lexical rules of English, making the translation sound like it was not written by a native speaker of English, giving the translation a foreign sound. Also there are a quite a few passages where non-English syntax is used, syntax which is borrowed by the Biblical languages. Whenever unnatural syntax or lexical combinations appear in a translation, it makes it more difficult for the users of that translation to accurately understand the meaning the translators intended them to understand. And it also reinforces the widespread stereotype that the Bible is kind of a strange book, not normal, not meant to communicate in Koine English (equivalent to Koine Greek). I'll give some specific examples to support my claims about the poor quality English in the ESV: 1 Kings 2:10 "David slept with his fathers": this is inaccurate in standard English; David did not sleep with his father. Instead, David died and was buried with his fathers. The ESV literally translates a Hebraic idiom here. It is almost never possible to literally translate an idiom from one language to another and accurately communicate the original meaning in the process." Endquote [There were other examples] I've known this gentleman long enough to know he insists common vernacular is to be preferred over beauty because the Bible is written that way (at least in the Greek). His motivation is a translation for the Cheyenne nation in Oklahoma. Steve |
||||||
2 | ESV opinion poll | Ps 119:105 | Makarios | 33809 | ||
Greetings, Steve! The NASB, ESV, ASV, Amplified, KJV, MKJV, RSV, 1889 Darby Bible, 1899 Douay-Rheims Bible, 1833 Webster Bible, and The World English Bible all render this verse as, "..David slept with his fathers.." So, when one goes to criticize the ESV on this particular point of translation, then they also have to take issue on this same point with all of the other translations that translate it exactly the same way. Of course, the meaning here is not that David "slept with" his fathers, who were dead, but that "David lay down in death with his ancestors and was buried in the City of David" as GOD'S WORD (a translation, the emphasis is not mine) puts it. :-) However, a few newer translations render this verse by saying "David rested with his fathers" like the NKJV, NIV, 1965 Bible in Basic English, and the 1898 Young's Literal Translation, which uses "lieth down". I would be curious as to know what other verses are cited that support the claim that the ESV uses poor English. In all my use, study, and scrutiny of the ESV, I come to the conclusion that the English in the ESV is 'first-rate' and is entirely acceptable and appropriate for the present-day. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||