Suggestion: NASB77 Version

Page 1 of 2 (29 items) 1 2 Next >
This post has 28 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 121
Mark Watson | Forum Activity | Posted: Thu, Feb 18 2010 5:12 AM

Mark A. Smith:

Mark Watson:
Mark - I did a quick search and found that several other Bible Software companies, including free ones, were still selling the 77 version alongside the 95 version.  Some even had both bundled together. 

Interesting. I don't know what could be done. Logos has stated it can no longer sell the '77 version, but we haven't been told why not if an effort were made whether that could change.

I would suggest a suggestion be made through the suggestion forum to this effect.

I have the '77 version in Logos but really use it infrequently. I have bound study Bible in the '77 NASB that I sometimes bring out. When I do it is handy to have the older version on Logos to follow along with. Handy, but not essential. I wonder if I'd buy it if it were available in Logos and I didn't already have it?

Here is the suggestion.  There seems to be an interest in this.

 

Posts 550
Shawn Drewett | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Feb 18 2010 6:36 AM

I already have this but I want others to have it that don't so here is my vote.

Posts 1055
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Feb 18 2010 11:24 PM

What's better of the NASB77 over NASB95?

Posts 550
Shawn Drewett | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 6:01 AM

New American Standard Bible (Updated)

The NASBU differs from the NASB in only a couple of ways. One is in regard to its technique of translation. It has moved toward the dynamic-equivalence philosophy of translation because it omits numbers of conjunctions and shows more of a departure from the original than does the NASB (#3). The NASBU is still within the range of literal translations, but those changes reduce its effectiveness for study purposes. The other difference results from the same changes and produces an improvement in the style of English (#5), but the changes do not raise the level of readability of the NASBU substantially. In the judgment of most, it is still ‘wooden’. The NASBU still enjoys the advantage of the Tyndale lineage (#1), of a sound textual basis (#2), and of a conservative theological stance (#3).

From "How to choose a bible version" by R.L. THomas.

Posts 1539
Terry Poperszky | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 6:27 AM

Personally I stopped using it because of the artificial use of Thees and Thous in reference to Divinity. I found that to be totally inconsistent with the philosophy of the rest of the translation and a constant irritant.

 

 

Posts 1055
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 11:14 AM

I see. Thank you so much.

But now I prefer ESV more than NASB, basically because of the reverse interlinear in ESV (I purchased the printed one, contains only NT) and the HDNT (ESV). These devices help me to jump directly into Greek from ESV. And after that, insights from how the others translate the Bible might help too (NASB95, Darby). I will say Darby is actually much better than NASB. The only weakness is the old English, older textual basis, and the wrong English Grammar (use English but in the concept of Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic). E.g. Eph 1:3-14 is in one sentence as in Greek, but I never find a modern translation do so (tell me if there is), except RcV, which is not popular and can be found only from its publisher (that's why it is not in Logos).

Posts 5637
Todd Phillips | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 11:35 AM

Kolen Cheung:
E.g. Eph 1:3-14 is in one sentence as in Greek, but I never find a modern translation do so (tell me if there is), except RcV, which is not popular and can be found only from its publisher (that's why it is not in Logos).

The American Standard Version, Young's Literal Translation, Wuest's Expanded translation, and the Lexham English Bible all translate that passage as one sentence (and they are all in Logos). The Lexham English Bible is the only one with a reverse interlinear in it.

Wiki Links: Enabling Logging / Detailed Search Help - MacBook Pro (2014), ThinkPad E570

Posts 1055
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 12:01 PM

Todd Phillips:
The American Standard Version, Young's Literal Translation, Wuest's Expanded translation, and the Lexham English Bible all translate that passage as one sentence (and they are all in Logos). The Lexham English Bible is the only one with a reverse interlinear in it.

Thanks. But ASV, YLT are not modern. YLT is around the time of Darby. ASV is more modern than them, but not modern enough...

Thanks for the Wuest's Expanded translation, it is the first time I heard about that (sorry to be ignorant). It is interesting to read that "a literal New Testament translation that follows the word order in the Greek quite strictly." That might be a good modern translation. I will look at that soon. Thanks.

Lexham might be good too (especially it has reverse interlinear, where Darby doesn't). Thanks.

But the bad thing about Wuest's Expanded translation, and the Lexham English Bible is that they have the NT only! And WET do not subdivide the sentence according to the verse (verses might not make sense, but easy to refer to).

Thanks again. The information did help. It will be great to see that Lexham English Bible covers OT.

Posts 187
Anthony Etienne | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 12:31 PM

Shawn Drewett:

New American Standard Bible (Updated)

The NASBU differs from the NASB in only a couple of ways. One is in regard to its technique of translation. It has moved toward the dynamic-equivalence philosophy of translation because it omits numbers of conjunctions and shows more of a departure from the original than does the NASB (#3). The NASBU is still within the range of literal translations, but those changes reduce its effectiveness for study purposes. The other difference results from the same changes and produces an improvement in the style of English (#5), but the changes do not raise the level of readability of the NASBU substantially. In the judgment of most, it is still ‘wooden’. The NASBU still enjoys the advantage of the Tyndale lineage (#1), of a sound textual basis (#2), and of a conservative theological stance (#3).

