Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Translating the Bible is a vexed task

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 183 posts

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#51

Post by bentley »

mattigames wrote: post #46
bentley wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was describing these people’s motivation. It goes without saying that that’s what they believe.

No it doesn't go without saying, specially because it means the translations are extremely biased towards showing a positive view of the texts and towards translations likely to reinforce their existing believes.

“Bob Johnson’s fundraising efforts for John Smith’s campaign were motivated by a desire to seat the best candidate as President.”

Does that sentence say that Smith is the best candidate? No, it says that Johnson thinks that.

Would it be better if it were reworded to “…were motivated by a desire to seat who he thought was the best candidate as President”? No, that would just be redundant.

Does the original sentence imply that Johnson holds an unbiased, objective opinion of Smith? Of course not. If anything, it implies the opposite!

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#52

Post by mattigames »

samus wrote: post #43
mattigames wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*what they believe it's the most important document in history (because most have been indoctrinated from a very young age to believe so)

Since a lot of people put a lot of faith in these texts, their importance is not just a mere belief.

The word that I meant to emphasize there was "most", as in of course there is a practical importance involved in any document people give importance, but "importance" in 2 very different contexts, one from the metaphysical/spiritual knowledge they believe it has vs the behaviors it incites among it's believers.

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#53

Post by mattigames »

bentley wrote: post #51
mattigames wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it doesn't go without saying, specially because it means the translations are extremely biased towards showing a positive view of the texts and towards translations likely to reinforce their existing believes.

“Bob Johnson’s fundraising efforts for John Smith’s campaign were motivated by a desire to seat the best candidate as President.” Does that sentence say that Smith is the best candidate? No, it says that Johnson thinks that. Would it be better if it were reworded to “…were motivated by a desire to seat who he thought was the best candidate as President”? No, that would just be redundant. Does the original sentence im…

In your example "a desire" is unambiguously "the desire of Bob Johnson", but in your initial comment "a desire" is not part of a sentence or even paragraph that mentions an individual or a group, therefore is likely to make the readers assume the author (in this case you) is the one making the claim (in this case that means assuming you are the one who believes it's the most important document)

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#54

Post by shakna »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #44

Americans have a weird fixation on translating the Bible. No religion apart from Protestants attempt to interpret holy texts without supporting ancient commentsry. Jews have the Talmud and other commentaries, Muslims have hadiths, Orthodox and Catholic Christians have centuries of commentaries by saints, similarly Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism and others all have many supporting texts, not just a single canonical one. Y…

Protestants are absolutely trained to make use of commentaries. Its one of the bare fundamentals of exegesis, which is taught in first year in basically every Bible college. Its nonsensical to say that they ignore the masses of study on these documents.

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#55

Post by beardyw »

mattigames wrote: post #46
bentley wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was describing these people’s motivation. It goes without saying that that’s what they believe.

No it doesn't go without saying, specially because it means the translations are extremely biased towards showing a positive view of the texts and towards translations likely to reinforce their existing believes.

If you search online it is easy to find parallel texts showing, say, the Koine Greek and English side by side. I think you should try to see what you make of them.

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#56

Post by shakna »

Waterluvian wrote: post #41
joelhaasnoot wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also how do you translate concepts that were clearly known to the readers to modern times. Do you entrust that readers have someone to tell them what this would've meant, or do you adapt to something more apt in their language. For example in countries where they don't each bread made from wheat or that isn't a staple, daily food, what do you translate for bread?

In high school our Shakespeare books had the text on the left and explanations on the right. The explanations were mostly to deal with what you’re bringing up.

There are actually Bibles that do this (like the Interlinear), with accompanying commentaries as well. You'll often find them on the desks and shelves of preachers, because they consider it their job to dive into that research, understand it, and then convey that understanding to those who haven't been trained in the literary arts.

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#57

Post by Luker88 »

Where do I find a literal translation of the bible?

I would like one that does not force a meaning on words that are not known. I think have read enough fiction with made up words to be able to understand something anyway.

Also, maybe not based on Latin? Latin was not the original language anyway, and I got fed up with the mistranslations that we keep repeating as correct.

I gave up after searching and learning the history of the text, but maybe something exists, even if it is not recognized by this or that church?

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#58

Post by bentley »

mattigames wrote: post #53
bentley wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Bob Johnson’s fundraising efforts for John Smith’s campaign were motivated by a desire to seat the best candidate as President.” Does that sentence say that Smith is the best candidate? No, it says that Johnson thinks that. Would it be better if it were reworded to “…were motivated by a desire to seat who he thought was the best candidate as President”? No, that would just be redundant. Does the original sentence im…

In your example "a desire" is unambiguously "the desire of Bob Johnson", but in your initial comment "a desire" is not part of a sentence or even paragraph that mentions an individual or a group, therefore is likely to make the readers assume the author (in this case you) is the one making the claim (in this case that means assuming you are the one who believes it's the most important document)

Well, you assumed wrong. To make it clearer, I’ve amended “a desire” to “translators’ desire” in the original comment.

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#59

Post by Mikeb85 »

shakna wrote: post #54
Mikeb85 wrote: post #44

Americans have a weird fixation on translating the Bible. No religion apart from Protestants attempt to interpret holy texts without supporting ancient commentsry. Jews have the Talmud and other commentaries, Muslims have hadiths, Orthodox and Catholic Christians have centuries of commentaries by saints, similarly Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism and others all have many supporting texts, not just a single canonical one. Y…

Protestants are absolutely trained to make use of commentaries. Its one of the bare fundamentals of exegesis, which is taught in first year in basically every Bible college. Its nonsensical to say that they ignore the masses of study on these documents.

Protestant commentaries are way too modern and they throw out basically anything they deem "too Catholic".

They also threw out books of the Bible that everyone used for the better part of 1500 years.

Re: Translating the Bible is a vexed task

#60

Post by shakna »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #59
shakna wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protestants are absolutely trained to make use of commentaries. Its one of the bare fundamentals of exegesis, which is taught in first year in basically every Bible college. Its nonsensical to say that they ignore the masses of study on these documents.

Protestant commentaries are way too modern and they throw out basically anything they deem "too Catholic". They also threw out books of the Bible that everyone used for the better part of 1500 years.

The most common commentaries used across all the Protestant churches would probably be the Tyndale commentaries. You will also find the Tyndale's on many a Catholic priest's book shelf.

This sounds less like a complaint on professionalism, and more like a personal beef. Not one reflected by the wider church - you'll find many leaders both in and outside the Catholic church, who communicate regularly, and coordinate their efforts together.

Post reply on HN