ESV & Logos

Page 4 of 6 (112 items) « First ... < Previous 2 3 4 5 6 Next >
This post has 111 Replies | 3 Followers

Posts 653
Alex Scott | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 7:31 PM

Just to provide a bit more clarity on my last post.  Anthropos is I think universally accepted as a man or human person.  Obviously in the context, it is not intended to be taken literally, but figuratively.  No one is suggesting that the believer puts off one human body and replaces it with another, ,so it must be figurative.  How one interprets it figuratively will vary with the individual and context.

But this merely points out the impossibility of accurate, literal translation.  No matter what language you choose to translate, the word you choose must almost inevitably carry less meaning than the original, and at the same time more meaning than the original intended.  You see the same problem in the John 3 passage - is it born again, or born from above?  The translator into English must choose the meaning - the Greek didn't have to make that choice, he knew already that the word had more than one meaning and his choice was merely one of interpretation, not translation.  In other words, the reader of Greek has that choice whenever he reads the passage - once the translation into English is made, the choice is automatically taken away from the English only reader.

Longtime Logos user (more than $30,000 in purchases) - now a second class user because I won't pay them more every month or year.

Posts 652
Jeremy | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 8:55 PM

If you know Greek and Hebrew, the NIV/TVIV is a better translation. The figures of speech come across better. The ESV is a little too literal for me, but still a good translation. But fear not TNIV haters. Due to the fact that the TNIV translators realized they didn't do as good of a job as they would have liked, the TNIV will be redone in the next few years. 

Posts 652
Jeremy | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:00 PM

Bryan Brodess:

"I know not everyone knows Greek but is there any bible which translates every instance of every Greek word with the same English word?"

I think this says it all. My previous version yuo could only do a KJV interliniar. So I am happy as heck we can use other versions now!! Your right.. No version is perfect..

There is no such thing as translating every Greek word with the same English word. When (some)translators translate, they are trying to find the word or thought that is as close as possible to the Greek or Hebrew word, but it can never be an exact science.

 

Posts 653
Alex Scott | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:01 PM

Damian McGrath:
Traduttore, traditore!

What's this???  An Italian Aussie?

Longtime Logos user (more than $30,000 in purchases) - now a second class user because I won't pay them more every month or year.

Posts 1692
LogosEmployee
Bob Pritchett | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:04 PM

The "official" answer:

When we do something new, creative, and tightly linked to the underlying Greek and Hebrew (Reverse Interlinear, HDNT, etc.) we need to use a text that:

A) is reasonably literal.

B) is licensed agreeably.

"Agreeably" includes cost, restrictions, and rapid "time between our asking and their saying yes."

When we started these projects we did not have our new relationship with Zondervan, (and felt the NIV's "dynamic" translation would be harder to align), and the NRSV is owned by an organization that we didn't have as close a connection to. Both are more expensive to license and have come with more conditions on use.

And once we did the first with the ESV, it made sense to do the second, etc. Sometimes it's the little things that make a difference -- like being the first publisher to say "Sure, go ahead" instead of "I'll check with the committee, and we may want to collect a separate royalty." :-)

The good news is, most of our data work is on the Greek and Hebrew, so we can eventually offer almost every database on any text we can reverse interlinearize, and the NIV and NRSV (among others) are on that list.

Posts 2212
Damian McGrath | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:06 PM

Alex Scott:
What's this???  An Italian Aussie?

It is an Italian saying - doesn't translate well (that I can remember).

I lived 5 years in Italy - I speak Italian here in Australia every day....

Posts 490
R. Mansfield | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:20 PM

Damian McGrath:

It is an Italian saying - doesn't translate well (that I can remember).

Traduttore, traditore = "translator, traitor"

RMansfield@mac.com
http://thislamp.com 
youtube.com/user/rfmansfield
twitter/thislamp
facebook.com/rmansfield

Posts 2212
Damian McGrath | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:26 PM

R. Mansfield:
Traduttore, traditore = "translator, traitor"

I know but it loses the alliteration...   

