Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | How far would you go in a translation? | Gen 1:1 | Hank | 32987 | ||
As regards simplification, Tim, I wholeheartedly concur that something needs to be done for that portion of the public whose reading skills are limited. But, at the time time, I have misgivings whether the biblical text itself should be tampered with. Simpler locutions could be offered and possible meanings suggested by the use of marginal commentary without corrupting the biblical text itself. Does this make sense? Of course, to some degree at least, the vast array of so-called study Bibles are doing something to help along these lines. --Hank | ||||||
2 | How far would you go in a translation? | Gen 1:1 | Morant61 | 33000 | ||
Greetings Hank! Oh, I agree! I'm not saying that we should change the text. I'm just saying that the most current style and language would be the best way to translate the text. There are many examples in Greek, where translators adopt English style to bring out the meaning. For instance, a Genititive is often used like we would use an adjective. One example from Scripture is the phrase "coals of fire" (Rom. 12:20). Many translations simply translate this as "burning coals". This is true to the meaning, but not strickly literal. These are the kinds of decisions which translators are forced to make. I quess I would summarize my position on translation this way. A translation must be true to the text, but express the meaning clearly in the receptor language. This will not result in a woodenly literal translation. The style will take on more of the flavor of the receptor language, in terms of word order, phrasing, ect.... Translation is not an easy task! It is amazing how many choices one is faced with in the process. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||