Idioms

[Van]

That's not idiomatic. And it's not English.

Its both. Personal incredulity contributes little light but much heat.

Ephesians 1:23 could be translated idiomatically as "Now the church is His body, the spiritual deity of Him fills every individual within the church." Or "Now the church is His body because the spiritual deity of Him fills every individual within the body." But even if that is what it means, shouldn't we stick to a literal translation and leave the commentary to the study notes?

 

[Rippon]

That's not idiomatic. And it's not English.

Isn't that the truth! Van is the guy who complains about what he declares about "messed-up versions." Yet he uses phraseology here that distorts the Word of God and the English language at the same time.

 

[Van]

More disinformation. The point is that translations should translate literally and put their interpretation in footnotes or study notes. Good Grief.

 

[Rippon]

More disinformation. The point is that translations should translate literally and put their interpretation in footnotes or study notes. Good Grief.

I'm glad that translations like the NASU do exactly the opposite of what you constantly drone on about.

 

[Van]

Yes, it is better to put the literal translation in the main text and put the interpretation and commentary in the notes. Here is an idiomatic translation of Ephesians 1:23, "Now the church is His body because the spiritual deity of Him fills every individual within the body." But is that the actual meaning? Thus providing the literal translation in the main text, and then footnoting the possible idiomatic meaning is the best way to go.

 

[Rippon]

it is better to put the literal translation in the main text and put the interpretation and commentary in the notes.

I already referred to your constant droning on about that. I am glad that the vast majority of translations --including the NASU, do exactly the opposite of what you want. ;-)

 

[Van]

Lets see, the NASB usually puts the literal translation in the main text, and occasionally puts the literal translation in a footnote. And this is how the word for word translation philosophy versions operate. But is this obvious fact accepted or denied? Go figure.

 

[Rippon]

Lets see, the NASB usually puts the literal translation in the main text, and occasionally puts the literal translation in a footnote.

The NASU does not "occasionally" put the "Lit." in the margins. Just take a gander at my thread on the subject. As anyone with eyes to see --it regularly puts the idiomatic in the text.

 

[Van]

Folks, all the text not in the "Lit" footnotes represents the vast majority of the text, and represents the literal translation. Apparently Mr. Rippon believes that all the places where the NASB footnotes literal, represent idiomatic renderings. No kidding.

Take a look at Galatians 2:2 The literal rendering is "It was according to revelation that I.... "
The NASB chose to put "It was because of revelation that I...." Again the premise that according to revelation is an idiom whose meaning cannot be discerned is hogwash.

 

[InTheLight]

Eighty-nine posts about an issue that must be considered trivial by almost everyone. Carry on.

 

[John of Japan]

Eighty-nine posts about an issue that must be considered trivial by almost everyone. Carry on.

Actually, it's pretty important to us Bible translators. But I don't see enough expertise in the OP or elsewhere to bother much with this thread, and those on the BB who actually know Greek and Hebrew are also not contributing, so like you say, "Carry on."

 

[Van]

I guess ITL plans to continue casting disparagement after posting "full stop." Maybe "full stop" is an ITL idiom for "non-stop."

Yes, it is better to put the literal translation in the main text and put the interpretation and commentary in the notes. Here is an idiomatic translation of Ephesians 1:23, "Now the church is His body because the spiritual deity of Him fills every individual within the body." But is that the actual meaning? Thus providing the literal translation in the main text, and then footnoting the possible idiomatic meaning is the best way to go.​

 

[Van]

People who claim expertise but post only disparagement are afraid to test their skill in the market place of ideas. Dictatorial elitists use credentials to censor ideas, just as the church did in the dark ages. The mass was in a foreign language so only the select few could know the scriptures, and those who translated it were burned at the stake.

 

[Van]

One of the possible idiomatic meanings of eat and drink is to comprehend and understand. So if we translated John 6:53 idiomatically it would read, "So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man (unless you comprehend the Son of Man) and drink His blood (and understand His life sacrifice) you have no spiritual life within you.

This view may be right or maybe wrong, but certainly should be consigned to the notes and not inserted into the text.

 

[InTheLight]

Actually, it's pretty important to us Bible translators. But I don't see enough expertise in the OP or elsewhere to bother much with this thread, and those on the BB who actually know Greek and Hebrew are also not contributing, so like you say, "Carry on."

The thread has devolved into a repetitious "am too!", "are not!" type of dialogue.

 

[John of Japan]

The thread has devolved into a repetitious "am too!", "are not!" type of dialogue.

Yeah, that's pretty typical of the unqualified opinionators here.

 

[Van]

One of the possible idiomatic meanings of eat and drink is to comprehend and understand. So if we translated John 6:53 idiomatically it would read, "So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you comprehend the Son of Man and understand His life sacrifice you have no spiritual life within you.

This view may be right or maybe wrong, but certainly should be consigned to the notes and not inserted into the text.

 

[Van]

Have you read the phrase "give glory to God?" See John 9:24 or Acts 12:23. There may be more than one way to give glory to God, but clearly the phrase is used idiomatically to mean to tell the truth. Thus the NET translates the phrase idiomatically (promise to tell the truth) but footnotes the literal translation.
The NIV puts both the literal and the idiomatic meaning in the main text.

No wonder God hates all liars, they cover themselves in stolen glory.