I prefer the verbal form (though not as traditional) - tradurre e' tradire...

Posts 490
R. Mansfield | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 9:49 PM

Damian McGrath:

R. Mansfield:
Traduttore, traditore = "translator, traitor"

I know but it loses the alliteration...   

True. Therefore, I recommend that if we come across it when translating the Bible, we should simply transliterate it Smile

RMansfield@mac.com
http://thislamp.com 
youtube.com/user/rfmansfield
twitter/thislamp
facebook.com/rmansfield

Posts 439
Mark Stevens | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 11:14 PM

Bob Pritchett:
The "official" answer:

Thank you Bob. Back in the late 1960's when I began this thread about the ESV and Logos I would never have imagined so much comment on translation philosophy so  I appreciate you answering the question.

Bob Pritchett:
Sometimes it's the little things that make a difference -- like being the first publisher to say "Sure, go ahead" instead of "I'll check with the committee, and we may want to collect a separate royalty." :-)

So I was right about a certain publisher! ;-)

 

TO ALL THE OTHERS WHO HAVE FILLED CLOGGED MY INBOX WITH REPLIES. Maybe I need to give the ESV another chance. Maybe it isn't so bad. You know what they say...99% of ESV users give the rest a bad name! (PLEASE this is a joke - meant in humour).

Posts 18828
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Dec 14 2009 11:37 PM

MarkStevens:

Maybe I need to give the ESV another chance. Maybe it isn't so bad. You know what they say...99% of ESV users give the rest a bad name! (PLEASE this is a joke - meant in humour).

I haven't used the ESV enough to become familiar with it. But I know that one of my professors, J.I. Packer, was the General Editor of it, so it goes up in my esteem already. My understanding was always that ESV was a more conservative translation than some of the other contemporary ones, and I wasn't thinking that the ones I've been using most often (NIV/TNIV for personal study and NRSV at church) were too "liberal" for me, so I didn't need to switch.

MarkStevens:

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. 

I'm glad to see that ESV Study Bible Notes is (are?) in pre-pub and I've ordered it. Here is J.I. Packer talking about it (and a bit about the ESV in general). He's so funny: "There are 1.1 million words in the Study Bible, and I don't know who else has read them all, but I know that I have." Geeked

Posts 27980
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 12:50 AM

JeremyEllis:
There is no such thing as translating every Greek word with the same English word.

Unfortunately there is. I have reviewed either it or the Hebrew equivalent on Amazon. I refuse to identify the translation or the author. Suffice it to say that the author was of the young earth persuasion and believed that there had not been enough time for either Hebrew or Greek to have changed much - therefore, things like the etymology fallacy did not apply. If I recall correct, the Jehovah's Witness's translation has a similar philosophy.

To me, the simplest way to describe why I have such a low regard for such translations is that they assume that the two language divide the world in exactly the same way.  They don't.  For example, the word in Sanskrit for "black" includes both what we think of as black and dark blue. Their word for "blue" excludes what we think of as dark blue ... because they put it under "black". A number of linguistic anthropologist in the 70's were studying such things as the different ways different languages/cultures divided the spectrum ... or even different groups of people with a culture. Birds, plants, seasons, ... you name it, different languages divide it different ways.

Another concrete example:until about 1970 billion meant something different in the UK than in America - check out long (English & European) and short (American scales). If there is this kind of variation in concrete terms, imagine what there is in abstract terms.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 2698
DominicM | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 1:27 AM

If you want to compare, you have to compare against the source, greek/hebrew, which most of us lay-folk dont have.

Any Translation can be flawed, due to human Interaction, but thats why God left us the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth.

The Holy Spirt and the Word combined work like a well greased wheel, no creaks and groans, as he leads us homeward

Simple question:

any hererital translation in it? No (not that I have found)
will God use it to save souls? Yes

Debate over IMO

 

Never Deprive Anyone of Hope.. It Might Be ALL They Have

Posts 18828
Rosie Perera | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 1:40 AM

MarkStevens:

Bryan Brodess:
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.  

