Featured The Harm of Dynamic Equivalence

10 Jesus answered, “You are a great teacher in Israel, and you don't know this?
10 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· σὺ εἶ ὁ διδάσκαλος τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ταῦτα οὐ γινώσκεις;
JoJ: Once again, the GNB leaves out the words from John’s unique narration style, “and said.” It also leaves out “to him.” (This once again highlights the difference between a translation theory based on neoorthodoxy (DE) and one based on verbal-plenary inspiration, which says we must translate every word possible to translate.) The GNB also adds the word “great,” which unnecessarily adds semantic content to the verse and misses the nuance. Jesus is not complimenting Nicodemus, but rebuking him. Again, the original is “teacher of Israel,” so one who teaches Jews, not “teacher in Israel,” a teacher who lives in that country. Again, the original has “these things,” not “this.”

11 I am telling you the truth: we speak of what we know and report what we have seen, yet none of you is willing to accept our message.
11 ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι ὅτι ὃ οἴδαμεν λαλοῦμεν καὶ ὃ ἑωράκαμεν μαρτυροῦμεν, καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἡμῶν οὐ λαμβάνετε.
JoJ: Here he goes again, ignoring the discourse style of Jesus by paraphrasing “Truly, truly…. ” The rest of the verse is pretty good, except translating the noun for “witness” (μαρτυρίαν) as “message.” In the verse, Jesus is acting as a witness of things seen and known, not specifically delivering a message (for which there are other Greek words).

12 You do not believe me when I tell you about the things of this world; how will you ever believe me, then, when I tell you about the things of heaven?
12 εἰ τὰ ἐπίγεια εἶπον ὑμῖν καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε, πῶς ἐὰν εἴπω ὑμῖν τὰ ἐπουράνια πιστεύσετε;
JoJ: This is the best translation of a verse yet. I’d accept this.

 

13 And no one has ever gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who came down from heaven.”
13 καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.
JoJ: Again, this is a pretty good rendering, one I would accept.

14 As Moses lifted up the bronze snake on a pole in the desert, in the same way the Son of Man must be lifted up,
14 Καὶ καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου,
JoJ: The GNB adds “bronze” here, but the original just has “snake.” Again, the GNB adds “on a pole” here, but the original just has “lifted up.” (Both are the same verb, just with different tense and voice.) Adding these words to the text is not acceptable in a translation faithful to the original. The GNB translator did not just transfer meaning (the supposed goal of DE), but added meaning from the OT, presuming that the reader was incompetent to search the OT historical record for elucidation. Furthermore, since the two verbs are the same, the unknowing reader might assume that Jesus was crucified on a pole instead of a cross—validating the position of the Jehovah’s Witnesses!

15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
15 ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
JoJ: The only problem I have with this verse is that it changes “the one believing” (the substantival usage of a singular participle) to “everyone who believes.” What’s wrong with that? It takes away some of the personal impact of Jesus speaking directly to one person, Nicodemus. In this pericope, Christ was seeking to win one person to Himself, Nicodemus, not “everyone.”

 

Her illustrations had a kind of modern art feel to them--not necessarily bad, though.

 

It's been a while since I posted about DE, and my vociferous opponent on that subject is gone from the BB now, so....

 

Here is one more set of comments on 3 verses for the weekend:

16 For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life.
16 οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾽ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
JoJ: Like many others, the translator has misunderstood houtos (οὕτως) as “so much,” when the Greek word in this context really means “in this way.” (This word can intensify meaning if followed by an adjective or adverb, but there are none after it here.) Again, he goes with the plural “everyone” instead of the singular, thus taking the onus off Nicodemus. The word “die” does not literally translate the verb ἀπόληται (be destroyed), but is not necessarily an incorrect rendering.

17 For God did not send his Son into the world to be its judge, but to be its savior.
17 οὐ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἵνα κρίνῃ τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι᾽ αὐτοῦ.
JoJ: This verse illustrates a key difference between DE and such literal methods as optimal equivalence. The DE advocates call a literal translation “formal equivalent” (FE), because it seeks to translate the form, since it carries meaning. Granted, sometimes translating the form is impossible (many languages have no future tense) or may even be unclear, but in this case it is perfectly possible to translate the forms (“judge” and “be saved” are verbs, not nouns) and have a perfectly clear translation.

18 Those who believe in the Son are not judged; but those who do not believe have already been judged, because they have not believed in God's only Son.
18 ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ κρίνεται· ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, ὅτι μὴ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ.
JoJ: Three times in this verse he has “everyone” again, instead of the singular of the original. As I have pointed out, this takes away much of the personal impact on Nicodemus that Jesus intended with the singular. Authorial intent is not nearly as important in DE as in literal methods. I have less problem with “only son,” since it is generally agreed nowadays that monogenes (μονογενοῦς here) usually means “unique,” but I still prefer “only begotten.”

 

Good! I appreciate the interaction and will answer to the best of my ability.

You missed my point. I distinctly said "and I don't mean archaic language." What I was referring to is literary language, not at all the same as a classical version of a language. There is a classical version of Japanese into which I would not translate. But our translation effort has used a literary version of Japanese, though our young lady proofreaders wish to make it more colloquial.

In the Greek NT, Luke has a very high literary level of koine, since he was highly educated. Hebrews is a pretty literary book, too. Revelation is not at all ordinary koine, but apocalyptic. And so on.

Optimal equivalence “Seeks to preserve all of the information in the text, while presenting it in good literary form."[1]
[1] Preface, New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), v.

I'm not real sure what your point is here r.e. my notes on the GNB.

Yes, I'm aware of the difference in word order, which, by the way, is much less important in Greek than English.

Again, you miss my point. Our English loan word "amen" comes from Greek, which got it from Hebrew. Each time it changed somewhat in meaning from the original, as loan words usually do. My reference to sushi was to illustrate that linguistic fact. I've eaten sushi in both Japan and America, and the versions are different. Japanese sushi chefs don't make a "California roll," and I've never had beef or egg sushi in the US, or inarizushi (delicious).

I don't know what point you are trying to make here. How is the Greek context missing in the target language?

And just for the record, I'm a translator, and also teach Greek 101 & 102, "Translation Theory and Practice," etc.

 

Quite all right. There is probably room on the thread for you and Van to spar.

I actually did a similar thread on the NIV years ago. It's not as dynamic as the GNB, but problematic.

 

19 This is how the judgment works: the light has come into the world, but people love the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds are evil.
19 αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ κρίσις ὅτι τὸ φῶς ἐλήλυθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον καὶ ἠγάπησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι μᾶλλον τὸ σκότος ἢ τὸ φῶς· ἦν γὰρ αὐτῶν πονηρὰ τὰ ἔργα.
JoJ: There is nothing about “how it works” in the original, which simply says, “This is the judgment.” So the GNB misleads the reader with extraneous information. Also, there is no “but” in the original, which has “and,” but that’s not a big problem.

20 Those who do evil things hate the light and will not come to the light, because they do not want their evil deeds to be shown up.
20 πᾶς γὰρ ὁ φαῦλα πράσσων μισεῖ τὸ φῶς καὶ οὐκ ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸ φῶς, ἵνα μὴ ἐλεγχθῇ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ·
JoJ: The GNB leaves “all” untranslated. Other than that, not too bad.

21 But those who do what is true come to the light in order that the light may show that what they did was in obedience to God.
21 ὁ δὲ ποιῶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸ φῶς, ἵνα φανερωθῇ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα ὅτι ἐν θεῷ ἐστιν εἰργασμένα.
JoH: The GNB is more free in this verse than I am comfortable with, but generally gets the meaning across.