For starters, there are basically two philosophies or attitudes translators observe when translating the Bible: literal or complete equivalence, and dynamic equivalence.
literal translations
Literal translations are good for serious Bible study since they try to give as literal a translation of the original text as possible, even preserving much of the original word order. Unfortunately, this makes the translation much harder to read because of the variations between Greek/Hebrew and English styles.
dynamic translations
Dynamic translations are more readable since they don't place much importance on the original grammar and word order of the original--what is important is preserving the meaning of the text. Unfortunately, this brings a disadvantage for a person seriously studying Scripture.
disadvantages
Sometimes, the meaning of a text is understood more fully through subtle cues or hints in the text. These cues are preserved in the literal translation, but are mostly lost in dynamic translations. This gives the reader a greater risk of reading the translators' doctrinal view into the text. Consider the following example provided by the people at catholic.com:
...dynamic Protestant translations, such as the NIV, tend to translate the Greek word ergon and its derivatives as "work" when it reinforces Protestant doctrine but as something else (such as "deeds" or "doing") when it would serve Catholic doctrine.
The NIV renders Romans 4:2 "If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works (ergon), he had something to boast about—but not before God." This passage is used to support the Protestant doctrine of salvation by faith alone. But the NIV translates the erg- derivatives in Romans 2:6-7 differently: "God ‘will give to each person according to what he has done ( erga).’ To those who by persistence in doing (ergou) good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life."
If the erg- derivatives were translated consistently as "work" then it would be clear that the passage says God will judge "every person according to his works" and will give eternal life to those who seek immortality "by persistence in working good"—statements that support the Catholic view of salvation.
Of course, extreme literalism can also give problems. Again, consider the sample translations of Genesis 1:20 provided by the people at catholic.com:
"And saying is God, ‘Roaming is the water with the roaming, living soul, and the flyer is flying over the earth on the face of the atmosphere of the heavens’" (Concordant Version, an extremely literal version).
"And God said, ‘Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky’" (NIV).
middle ground
There are many alternatives that are neither directly literal nor dynamic. Again, catholic.com provides us good observations regarding these translations based on which end of the spectrum they tend to lean to:
Toward the literal end of the spectrum are translations such as the King James Version (KJV), the New King James Version (NKJV), the New American Standard (NAS), and the Douay-Rheims Version. Next come slightly less literal translations, such as the Revised Standard Version (RSV), and the Confraternity Version. Then there are mostly dynamic translations such as the New International Version (NIV) and the New American Bible (NAB).
And finally, toward the very dynamic end of the spectrum are translations such as the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB), the New English Bible (NEB), the Revised English Bible (REB), the Contemporary English Version (CEV), and the "Good News Bible," whose translation is called Today’s English Version (TEV).
inclusive versions
Nowadays, we also have versions that changed the genders used in the Bible. These versions usually replace "he" or "brothers" with "them" or "brothers and sisters'.
It also draws more on using "God" or "Jesus" when the original text uses "he". One example of this is the New Revised Standard Version, which retains the philosophy of the RSV but changes the genders to be more inclusive.
making the pick
It is your purpose that will help you make the decision. If your goal is a simple reading of the Bible, then dynamic translations would do, though you should be careful about the translators' views hidden in the text.
Of course, a serious Scripture study would lean more on the literal translation. Most theologians recommend the RSV Catholic Edition, which has been reissued by Ignatius Press.
Finally, catholic.com tells us that "In the end, there may not be a need to select only one translation of the Bible to use. There is no reason why a Catholic cannot collect several versions of the Bible, aware of the strengths and weaknesses of each. It is often possible to get a better sense of what is being said in a passage by comparing several different translations." The best Bible is "the one you’ll read."
***For a more detailed rendering of the topic, please visit http://www.catholic.com/library/Bible_Translations_Guide.asp where this page or article is heavily based upon.
Next in this series...
What do we mean when we say God is the author of Scripture? Why do we say it is God's Divine Word?
No comments:
Post a Comment