From "How to choose a bible version" by R.L. THomas.

 

I was about to cite this book as well, in answer to the orig posters' question. This is a very good book IMO:

Posts 3883
Floyd Johnson | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 12:40 PM

Todd Phillips:
E.g. Eph 1:3-14 is in one sentence as in Greek, but I never find a modern translation do so (tell me if there is), except RcV, which is not popular and can be found only from its publisher (that's why it is not in Logos).

Remember, the original Greek manuscripts did not have the text divided into sentences, though the modern printed editions of our Greek text do add them.  Translators may read the passage differently than the editors of the Greek text.

Blessings,

Floyd

Blessings,
Floyd

Pastor-Patrick.blogspot.com

Posts 1055
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 12:43 PM

But from the Grammar we can tell it is one single sentence, right?

Posts 3883
Floyd Johnson | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 12:51 PM

Kolen Cheung:
But from the Grammar we can tell it is one single sentence, right?

I certainly am not the one to ask.  I have to assume that Greek editors and translators know more than me and that differences of opinions are possible and allowed.

Blessings,

Floyd

Blessings,
Floyd

Pastor-Patrick.blogspot.com

Posts 1674
Paul Golder | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 12:56 PM

Terry Poperszky:

Personally I stopped using it because of the artificial use of Thees and Thous in reference to Divinity. I found that to be totally inconsistent with the philosophy of the rest of the translation and a constant irritant.

Do you think that this was a way to introduce a modern English version of the Bible to those who had spent their lives in the KJV?

"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."

Posts 1539
Terry Poperszky | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 1:01 PM

Paul Golder:
Do you think that this was a way to introduce a modern English version of the Bible to those who had spent their lives in the KJV?

Paul, I don't know, but I assume if it was then they would have mentioned it as part of their translation philosophy. I really have never seen any reason given for doing it, but if that was it, then it is certainly non-intuitive from my view point. But then again, so much is Big Smile

 

 

Posts 1674
Paul Golder | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 1:07 PM

Terry Poperszky:

Paul Golder:
Do you think that this was a way to introduce a modern English version of the Bible to those who had spent their lives in the KJV?

Paul, I don't know, but I assume if it was then they would have mentioned it as part of their translation philosophy. I really have never any reason given for doing it, but if that was it, then it is certainly non-intuitive from my view point. But then again, so much is Big Smile

It's the only reason that makes sense to me. It goes along with how all Biblical based movie characters, of the time, always used them also. It was still an era where "church language" was different from spoken language...

"As any translator will attest, a literal translation is no translation at all."

Posts 1055
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 2:07 PM

Floyd Johnson:
I have to assume that Greek editors and translators know more than me and that differences of opinions are possible and allowed.

I think we could determine the sentence division except for some rare case. The sign for this determination is from the verb used. Of course, I am not an expert on Greek as well so I am kind of hesitate to bring out this point.

Posts 121
Mark Watson | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 10:06 PM

Kolen Cheung:
But now I prefer ESV more than NASB, basically because of the reverse interlinear in ESV (I purchased the printed one, contains only NT) and the HDNT (ESV). These devices help me to jump directly into Greek from ESV. And after that, insights from how the others translate the Bible might help too (NASB95, Darby). I will say Darby is actually much better than NASB. The only weakness is the old English, older textual basis, and the wrong English Grammar (use English but in the concept of Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic). E.g. Eph 1:3-14 is in one sentence as in Greek, but I never find a modern translation do so (tell me if there is), except RcV, which is not popular and can be found only from its publisher (that's why it is not in Logos).
Hey, you changed the point of this thread.  I believe that is called hijacking.  Please start a new thread in the future.

The original post was about Logos offering the NASB77 version alongside the NASB95 version.  Does anyone else want to see the NASB77 version in Logos?  Please post.  (This is the original point of this thread).

Another thread stated that Lockman will grant Logos the rights to sell the 77 version if they want to.

Posts 36090
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 10:13 PM

Mark Watson:
ey, you changed the point of this thread.  I believe that is called hijacking.  Please start a new thread in the future.

As a new thread would it be Logos related? I'd call this thread drift and let it be.

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

Posts 1055
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Fri, Feb 19 2010 11:43 PM

Well, I am sorry about it.

Posts 5637
Todd Phillips | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Feb 20 2010 8:38 AM

Mark Watson:
Hey, you changed the point of this thread.  I believe that is called hijacking

Threads are conversations and they naturally go other ways.  You may always feel free to post a response to the original topic, despite what others are discussing.  Besides, there is a more in-depth and current thread on the original topic if you wish to continue that conversation: NASB77 vs NASB95

As to the original topic, the post in the other thread made it sound like the availability of the 77 version was a done deal and all we need to do is wait for it to be made available for purchase.

 

Wiki Links: Enabling Logging / Detailed Search Help - MacBook Pro (2014), ThinkPad E570

Page 1 of 2 (29 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS