Translation pet peeve
I am absolutely annoyed to no end when Bible translators use the word LORD to translate the tetragrammaton. I fully understand why they do it. I just don't like it. It seems overly impersonal for the name of God.
Exodus 8:30 ESV: So Moses went out from Pharaoh and prayed to the Lord.
Exodus 8:30 NASB: So Moses went out from Pharaoh and made supplication to the Lord.
Thank you Lexham English Bible!
Exodus 8:30 LEB: And Moses went out from Pharaoh and prayed to Yahweh.
Does anyone else have any translation pet peeves?
Comments
-
Here's one of mine.
God SO loved the world THAT .... in various versions.
0 -
Not so much a translation as it is human mis-concption FROM the translation[one of many]:
Lucifer IS NOT another name for satan. Just start at the beginning and not in the middle.......
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Messiah instead of Christ, specifically when the translator's notes say something like: "This is the word we should really use..."
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
One of the features of my Bible software is the ability to re-write the text. You select one version you like, it makes a copy of that Bible renaming it, and then you can edit the text as needed for issues like these. In my case, I like a literal translation, YLT being decent. But YLT somehow goes crazy periodically as to exactly where he got a choice.
The issue Josh introduces was one of the root differences between the 2nd Temple Judaism and the early Christians who consciously reversed the view of God (coincidentally going back to the Canaanite patterns).
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
The problem can be solved by reading the OT in Hebrew/Aramaic and the NT in Greek. The translation is perfect !! [;)]
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Lee said:
Here's one of mine.
God SO loved the world THAT .... in various versions.
I know! However, this is not the translators fault - this is the publisher unwilling to sell a product with everyone's favorite verse changed. I'm happy the NET went against the grain and translated it "For this is the way God loved the world..."
0 -
George Somsel said:
The problem can be solved by reading the OT in Hebrew/Aramaic and the NT in Greek. The translation is perfect !!
ναι [Y]
0 -
George Somsel said:
The problem can be solved by reading the OT in Hebrew/Aramaic and the NT in Greek. The translation is perfect !!
If you are going to read the Alexandrian text of the NT don't you also want to read the Alexandrian text of the OT? So just also use the Greek OT text and stay consistent. After all if the Alexandrians were right in 300 ad does it not also stand to reason that they were right in 300 bc? [[The 300 bc Alexandrian OT text no longer exists in Hebrew except for samples found with the Dead Sea Scrolls so it needs to be read in its translation - the LXX Greek]][There are three NT Greeks - which is perfect? There are 2 OT texts - one of which was translated into the Greek and is not available in Hebrew - which is perfect?][[its a trick question]] [[[Still looking for better textbooks - the Andrews set did not help my prior question]]]0 -
Josh said:
Thank you Lexham English Bible!
Exodus 8:30 LEB: And Moses went out from Pharaoh and prayed to Yahweh.
Does anyone else have any translation pet peeves?
A couple...
It chafes me when the waaw is used in Yahweh, but a vaav is used in all other Hebrew words. Why? A little consistency, please. (Waaw is Biblical.)
It chafes me when people use Yahweh, because it's not correct. It's Y'hohwaah, but since few will agree, people should just use YHWH (as I do [A] ) and pronounce as they prefer.
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 -
David Ames said:
After all if the Alexandrians were right in 300 ad does it not also stand to reason that they were right in 300 bc?
Uh...NO.
Why would you expect consistency in understanding (based on location) for individuals separated by a distance of 600 years?
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 -
David Paul said:
It chafes me when the waaw is used in Yahweh, but a vaav is used in all other Hebrew words. Why? A little consistency, please. (Waaw is Biblical.)
It chafes me when people use Yahweh, because it's not correct. It's Y'hohwaah, but since few will agree, people should just use YHWH (as I do
) and pronounce as they prefer.Wow! Only one he. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
ok, so who has finished reading the book 'satan' logos edition l.s. chafer?
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
I know my use of "aa" for the Hebrew long "a" bugs you, George, but I use it for a very simple, logical reason. The reason the qaamaats is a long "a" and patthahh is a short "a" is because the qaamaats is pronounced LONGER than patthahh.
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 -
Room4more said:
ok, so who has finished reading the book 'satan' logos edition l.s. chafer?
