See here.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Broadening the Perspectives blog
The new "Perspectives in Translation" blog is now open.
I'm enjoying the discussion. I do wonder however, why they haven't brought Eugene Peterson into the discussion? I think he brings a valuable insight into what translation can be. Why the snub?
I'm enjoying the discussion. I do wonder however, why they haven't brought Eugene Peterson into the discussion? I think he brings a valuable insight into what translation can be. Why the snub?
Sunday, October 31, 2010
NIV Accuracy
An NIV translator answers questions about accuracy in the NIV.
I'm looking forward to reading it on my kindle :-)
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Some people love the Message
Why is that so?
Check out this interview with Peterson where he reacts to Bono (from U2) gushing about his translation.
Check out this interview with Peterson where he reacts to Bono (from U2) gushing about his translation.
It takes two to...
Communication can't be done by one person. Often when people evaluate Bible translations they look at the text in front of them and they look at original language and then evaluate whether it has accurately reflected the meaning.
That is important, but it misses out about half of the point of translation. The really important thing to know is what does it mean to the people who will be reading the translation. You as translator (or as evaluator of the translation) may think it has communicated clearly to "all English speaking people" or the like. But that is a rather large assumption.
For this reason, I'm very interested in talking to people about what are their reactions to various Bible versions, and asking which ones they use and why. It's also why I'm interested in websites like this. Where people (like David J. Stewart in this rather extreme case) rant and rave (I don't think that's too strong a term) about the errors in a particular version. People like Stewart tell me what people expect from a Bible, which very important when translating.
I don't intend for readers of this blog to "rant", but I am interested in people's preferences, and finding out what underlies those preferences.
So if you're out there, and you happen to stumble upon this blog:
What Bible translation do you prefer to read and why?
That is important, but it misses out about half of the point of translation. The really important thing to know is what does it mean to the people who will be reading the translation. You as translator (or as evaluator of the translation) may think it has communicated clearly to "all English speaking people" or the like. But that is a rather large assumption.
For this reason, I'm very interested in talking to people about what are their reactions to various Bible versions, and asking which ones they use and why. It's also why I'm interested in websites like this. Where people (like David J. Stewart in this rather extreme case) rant and rave (I don't think that's too strong a term) about the errors in a particular version. People like Stewart tell me what people expect from a Bible, which very important when translating.
I don't intend for readers of this blog to "rant", but I am interested in people's preferences, and finding out what underlies those preferences.
So if you're out there, and you happen to stumble upon this blog:
What Bible translation do you prefer to read and why?
Link Love
I'm a little frustrated by Google searches on the topic of Bible
translation, because there are so many sites listed which seem to only
spread anger and discontent with the various good versions out there.
It's hard to find the wheat for all the chaff.
translation, because there are so many sites listed which seem to only
spread anger and discontent with the various good versions out there.
It's hard to find the wheat for all the chaff.
If you know of a good site with scholarly and generous (or at least
generous) discussion of different translations (or discussion of just
one translation), please let me know and I'll add it to my links on the
right.
Cheers.
I want an inaccurate Bible...
I've asked quite a few people what is their favourite Bible version and why. Never has anyone answered with this:
"I want an inaccurate Bible. One that tells me the true story some of the time, but makes the rest up."
Similarly, when I read the introductions to various Bible versions, they all claim (in word or in essence) that they are accurate to the original writings.
This is not surprising for literal (or Essentially Literal, or Formal Equivalent, or "word-for-word" whatever you like to call them) translations like the ESV. It's also true for functional equivalent (or meaning based etc) translations like the New Living Translation and Good News Bible. Even The Message, which some shun as being merely a paraphrase and not a real translation, makes similar claims (though not with the same words - of course not):
"So [Peterson] began to bring into English the rhythms and idioms of the original ancient Greek—writing straight out of the Greek text without looking at other English translations."
In some way, even Peterson in his very "free" translation, is trying to accurately reflect of the original Greek text.
So why this blog?
I'm interested in meaning, and types of meaning, and how this influences our translation style.
I'm not interested in throwing stones at various versions, or finding out which is "right". I want to ask the question "In which way is this Bible version good". How have the translators understood the concept of accuracy and how is that understanding reflected in their translation.
This blog is a documentation of my journey of discovery. Join me, won't you?
"I want an inaccurate Bible. One that tells me the true story some of the time, but makes the rest up."
Similarly, when I read the introductions to various Bible versions, they all claim (in word or in essence) that they are accurate to the original writings.
This is not surprising for literal (or Essentially Literal, or Formal Equivalent, or "word-for-word" whatever you like to call them) translations like the ESV. It's also true for functional equivalent (or meaning based etc) translations like the New Living Translation and Good News Bible. Even The Message, which some shun as being merely a paraphrase and not a real translation, makes similar claims (though not with the same words - of course not):
"So [Peterson] began to bring into English the rhythms and idioms of the original ancient Greek—writing straight out of the Greek text without looking at other English translations."
In some way, even Peterson in his very "free" translation, is trying to accurately reflect of the original Greek text.
So why this blog?
I'm interested in meaning, and types of meaning, and how this influences our translation style.
I'm not interested in throwing stones at various versions, or finding out which is "right". I want to ask the question "In which way is this Bible version good". How have the translators understood the concept of accuracy and how is that understanding reflected in their translation.
This blog is a documentation of my journey of discovery. Join me, won't you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)