Personally I was glad at what T Cassidy wrote on inspiration and at his defense of formal translation. The chaff is being separated from the wheat (formal versus dynamic). I have no sympathy whatever for the dynamic equivalency translation method. Yet I know in some (I don't say MANY) instances all normal formal translations (KJV, LITV, YLT etc.)had to use dynamic equivalency of sheer necessity, e.g. Rom. 1:15 - outôs to kat eme prothumon kai umin tois en rômê euaggelisasthai . Literally this would read thusly: thus the according to me ready (adjective)also to you those in Rome to announce glad tidings. "thus the according to me ready" sounds like awkward English, and even if you tried to switch word order you would not make good English out of these six words. In this case one has to resort to something else than formal/literal rendering. If it is to be called dynamic equivalence I know not, but it might read like this - So, as for me I am ready...(to preach the Gospel also to you who[are]in Rome). Against such dynamic equivalencing I am not opposed. But NIV, for example, uses D.E. in many more instances than would be necessary, just because it has taken the policy to translate non-formally, non-literally. This is wrong policy from the start. In majority of all NT verses I would say there is no need for dynamic equivalency, just use of common sense when changing word order into English word order would solve apparent problems. A translator/translation team that seeks to please men/the world by using dynamic e. in the main (as NIV, GNB, Living Bible etc)cannot please God at the same time. I believe it is wrong to refer to the NT writers that they did not quote the OT (whether LXX or Masoretic T.) word for word and thus a translator needs not to translate formally, but has the freedom to use D.E. Those men were definitely inspired and moved along by God the Spirit. Although the Spirit caused them not to quote word for word (here and there) there was no fear they bring errors and heresies by them NT scriptures they penned down. But today we do not have such inspiration in translating, thus we have no freedom to resort to dynamic equivalency and guesswork which accompanies it. If we do we do not please God but rather men and the flesh. Dyn.Equiv. may, IMO, be resorted to only in such clearly tricky instances as I gave example of. The translator should strive to give the exact form of the Greek word(s), adjective for adjective, verb for verb etc. He also should give the right meaning of the word, and this I believe is in the last instance solved by examining the context. E.g. the word faith, pistis. It may mean different things, depending on context. Mostly it is FAITH, but it can also be FAITHFULNESS, and a few other meanings it can also have. The context should tell the translator which one to put for pistis. Cassidy rightly said the translator is not to become an interpreter or expounder, he is to translate faithfully, period. What interpretation he has had to resort to in the translating process is another thing, but it should not reflect upon the finished translation so that he begins commenting or making ready interpretations as I believe NIV has done in some instances. I believe it is good to try to give one English word for each Greek word. Sometimes this won't do of course, but generally I believe it is a good thumb rule. E.g. the word euaggelizô, it might be shortly translated "evangelize", but it is not wrong to render it "preach glad tidings" or "proclaim the Gospel". This is one example where one Greek word may take more than one English word. I believe it is wrong and bad to translate God's inspired words wholly utilizing dynamic equivalency method. When it comes to penetrating and careful exegesis dynamic equivalency is exposed for what it is worth, and one is forced to go to the Greek (or Hebrew respectively) to clear out the matter. Nothing wrong in going to the original texts, but in general I feel a translation should be faithful in such a manner that one did not have to resort to the originals, for very few people are familiar with them for reasons they only know, and not all have the money to buy the necessary tools which follow e.g. Koine Greek studying. OK, must get some sleep. Forgive me if my English is bad at times.
Harald