Not I, said the cat. I haven't even downloaded it.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
David Paul said:
I know my use of "aa" for the Hebrew long "a" bugs you, George, but I use it for a very simple, logical reason. The reason the qaamaats is a long "a" and patthahh is a short "a" is because the qaamaats is pronounced LONGER than patthahh.
Yes? Well, you are about the only one to do so. Besides, sometimes (in closed unaccented syllables) it isn't even a long "a" but more like a short "o."
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:David Paul said:
I know my use of "aa" for the Hebrew long "a" bugs you, George, but I use it for a very simple, logical reason. The reason the qaamaats is a long "a" and patthahh is a short "a" is because the qaamaats is pronounced LONGER than patthahh.
Yes? Well, you are about the only one to do so. Besides, sometimes (in closed unaccented syllables) it isn't even a long "a" but more like a short "o."
like: oo you are soo kool!
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
Josh said:
I am absolutely annoyed to no end when Bible translators use the word LORD to translate the tetragrammaton. I fully understand why they do it. I just don't like it. It seems overly impersonal for the name of God.
I choose to make visual filters for my translational peeves like this. This way all your translations can say what you want them to..or at least highlight original language words in ways that are helpful to you. You can see my YHWH filter here: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/16999.aspx
Jacob Hantla
Pastor/Elder, Grace Bible Church
gbcaz.org0 -
George Somsel said:David Paul said:
I know my use of "aa" for the Hebrew long "a" bugs you, George, but I use it for a very simple, logical reason. The reason the qaamaats is a long "a" and patthahh is a short "a" is because the qaamaats is pronounced LONGER than patthahh.
Yes? Well, you are about the only one to do so.
Well, call me a trend setter then [8-|] ...and I'm quite sure there are many other things related to Scripture where I am "about the only one to do" or teach them. I'm okay with that. Say what you want, but it won't always be that way.
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 -
David Paul said:
Well, call me a trend setter then
...and I'm quite sure there are many other things related to Scripture where I am "about the only one to do" or teach them. I'm okay with that. Say what you want, but it won't always be that way.You flatter yourself overmuch.george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
My translation pet peeve is people having a pet peeve rather than recognizing translators have to make compromises in order to best meet the need of their ideal intended audience which I not me. I much prefer to have my pet translations such as Psalm 4 in the Jerusalem Bible ... I measure all other translations against it even though i know the grammatical argument against the translation.
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 -
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 -
Jacob Hantla said:Josh said:
I am absolutely annoyed to no end when Bible translators use the word LORD to translate the tetragrammaton. I fully understand why they do it. I just don't like it. It seems overly impersonal for the name of God.
I choose to make visual filters for my translational peeves like this. This way all your translations can say what you want them to..or at least highlight original language words in ways that are helpful to you. You can see my YHWH filter here: http://community.logos.com/forums/t/16999.aspx
Another option is inserting tetragrammaton along with highlighting some nearby words:
Members of Faithlife group Logos Visual Filters => https://faithlife.com/logos-visual-filters can use https://documents.logos.com to copy Highlighting palette then Visual Filter.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
MJ. Smith said:
recognizing translators have to make compromises in order to best meet the need of their ideal intended audience
Not that any bible translator, or committee would ever, never ever, be motivated by an agenda...
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Josh,
As you probably know, the HCSB includes the name “Yahweh” in its translation. Admittedly, even they only translate a certain number of passages that actually use this personal name. Like Jacob, I use a Visual Filter to highlight the rest.
I find value including the HCSB in my studies. As far as a pet peeve with this translation, while I appreciate its accuracy and generally readability, as a reader I do find it a bit “clunky” compared to the NIV.
They really need to remove or significantly reduce those note bullets as I find them very distracting. If they invested some time in refining their product from a readability standpoint, it would become certainly one of the best English translations from my perspective. Notwithstanding this pet peeve, I continue to be impressed by its accuracy with regards to the Greek NT.
Regards
0 -
Paul Golder said:
Not that any bible translator, or committee would ever, never ever, be motivated by an agenda...
...or a broken hermeneutic.
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 -
Mark O'Hearn said:
I find value including the HCSB in my studies. As far as a pet peeve with this translation, while I appreciate its accuracy and generally readability, as a reader I do find it a bit “clunky” compared to the NIV.
I remember when this translation came out and my friends and I were reviewing it, and we came to a consensus (fair or unfair, as it were) that each paragraph in the translator's notes should begin with: "In order to be different from the NIV..."
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Good one (again), Paul.
