Comments on: The problems of literal translations http://shaddick.net/w/2009/10/the-problems-of-literal-translations/ Mission, IT & the Shaddick family Tue, 08 May 2012 04:10:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: The Matrix Bible? « Consider IT pure joy… http://shaddick.net/w/2009/10/the-problems-of-literal-translations/comment-page-1/#comment-158 The Matrix Bible? « Consider IT pure joy… Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:30:55 +0000 http://shaddick.net/w/?p=671#comment-158 [...] The problems of literal translations Tags books humour Africa missional pray music ICCM translation tv scribblings Profile film reviews church Kenya web software video AIM Bible Islam Google travel theology mission Archives [...] [...] The problems of literal translations Tags books humour Africa missional pray music ICCM translation tv scribblings Profile film reviews church Kenya web software video AIM Bible Islam Google travel theology mission Archives [...]

]]> By: Yusuf Garba http://shaddick.net/w/2009/10/the-problems-of-literal-translations/comment-page-1/#comment-121 Yusuf Garba Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:40:52 +0000 http://shaddick.net/w/?p=671#comment-121 this is a good attempt this is a good attempt

]]> By: Paul Shaddick http://shaddick.net/w/2009/10/the-problems-of-literal-translations/comment-page-1/#comment-46 Paul Shaddick Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:04:44 +0000 http://shaddick.net/w/?p=671#comment-46 It's a very good point Peter and an ongoing challenge for translators. Each idiom needs to be considered carefully in the light of its original and current readers. In the case of Saul "covering his feet" the likelihood of non-comprehension is high if the idiom is retained, but the original idiom seems likely to have been euphemistic so its purpose might better be retained by use of a modern euphemism, but "Saul went into the cave to use the bathroom" has some problems :) In the Hebrews example I would want to consider the evidence for the Greek being an idiom, but I suspect that removing the tripartite reference might generate more heat than light among contemporary theologians. It’s a very good point Peter and an ongoing challenge for translators. Each idiom needs to be considered carefully in the light of its original and current readers. In the case of Saul “covering his feet” the likelihood of non-comprehension is high if the idiom is retained, but the original idiom seems likely to have been euphemistic so its purpose might better be retained by use of a modern euphemism, but “Saul went into the cave to use the bathroom” has some problems :)

In the Hebrews example I would want to consider the evidence for the Greek being an idiom, but I suspect that removing the tripartite reference might generate more heat than light among contemporary theologians.

]]> By: Peter Parslow http://shaddick.net/w/2009/10/the-problems-of-literal-translations/comment-page-1/#comment-45 Peter Parslow Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:03:30 +0000 http://shaddick.net/w/?p=671#comment-45 But how do we know which things are idioms, and what the idioms mean? I'm happy enough that "covered his feet" is unlikely to be literal, and the contexts mean it doesn't matter too much, but "urinate" seems likely. But what about say Heb 4:12 - is Paul using an idiom from contemporary Greek, or does he accept the Greek idea that man has body, soul & spirit? I've heard there isn't much support for that in the Hebrew scriptures. But how do we know which things are idioms, and what the idioms mean?

I’m happy enough that “covered his feet” is unlikely to be literal, and the contexts mean it doesn’t matter too much, but “urinate” seems likely.

But what about say Heb 4:12 – is Paul using an idiom from contemporary Greek, or does he accept the Greek idea that man has body, soul & spirit? I’ve heard there isn’t much support for that in the Hebrew scriptures.

]]>