ESV & Logos
What is with Logos and the ESV? Every video it is used as the preferred Bible translation (not to mention I still cant remove it in the exegetical guide). Is there a reason why it is always used?
( I mean this with a fair amount of jest, but I am also curious as to why it is always used).
Comments
-
MarkStevens said:
What is with Logos and the ESV? Every video it is used as the preferred Bible translation (not to mention I still cant remove it in the exegetical guide). Is there a reason why it is always used?
I'll have an (uninformed) guess, Mark.
For serious Bible study related to the original languages, you want a translation that's quite literal, word-for-word rather than the dynamic-equivalence approach of The Message (or even NIV.) Like the old ASV or NASB, the ESV fits that style, and so seems a fairly natural choice for working with inter-linears etc.
It also makes sense to me to provide some consistency in the examples, and it's in all the base packages. (Just my 2c.)
0 -
Allen Browne said:
For serious Bible study related to the original languages, you want a translation that's quite literal, word-for-word rather than the dynamic-equivalence approach of The Message (or even NIV.) Like the old ASV or NASB, the ESV fits that style, and so seems a fairly natural choice for working with inter-linears etc.
Well the ESV might be a word for word translation but in my opinion it isn't very accurate! Why not use the NRSV? It is the premier word for word translation.
The naughty part of me does wonder if it has anything to do with making a point to Zondervan.....[:P]
0 -
MarkStevens said:
Well the ESV might be a word for word translation but in my opinion it isn't very accurate! Why not use the NRSV? It is the premier word for word translation.
Really? I thought the ESV was the spiritual successor to the NRSV... Why do you think its inaccurate?
0 -
Jon Rumble said:
Really? I thought the ESV was the spiritual successor to the NRSV... Why do you think its inaccurate?
There is absolutely no relationship between the two! The two have completely different translation committees.
Jon I would love to discuss what I don't like (and it is personal - I have no problem for the most part with the translation) but here is the place and it causes the kind of divisions between Christians not seen since the Calvinist/Arminianism debate in seminary! [;)] My personal preference is for gender inclusive so i would like to be able to choose that option in my exegetical guide.
0 -
Which part of the exegetical guide keeps using the ESV for you?
0 -
Philip Spitzer said:
Which part of the exegetical guide keeps using the ESV for you?
I use NA27 as my preferred NT text in the exegetical guide, It automatically chooses the ESV as the interlinear...much to my annoyance! Apparently this can't be changed. I actually despise the translation but tell very few people (so please keep it to yourself). Actually that is unfair, I despise all of the ESV users who criticise and spread falsities about the TNIV which leaves me with a negative feeling toward the ESV...actually it is quite painful and I don't like to talk about it! [;)]
0 -
MarkStevens said:
I despise all of the ESV users who criticise and spread falsities about the TNIV
Fair enough... Christians can be so annoying [:D]
I tend to use the TNIV for reading and the ESV for study; in the print versions it carries gender neutral language in the margin where appropriate.
I think there is a relationship between ESV and NRSV though as I they're both revisions of the RSV; and doing compare versions (cluster graph in L4) they're often more similar to each other than anything else...
Re: the exegetical guide use of the ESV, do you have another English version with interlinear prioritised higher?
0 -
MarkStevens said:
I use NA27 as my preferred NT text in the exegetical guide, It automatically chooses the ESV as the interlinear...much to my annoyance! Apparently this can't be changed.
I just prioritized the NRSV to the top of the list (typically its the NKJV...did I just make you spew :-)) and then ran an exegetical guide. It used the NRSV.
0 -
What is wrong with the ESV? I have not studied it much, I was planning on starting to use it in my study's.
0 -
MarkStevens said:
What is with Logos and the ESV? Every video it is used as the preferred Bible translation (not to mention I still cant remove it in the exegetical guide). Is there a reason why it is always used?
( I mean this with a fair amount of jest, but I am also curious as to why it is always used).
Good question. I'll give it a shot.