I do agree, though, with MJ. Most translations unavoidably are marketing products for the audience they wish to sell to. That's one big reason why I keep a sizable number of translations ... not for the accuracy of the words, but as to which market would alter the wording.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
George Somsel said:
You flatter yourself overmuch.David Paul said:Well, call me a trend setter then
...and I'm quite sure there are many other things related to Scripture where I am "about the only one to do" or teach them. I'm okay with that. Say what you want, but it won't always be that way.Plethorically.
DISCLAIMER: What you do on YOUR computer is your doing.
0 -
[:D]
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 -
My biggest pet peeve is with the NEB. Genesis 11 begins "Once upon a time..." seriously? In the Bible? That alone has made me disregard the entire translation..
0 -
DMB said:
I do agree, though, with MJ. Most translations unavoidably are marketing products for the audience they wish to sell to. That's one big reason why I keep a sizable number of translations ... not for the accuracy of the words, but as to which market would alter the wording.
Always a excellent practice.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Alan Charles Gielczyk said:
My biggest pet peeve is with the NEB. Genesis 11 begins "Once upon a time..." seriously? In the Bible? That alone has made me disregard the entire translation..
[:D]
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 long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...."Alan Charles Gielczyk said:My biggest pet peeve is with the NEB. Genesis 11 begins "Once upon a time..." seriously? In the Bible? That alone has made me disregard the entire translation..
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
"A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...."Alan Charles Gielczyk said:My biggest pet peeve is with the NEB. Genesis 11 begins "Once upon a time..." seriously? In the Bible? That alone has made me disregard the entire translation..
"A long time ago in a dispensation far, far away...".
Gotta love fiction! [li]
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 -
David Paul said:
Gotta love fiction!
What we have in Gen is actually fiction. There were no New York Times reporters there to tell exactly what happened and what was said. Scratch that since the NYT is largely fiction as well. Nevertheless, you get the point. This was not written to help the reader understand what happened historically. If it had done that, it would be virtually useless. It is theological literature aimed at inculcating a view of man and his place in the world.george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
What we have in Gen is actually fiction
Not necessarily...
--->> Insert a likely unconvincing
literalists argument here that you have heard before <<---My point of view anyway.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Some pet peeves:
1. Sentences beginning with "And." It's good Hebrew (and Greek) style, but it's bad in an English translation, and adds nothing to comprehension.
2. Popular verses that we know aren't quite accurate but keep anyway out of tradition (usually held over from KJV). Psalm 23:6 "I will dwell in the house of the Lord FOREVER," Luke 2:7 "There was no room for them in the INN," and John 3:16 "For God SO loved the world" top my list.
3. Capitalizing pronouns for God. HCSB comes to mind.
4. Using "they" and "their" as a singular pronoun (NIV2011). I know it's entered modern usage and has a long history of use, but it makes a lot of us cringe, especially when read in public worship.
5. Unnecessary pluralization or shift to second person to avoid masculine pronouns, especially when it obscures OT references to Christ. In some languages it's necessary for comprehension, but not in English.
0 -
elnwood said:
4. Using "they" and "their" as a singular pronoun (NIV2011). I know it's entered modern usage and has a long history of use, but it makes a lot of us cringe, especially when read in public worship.
5. Unnecessary pluralization or shift to second person to avoid masculine pronouns, especially when it obscures OT references to Christ. In some languages it's necessary for comprehension, but not in English.
Both of these are attempts to eliminate the masculine gender. This is a tendency in pop culture today. "He" was formerly the pronoun used when the gender was unknown or could be either, but today babies are "she" (μὴ γένοιτο that anyone should ever use the neuter which was a common practice in Greek). Similarly others who are already born are routinely verbally transgendered into the feminine. It's political correctness run amok. I think they feel that they must make "reparations" for all of those years when the masculine was used. It amounts to the wussification of society.george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Absolutely correct, George. Both the OT and later the NT are primarily targeted towards one of the genders run amok. One big reason why in my mother's generation, women didn't sit on juries; the men couldn't bear the shame. [A]
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Elnwood ... you want to expand a bit on Luke 2.7? I'm admittedly having trouble finding a source that doesn't use 'inn', guest lodging, or similar.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
DMB said:
Elnwood ... you want to expand a bit on Luke 2.7? I'm admittedly having trouble finding a source that doesn't use 'inn', guest lodging, or similar.
http://biblestudymagazine.com/preview/NovDec09Manger.pdf
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Thanks, Paul. That one's a bit of touch and go. Especially since the alternative uses in Mark / Luke assume a translation as well (e.g. circular logic).
