Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Bible Support Gender-Inclusive Language? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 98478 | ||
Does the Bible really support gender-inclusive language? --Hank | ||||||
2 | Bible Support Gender-Inclusive Language? | Bible general Archive 2 | Makarios | 98479 | ||
Greetings my friend, "Does the Bible really support gender-inclusive language?" 1. First of all, what is a Bible translation? The goal of a good translation is to provide an accurate, readable, rendition of the original that will capture as much of the meaning as possible. To do this effectively, the translator must understand both the meaning of the original text and the manner in which the target audience is likely to comprehend that meaning in the receptor language. 2. What are some of the differences between translations? "Formal equivalence" translations seek to correspond as closely as possible to the form of the original Greek and Hebrew text. The goal is to find an equivalent English word for each word in Greek or Hebrew. However, no two languages correspond exactly to each other; each using its own unique set of words and phrases to communicate meaning. So a "completely" literal, word for word approach would be misleading, since English and Greek use different constructions to express the same meaning. Therefore, in reality all Bible versions, to one degree or another, use both literal and idiomatic language. The issue is not whether a translation sometimes introduces idiomatic language (all do), but to what extent 'meaning' is allowed to take precedence over 'form.' 3. What that said, what should be the 'aim' of a Bible translation? To translate 'responsibly', the goal of translation should be to render literally what is in the original language. For example, the word "anyone" could be used where there is no word corresponding to the male gender in the original languages, and "people" could be used where the original languages refer to both men and women. However, where there is a male meaning component in the orginal languages, then the masculine form in English should also be retained in the translated text. The objective in translation is to be 'transparent' to the original text, allowing the reader to understand the original on its own terms rather than on the terms of present-day culture. 4. How has the attitude of present-day culture changed towards gender, and how has that influenced Bible translation? If you have noticed, no Bible translation produced before the 1970's had ever questioned the retaining of a male gender pronoun in what could otherwise be considered an all 'gender inclusive' meaning in a verse, when the original languages called for a male pronoun in that verse. But 'dynamic equivalence' has taken on a new meaning now in present day translations, stating that the carried over "meaning" overrides the "form" of what is actually in the original languages, and therefore, the 'presented text' should present the "meaning" over that of the form, sacrificing the loyalty to the original text, in an effort to completely avoid misunderstanding in any degree. To avoid misunderstanding has now taken precedence in translating "meaning", which has also taken precedence over carrying over the "form" of what the original languages actually convey. Therefore, we can see clearly now what effect present-day culture has had towards the attitude of translating gender, since newer versions seek to avoid 'misunderstanding' at any cost. 5. How can we identify a present-day translation that seeks to avoid 'misunderstanding' at any cost? After studying 100 selected verses that 'confront' this very issue in every translation, I have come to the following conclusions: the KJV has Zero inclusive verses, the NASB has 3, the NKJV has 4, the RSV has 3, and the NIV has 17. In contrast, using the same 100 verses, the NRSV has 97 inclusive verses, the REB 59, NJB 78, GNB 90, CEV 97, NLT 93, NIVI 94, GW 87, NCV 82, and the NIrV 91.. Some "target" passages (included in the 100 studied) that could help you determine if your Bible is "gender-inclusive" or not, are: Romans 12:1; 14:10; 1 Cor. 14:39; 15:21; Eph. 13:5; Prov. 4:10; 15:5,20; Ex. 13:14; Gal. 3:26; Phil. 2:8; 1 Tim. 2:5. You will be able to tell if the translation is 'gender inclusive' or not by looking up the verses above and determining if the translators sought to use an 'all inclusive' term over a masculine term. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
3 | Bible Support Gender-Inclusive Language? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 98481 | ||
Makarios - Wow, that was better stuff than what old Uncle Sipe who lives over the hill from me here in the Ozarks has ever said (He can't write yet). ..... An entry from Hank's Unabashed Dictionary of Misleading Expressions: "Dynamic Equivalence, a catch-all phrase used by certain Bible translators meaning 'what we think the original author meant by what he said' -- or 'what we would like for him to have meant by what he said.' :-) ..... Good post, little brother. --Hank | ||||||
Up | Down | |||
Questions and/or Subjects for Bible general Archive 2 | Author | ||
|
Hank | ||
|
Hank | ||
|
Hank | ||
|
Makarios | ||
|
Hank | ||
|
Hank | ||
|
shalor | ||
|
TommyS | ||
|
Soar | ||
|
Cheif | ||
|
Ironsage | ||
|
cyndie |