I searched for Witherington's critique of it, a post on his blog called "The Problem with the ESV" which several bloggers cited and responded to. However the original post has been removed from Witherington's blog and he apparently recanted most of it and apologized in the comments section before deleting the post entirely. This I learned here.

Posts 27980
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 1:44 AM

Russ Quinn:
The NRSV was theologically controversial for reasons beyond gender inclusiveness. Most famously it replaced "virgin" with "young woman" in Isaiah 7:14.

I keep getting lost in some of these discussions - I did not know the relationship between the ESV and the RSV - a tidbit worth knowing. But the NRSV re: Isaiah confuses me. As a Catholic I was taught that the Hebrew read "young woman" and the LXX read "virgin" ... anyone out there who can really read Hebrew and Greek well enough to explain this to me? Thanks.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 439
Mark Stevens | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 1:56 AM

MJ. Smith:
As a Catholic I was taught that the Hebrew read "young woman" and the LXX read "virgin" ... anyone out there who can really read Hebrew and Greek well enough to explain this to me?

This is correct.

Posts 2212
Damian McGrath | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 2:10 AM

MJ. Smith:
As a Catholic I was taught that the Hebrew read "young woman" and the LXX read "virgin"

The Hebrew reads almah and the LXX reads parthenos. The former usually refers to a young girl, the latter unequivocally means virgin.

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 3:26 AM

Alex Scott:
R. Mansfield:
How would you translate ἄνθρωπος in these passages, Alex?

By its literal meaning, 'man'.  To give it some other meaning is not translation but interpretation.  Now you may give it some other interpretation such as "a being in conflict at a transcendent level" but as soon as you do that you have narrowed down the various interpretations of the statement to a single one, and in so doing you totally miss the possibility of the corporate aspect of the new man as defined in Ephesians 2:15.

you just contradicted yourself. ESV did interpret in the other passages "self" which I think any honest person can understand what Paul was trying to say whether it is translated man or self. Yet in the passage above, The ESV interpreted it to be "man or men" would would be proper.

 

I think this is the just of the conversation here. Yes, I learned "old man" to mean old sin nature, or old self, But we do not speak this way today. Old Self would be a better interpretation today.

 

 

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 3:47 AM

Damian McGrath:
Alex Scott:
By its literal meaning, 'man'.

But therein lies the rub, surely?  What is the "literal meaning" of a word? Can the "literal meaning" of a Greek word be an english word?

Here we go. I do not even think it is so much the word that should be questioned. Unless of course we are talking transliterations like baptism, The problem is how the word is written, what tense, what person, other things that can not be found in the "word" tranlation.

 

Big example would be in acts 2 when Peter tells us to repent and be baptised, where repent is second person, and baptize is third person. Major difference in translation if this is known.. which can not be found in any version I know of.

 

This is what I am interested in. being able to interpret that word as written, not just the base word translation, as a "word for word" will give you..

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 15 2009 3:57 AM

JeremyEllis:
Bryan Brodess:

"I know not everyone knows Greek but is there any bible which translates every instance of every Greek word with the same English word?"

I think this says it all. My previous version yuo could only do a KJV interliniar. So I am happy as heck we can use other versions now!! Your right.. No version is perfect..

There is no such thing as translating every Greek word with the same English word. When (some)translators translate, they are trying to find the word or thought that is as close as possible to the Greek or Hebrew word, but it can never be an exact science.

Yes, I agree. which is why people will interpret under there own "bias" Huge example is 1 Peter 3: 21, where in the NIV the words "It saves you" are added to the text. And the translation "dirt body" replacing "filth flesh" which Paul spoke of as a figure of speach for sin which proced from the "old man" When someone tried to use this to prove thazt water baptism was essential to recieve eternal life I was floored!! And thus hated the NIV.. I see now however that the ESV has also tranlated dirt and body.. but leaves out" it saves you" which is not found in the origional text..

 

which is whay I also said. I do not think there is a pure translation. all of them have errors,,

Page 4 of 6 (112 items) « First ... < Previous 2 3 4 5 6 Next > | RSS