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
DMB said:
Thanks, Paul. That one's a bit of touch and go. Especially since the alternative uses in Mark / Luke assume a translation as well (e.g. circular logic).
True, but taking what is known, Joseph's family is from Bethlehem, and also that current archaeological evidence shows that the animals were kept in houses, it would seem more likely that it was a room in a house, and the the "inn" is more likely a tradition.
"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
Josh said:
I am absolutely annoyed to no end when Bible translators use the word LORD to translate the tetragrammaton. I fully understand why they do it. I just don't like it. It seems overly impersonal for the name of God.
Does anyone else have any translation pet peeves?
I'm not sure how LORD became the normal way to translate this but I agree with you.
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
George Somsel said:
Both of these are attempts to eliminate the masculine gender. This is a tendency in pop culture today. "He" was formerly the pronoun used when the gender was unknown or could be either, but today babies are "she" (μὴ γένοιτο that anyone should ever use the neuter which was a common practice in Greek). Similarly others who are already born are routinely verbally transgendered into the feminine. It's political correctness run amok. I think they feel that they must make "reparations" for all of those years when the masculine was used. It amounts to the wussification of society.elnwood said:4. Using "they" and "their" as a singular pronoun (NIV2011). I know it's entered modern usage and has a long history of use, but it makes a lot of us cringe, especially when read in public worship.
5. Unnecessary pluralization or shift to second person to avoid masculine pronouns, especially when it obscures OT references to Christ. In some languages it's necessary for comprehension, but not in English.
One man's wussification is another man's acknowledgement that the Kingdom of God is not for men first and women simply by extension. When I have a (currently hypothetical) daughter and she reads Genesis for the first time, I don't want to have to explain to her "well the Bible says 'man,' but you're created in God's image too." I don't want her to read Thessalonians 1:4 and think that God has chosen her brothers, and she just gets to tag along as an afterthought. These translation decisions affect people in ways more subtle than we often realize, and by the time anyone teaches what the text "really" means, the damage has already been done.
0 -
Bruce Dunning said:
I'm not sure how LORD became the normal way to translate this but I agree with you.
The Septuagint typically translates
YHWH as κύριος or "Lord". Most English translations use
"LORD" which serves as a mnemonic device for YHWH, since
they both have four letters."As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."
0 -
I get bothered when translators choose to use gender-neutral language instead of the original gender. I know why they do this (trying to translate what they believe the meaning is) but I don't like it.
This is why I don't like the TNIV and the NIV 2010. Actually that is a whole other conversation. I also really disliked how they eliminated the NIV84 and how they call the NIV 2010 just NIV. Did this bother anyone else?
Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God
0 -
Well, I for one, bought the NIV84 simply because it didn't have that awful gender-neutral language. Frankly I can't stand the NIV, but the purchase was well worth it. I'm keeping it out of my Libronix for the time being though.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0 -
Bruce Dunning said:Josh said:
I am absolutely annoyed to no end when Bible translators use the word LORD to translate the tetragrammaton. I fully understand why they do it. I just don't like it. It seems overly impersonal for the name of God.
Does anyone else have any translation pet peeves?
I'm not sure how LORD became the normal way to translate this but I agree with you.
That's fairly simple. If you remember, people used to use Jehovah as the name of God. That is because the Jews did not pronounce הַשם (the Name) so they used אַדֹנַי (Lord) instead. Jehovah is הַשֵׁם with the vowels from אַדֹנַי which were used as the pointing to remind the reader to say אַדֹנַי rather than Yahweh.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Mitchell said:
One man's wussification is another man's acknowledgement that the Kingdom of God is not for men first and women simply by extension. When I have a (currently hypothetical) daughter and she reads Genesis for the first time, I don't want to have to explain to her "well the Bible says 'man,' but you're created in God's image too." I don't want her to read Thessalonians 1:4 and think that God has chosen her brothers, and she just gets to tag along as an afterthought. These translation decisions affect people in ways more subtle than we often realize, and by the time anyone teaches what the text "really" means, the damage has already been done.
No one until recently would have denied that women were included. The problem today is that people are no longer properly educated in his own language. It arises because people are too ignorant to understand.george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0