The ESV has a different translation goal than the TNIV.
The translation philosophy behind the TNIV (as well as NIV, NLT and others) is to be dynamically equivalent to the original text. This results in a concept for concept translation.
Although it is technically impossible to be completely literal in a translation, the ESV seeks to more of a word for word or idiom for idiom translation (NASB also attempts this).
Regardless of preferences and debates on the appropriateness of gender inclusive language, the more literal translations (like NASB and ESV) are more useful as an Interlinear text because the resulting translations are a closer reflection to the actual grammatical constructions in the original text (not perfect just closer than those who explicitly embrace dynamic equivalence).
Compare for instance, Acts 15:36 in ESV and TNIV where the TNIV translates adelphos as believers. While this might fit the dynamic equivalent goals of translating the concept in a gender inclusive way, it is not very helpful as a reverse interlinear when you are trying to find all the occurrences of brother. There is no way adelphos can ever be rendered as "believer".
Therefore, there are technical reasons to use the ESV as a preferred Bible when much of the functionality of the software is dependent upon reverse interlinears.
Logos is currently developing reverse interlinears of the NIV and NLT (both dynamic equivalence translations) but they developed the more literal translations first for technical reasons.
0 -
Russ Quinn said:
The translation philosophy behind the TNIV (as well as NIV, NLT and others) is to be dynamically equivalent to the original text. This results in a concept for concept translation.
Although it is technically impossible to be completely literal in a translation, the ESV seeks to more of a word for word or idiom for idiom translation (NASB also attempts this).
It is one of the reasons that I study out of NASB and teach/preach out of NIV. The dynamic and literal translations work together to give a more complete understanding.
0 -
Philip Spitzer said:
I just prioritized the NRSV to the top of the list (typically its the NKJV...did I just make you spew :-)) and then ran an exegetical guide. It used the NRSV
LOL! The NKJV is my sentimental favourite because it was the first translation I ever purchased. I have moved the ESV to the lowest depths of prioritisation and it still uses it. I am at home at the moment and my 'logos computer' is at work so I will check it again when I get in.
0 -
Bryan Brodess said:
What is wrong with the ESV? I have not studied it much, I was planning on starting to use it in my study'
Where do I begin?!?! If you are interested Ben Witherington has some posts on his concerns (not that I agree with them all). You could also try Mounce's website for a counter argument.
0 -
Remember also that you can hide a resource. If you think you will never use the ESV for anything, just hide it in the program settings. I have done this with several things like the Woman's Study Bible and Young's Literal Translation. Works great!
Jerry
iMac (2019 model), 3Ghz 6 Core Intel i5, 16gb Ram, Radeon Pro Graphics. 500GB SSD.
0 -
Jon Rumble said:
I tend to use the TNIV for reading and the ESV for study; in the print versions it carries gender neutral language in the margin where appropriate
Same, except I use the NRSV for English bible study and TNIV for preaching.
Jon Rumble said:I think there is a relationship between ESV and NRSV though as I they're both revisions of the RSV
I see what you are saying but I think the NRSV people would not see the two as being related...
0 -
MarkStevens said:
Where do I begin?!?!
Begin somewhere because so far I have simply seen character defamation of the ESV and no arguments
Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org0 -
Russ Quinn said:
The translation philosophy behind the TNIV (as well as NIV, NLT and others) is to be dynamically equivalent to the original text. This results in a concept for concept translation.
Not to quibble too much, Russ, but technically the NIV & TNIV are not dynamic equivalent translations, but rather "median" translations, incorporating the best of both formal and dynamic equivalent methods.
From Fee & Strauss' How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth:
"Notice that in addition to formal and functional [i.e. dynamic] versions we have introduced a third category, mediating, which represents a middle ground between these two. Mediating versions like the TNIV, NIV, NAB, HCSB, and NET are sometimes more literal, sometimes more idiomatic, seeking to maintain a balance between form and function."
I personally favor median translations, especially for public use, over formal equivalent translations.
