Translation Debate
I have been using the CSB for sometime now but I have recently come to question that decision. What resources in logos do you recommend that speak to the translation debate issue? I am interested in comparisons between the literal and dynamic equivalent approaches to interpretation. Thanks!
Comments
-
Why not just have one (or two) of each type of Bible open in Logos at the same time, and see the differences for yourself?
0 -
RJ said:
Why not just have one (or two) of each type of Bible open in Logos at the same time, and see the differences for yourself?
Thanks RJ. The translation philosophy behind translations is important particularly in choosing your primary translation. Yes I can use the Text Comparison tool to determine what the differences are between the different translations. I may like a particular reading in one translation over that of other translations but what I want to know is, which translation is closest to the original text. When I look at bible translation comparison charts, the NASB and the ESV are closest in word for word translation. See here Written another way, which translation best coveys the original text and intent of the author. I have recently read Understanding English Bible Translation: The Case for an Essentially Literal Approach | Logos Bible Software which was on the twitter sale this week. I am also looking at The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations? | Logos Bible Software and Understanding Scripture: An Overview of the Bible’s Origin, Reliability, and Meaning | Logos Bible Software. There are probably other resources in Logos that would be helpful. In order to get a balanced view I want to look at translations from different perspectives. It is important to me that the observations, interpretations and applications that I make in my studies are based upon the Word of God as God inspired the human authors with as little as possible of private interpretations. I want translation not interpretation as I read or study the text.
0 -
I found this Mobile Ed course to be helpful:
Mobile Ed: BI181 Introducing Bible Translations (2 hour course) | Logos Bible Software
0 -
It looks like the Mobile Ed course I linked above is also a part of a bigger bundle with three courses on bible translation:
Bible Translations Bundle (3 courses) | Logos Bible Software
0 -
Okay last one I promise, lol. I found two more books by typing this search into the library store inside logos:
subject:bible-translating
Mark Strauss has apparently done a lot on this topic, these both happen to be by him:
40 Questions about Bible Translation (40 Questions Series) | Logos Bible Software
0 -
Bard/Gemini said:
Yes, Eugene Nida regretted the way the distinction between dynamic and formal equivalence in Bible translation was sometimes misapplied. Here's why:
- Oversimplification: The terms "dynamic equivalence" and "formal equivalence" were helpful in starting discussions about translation philosophies. However, they were often treated as rigid categories rather than a spectrum of possible approaches.
- Prioritizing 'Meaning' over Form: Some translators using the dynamic equivalence label prioritized conveying the perceived meaning of a text, sometimes at the expense of the original wording and cultural context. Nida believed it was important to balance meaning with as much of the original form as possible.
- Ethnocentrism: Unfortunately, some interpretations of dynamic equivalence led to imposing Western cultural assumptions onto the Biblical texts instead of faithfully representing the original cultures.
Nida emphasized that good translation involves a complex interplay between form and meaning. He later preferred the terms "functional equivalence" over "dynamic equivalence" to better convey this balance.
Note re: preserving form: English is an SVO language i.e. Subject-Verb-Object is the normal sentence order. Biblical Hebrew is VSO and Biblical Greek although relatively free is most often SVO.
Note I used Bard instead of going on a personal rant which would have been controversial.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
... instead of going on a personal rant which would have been controversial.
After reading Robert Alter's Art of Biblical Translation, I'm reluctant to make decisions on the labels. They might be descriptive, but not necessarily correlating to good translation.
Better to choose a translation that agrees with what you think. Smiling.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Michael Kinch said:
What resources in logos do you recommend that speak to the translation debate issue?
I'd say as strongly as I can to simply not have a 'translation debate.' Go watch Mark Ward's videos on which version is "the best." Here's the link to his youtube channel. Look for videos titled, "The xyz Version is the Best Bible Translation," where xyz can be KJV, NIV, ESV, CSB, etc.
It'll be worth your time.
Eating a steady diet of government cheese, and living in a van down by the river.
0 -
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
A debate may be more fun than research?
One solution is to utilize the original languages. Logos has many tools for that.
Gold package, and original language material and ancient text material, SIL and UBS books, discourse Hebrew OT and Greek NT. PC with Windows 11
0 -
Michael Kinch said:
The translation philosophy behind translations is important particularly in choosing your primary translation.
You should question this assumption. In the 1960's a new translation of the Chinese classic I Ching was published that immediately got accolades as being the best English translation yet. The joke was that the translator did not know Chinese. His translation was built on multiple translations in multiple European languages. He simply "translated" what all the translations seemed to point towards. Stephen Mitchell took a somewhat similar approach at times. I'm just saying don't swallow your assumption without thought. I would suggest that you read a couple of text books on the skill of translation. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications - Kindle edition by Munday, Jeremy, Ramos Pinto, Sara, Blakesley, Jacob. Reference Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com. is a reasonable starting point. (Admittedly I am familiar with an early edition.)
Michael Kinch said:literal and dynamic equivalent approaches to interpretation.
You realize that Nida proposed these terms in the mid 60's and changed to literal and functional equivalents as he considered his original terminology to being misunderstood/abused. Furthermore, since the mid 90's translations have been evaluated by multidimensional models because Nida's model is deemed over-simplistic.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
David Paul said:
...it IS...NASB95.
After having to check the translation, of various translations I've tried to use as a common base, I've ended up with Emphasized Bible (early 1900s). I got tired of fit-the-doctine modern translations (including so-called literal).
Emphasized follows a more classical fit-the-language, including how style connotes meaning. Originally, it worked off of Tregales, and then updated to Westcott for the NT. I'm hoping to compare it to Alter's OT.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Thanks everyone! Some great suggestions and comments here.
0 -
Michael Kinch said:
I want translation not interpretation as I read or study the text.
see this thread - https://community.logos.com/forums/p/221386/1288126.aspx#1288126
Making Disciples! Logos Ecosystem = LogosMax on Microsoft Surface Pro 7 (Win11), Android app on tablet, FSB on iPhone & iPad mini, Proclaim (Proclaim Remote on Fire Tablet).
0 -
There is simply no such animal as a "literal word for word" translation from one language to another.
Personally, I prefer the NIV 1984 edition as my favorite translation, most of the time. However, I preach from the ESV because my congregation cannot buy a new 1984 edition of the NIV, and I just do not like the post-1984 editions.
Always go back to the Hebrew and Greek text, or to somebody who can go back to the Hebrew and Greek text. No English translation is perfect.
"In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church," John Wesley0
