Featured Corrupted text?

The Greek text is not corrupted. But the choice of how it is translated is at issue. And there are other texts with similar issues on choices of translation.

 

Did the translators have legit reasons for their wording choices?

 

I have studied a few modern languages other than my native English, and the ancient languages of Greek, Hebrew, and Latin. Literal translation is not always the best translation, because each language works differently. I approach BIble word studies differently since I have had the opportunity to learn a modern language well enough to argue with someone in it. LOL.

I had one friend that told me to never speak to him in his language again. I was saying things literally, but offensively and .... promiscuously, or so I am told. My teacher at college told us to use every opportunity to speak in the language. I told her that I had been asked not to. When I told her what I said, she said, "Maybe YOU shouldn't use every opportunity," and the whole class laughed.

I do not intend to ever take the time to learn Greek and Hebrew well enough to be able to critique a translation. I can have an opinion about the underlying manuscripts used, but when it comes to translating: I am a baby at the mercy of my elders to care for me. Or not to care for me. Sometimes elders choose to neglect and even abuse their babies.

I don't believe my calling is to learn the ancient languages to the level required to truly comprehend the Bible with context. I think I am meant to do something else.

 

"Ρῆμα has two fundamental meanings: word and thing. It thus corresponds to Heb. dābār," (EDNT)

"...after the Hebrew an event that can be spoken about, thing, object, matter, event" (BDAG).





Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

What are your qualifications then to be able to judge their textual/rendering decisions in translating?

 

Welcome to the BB. I'm glad you are here. I hope you'll contribute to this particular forum. Good linguists are hard to find.

As for literalness, well, there is literal and then there is literal. Everyone defines "literal" differently. I'm not sure what you mean about speaking in someone else's language literally. Were you using distasteful idioms, or "taboo" words, or something? (Been there, done that in Japanese. )

I translate the NT literally, but I don't think I mean the same thing as you by that term.

 

That is one of the hardest thing to get when translation would think, striking the balance between being so literal that one misses what was being stated and meant!

 

I just very literally said that I was hot. To mean that I am uncomfortable because the weather is hot, would require saying things in a way that makes no sense when translated literally back into English. One option is to use the verb "have" instead of the verb "be"

In one language I have studied there are not separate words for "he" and "she". In another language, at the opposite end of the spectrum, even some verbs are different for males and females. Neither of these languages can be translated literally into English, or vice versa; it is impossible.

The language without "he" and "she" also does not conjugate verbs. But lest you think that language is easier to learn, you need to learn the country's parables, because people use references to those parables as substitutes for basic nouns.

In another language, I only have worked to improve badly translated books and articles into better English. The translators had a very tough time knowing when to use "the" or not. You cannot just literally translate "the" just because it was in the original. Or skip it, if it was skipped in the original.

The word "the" is even used differently in different English speaking countries. In the UK and British territories, the phrase used is "In hospital", but in the USA, the same meaning is expressed as "In the hospital."

Spend some time conversing with Australians and see how some English words have very different meanings in the USA.

 

Okay, so what you are saying as I take it is that if you translated what you said literally into English, it would make no sense. I sense )) that you are talking about idioms in that language rather than normal lexical units. Of course, English has "hot" as an idiom, and in certain contexts you would never call yourself hot, right?

If by "literally" you mean the figures of speech of the language (especially the idioms), I agree. Very seldom do idioms translate literally from one language to another. However, the Hebrew idiom "kick against the goads" translated literally into Greek (Jesus to Paul), and makes sense in English also.

Chinese also does not conjugate verbs, nor even have verb tenses. But I'm mystified (and intrigued) by your reference to parables. Do you mean short fictional stories to make a point as Jesus often told?

Neither Japanese nor Chinese have an article. Many languages lack one. Koine (NT) Greek only has the definite article, and does some things with it which cannot be translated into English. For example. proper nouns in Greek have an article: "The Jesus."

Been to Australia. Certainly different. I once helped translate an Australian's book into Japanese.