0 -
MarkStevens said:
Same, except I use the NRSV for English bible study and TNIV for preaching.
The NRSV suffers from the same problems as the TNIV when it comes to using it as an interlinear. See Acts 15:36, 40; 16:2, 40 for just a few examples where neither the TNIV or NRSV can be trusted to accurately render the underlying Greek words. Rendering adelphos as "believers" instead of "brothers" skews search results on many levels.Jon Rumble said:I think there is a relationship between ESV and NRSV though as I they're both revisions of the RSV
That is right. The ESV committee took the RSV of 1971 as a starting point not the NRSV of 1989.
The NRSV was theologically controversial for reasons beyond gender inclusiveness. Most famously it replaced "virgin" with "young woman" in Isaiah 7:14. This is something that went beyond the other gender inclusive translations. TNIV and NLT both use "virgin".
0 -
MarkStevens said:
What is with Logos and the ESV? Every video it is used as the preferred Bible translation (not to mention I still cant remove it in the exegetical guide). Is there a reason why it is always used?
( I mean this with a fair amount of jest, but I am also curious as to why it is always used).
I don't get it either. I find the ESV to be very, very close to the NRSV much of the time (except for the gender inclusive aspect, of course).
But I think there are at least two reasons Logos uses the ESV reverse interlinear in its videos: First the ESV was one of the first modern translations from which Logos created a reverse interlinear. Second, the ESV is being heavily promoted in the US as a successor to the RSV for groups who do not like the gender-inclusiveness of the NRSV, nor the dynamic equivalence philosophy of the NIV.
In L3 I had the NRSV as my preferred reverse interlinear. I don't know how to change this setting in Logos4, and don't believe it's possible at this time.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
looks like Ben took his blog down. And from what I have seen has made an apology about what he wrote..
I am not trying to argue. hope you do not think so.. I personally think every translation has flaws.. I grew up on KJV, and have used the NKJV since. I know where the problem area's are.. and have no problem myself. But those in my church ues other translations. In fact my church uses NLV to teach now ( I hate that version I have seen more errors in this in the little I have read than all the others.) And was looking for a neutral version to teach from.. Thought ESV would help.. So if there is a problem.. would like to know before I get to deep iunto the ESV. I can just keep using the NASB..
0 -
Jacob Hantla said:
Begin somewhere because so far I have simply seen character defamation of the ESV and no arguments
And so it begins...
Jacob I suggest you READ my posts and then come back an apologise. I have not defamed the ESV I have shared my frustration at some supporters the ESV who criticise the TNIV - And, I said it in jest. I have no problem with the ESV and people who want to read it. Personally I don't like it. But hey, I dont like the KJV or the NIV or the Good News either! Futhermore, I said that I did not want to discuss translation philiosophy for thsi very reason.
Thanks for nothing and getting me worked up, I appreciate it a lot! No, honestly, I really I like this sort of thing so please keep it coming. I love being accused of character defamation...AND IF YOU ARE WONDERING I AM BEING SARCASTIC!
0 -
Russ Quinn said:
The NRSV was theologically controversial for reasons beyond gender inclusiveness. Most famously it replaced "virgin" with "young woman" in Isaiah 7:14. This is something that went beyond the other gender inclusive translations. TNIV and NLT both use "virgin".
Actually, the 1971 RSV has 'young woman' too, which is, as a matter of fact, a more precise translation of the original language (that is the Hebrew) behind the text in Isaiah.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
Bryan Brodess said:
I am not trying to argue. hope you do not think so..
Not at all Bryan. I went through a similar process a few months back...I really like the ESV Study Bible and am kind of jealous that my preffered translations have not invested in this sort of study bible.
Thanks for the info Richard. I didn't know it was the alternative to the NRSV and can understand why people feel uncomfortable with the NRSV.
0 -
Russ Quinn said:
Rendering adelphos as "believers" instead of "brothers" skews search results on many levels.
Russ, I really don't understand this... Why would you search on the English text and not on the Greek itself?
0 -
Damian McGrath said:Russ Quinn said:
Rendering adelphos as "believers" instead of "brothers" skews search results on many levels.
Russ, I really don't understand this... Why would you search on the English text and not on the Greek itself?
Well, not everyone knows Greek or uses Logos.
MacBook Pro (2019), ThinkPad E540
0 -
No problem Mark.. I also grew up a scofield guy. so I am sure I could get some remarks about that also.. Although I love most of his notes and cross refrenses.
That is one thing I like about LOGOS. I have so many resources to check what anyone is saying. I learned along time ago not to take anyone's word as Gospel.. even if they belong to the same church I do..
0 -
Richard DeRuiter said:Russ Quinn said:
The NRSV was theologically controversial for reasons beyond gender inclusiveness. Most famously it replaced "virgin" with "young woman" in Isaiah 7:14. This is something that went beyond the other gender inclusive translations. TNIV and NLT both use "virgin".
Actually, the 1971 RSV has 'young woman' too, which is, as a matter of fact, a more precise translation of the original language behind the text in Isaiah.
The NET Bible, which is also a VERY conservative translation also translates עַלְמָה as "young woman." This is really a non-issue because that's what the Hebrew text says (and I write that fully believing in a virgin birth). The LXX used the very specific word παρθένος meaning virgin, and this is what was quoted in the NT.
0 -
R. Mansfield said:
Not to quibble too much, Russ, but technically the NIV & TNIV are not dynamic equivalent translations, but rather "median" translations, incorporating the best of both formal and dynamic equivalent methods.
I personally favor median translations, especially for public use, over formal equivalent translations.
Welcome to the discussion, Rick. I defer to you on the technical details concerning the TNIV. You have spent much more time on the issues than I.
I'm not trying to be overly technical or attack or defend preferences or really even the advantages or disadvantages of a particular philosophy of translation.
I'm just trying to explain why Logos has preferred the ESV as the basis of its reverse interlinears.
The NIV as a reverse interlinear would render accurate search results in the passages cited above whereas the TNIV (or NLT or NRSV) would not.
I don't mean that statement to be a statement of preference of one version or another. It is simply an observation of how the reverse interlinears work in Logos.
0 -
Todd Phillips said:Damian McGrath said:Russ Quinn said:
Rendering adelphos as "believers" instead of "brothers" skews search results on many levels.
Russ, I really don't understand this... Why would you search on the English text and not on the Greek itself?
Well, not everyone knows Greek or uses Logos
Thanks Todd, but surely when we're talking about skewed search results we're talking about doing something in Logos?
I know not everyone knows Greek but is there any bible which translates every instance of every Greek word with the same English word?
0 -
MarkStevens said:Jacob Hantla said:
Begin somewhere because so far I have simply seen character defamation of the ESV and no arguments
And so it begins...
Jacob I suggest you READ my posts and then come back an apologise. I have not defamed the ESV I have shared my frustration at some supporters the ESV who criticise the TNIV - And, I said it in jest. I have no problem with the ESV and people who want to read it. Personally I don't like it. But hey, I dont like the KJV or the NIV or the Good News either! Futhermore, I said that I did not want to discuss translation philiosophy for thsi very reason.
Thanks for nothing and getting me worked up, I appreciate it a lot! No, honestly, I really I like this sort of thing so please keep it coming. I love being accused of character defamation...AND IF YOU ARE WONDERING I AM BEING SARCASTIC!
Upon re-reading my statement asking you to elaborate, I see that it does indeed sound very adversarial. That was not my intent. Please forgive me. I simply wanted to ask you to give example reasons for your dislike of the ESV. I see that you state you don't think its accurate, you like gender inclusiveness, you don't like ESVers who rag on TNIV, and you direct us to Ben Witherington. I was wanting some examples of what you view is incorrect.
Again, please forgive me for my terseness and unintenional adversarial language in asking for you to elaborate upon your answer to "what's wrong with the ESV."
Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org0
