The Question of Language

The problem has to do with the transferring of words and ideas from one language to another.

There are three basic theories of translation:

1. Literal: The attempt to translate by keeping as close as possible to the exact words and phrasing in the original language, yet still make sense in the receptor language. A literal translation will keep the historical distance intact at all points.

2. Free: The attempt to translate the ideas from one language to another, with less concern about using the exact words of the original. A free translation, sometimes called a paraphrase, tries to eliminate as much of the historical distance as possible.

3. Dynamic Equivalent: The attempt to translate words, idioms, and grammatical constructions of the original language into precise equivalents in the receptor language. The translation keeps historical distance on all historical and most factual matters, but "updates" matters of language, grammar, and style.

The several translations of the whole Bible that are currently easily accessible might be placed on a historical-distance scale in the following way:

LITERAL: King James Version (1611); New American Standard Bible(1960); Revised Standard Version (1952);

DYNAMIC EQUIVALENT: New International Version (1973); New American Bible (1970); The Message (1993); Good News Bible (1976); The Jerusalem Bible (1966); New English Bible (1961);

FREE: Phillips; Living Bible.

The best translational theory is dynamic equivalence. A literal translation is often helpful as a second source. The problem with a literal translation is that it keeps distance at the wrong places - in language and grammar. The translator often renders the Greek or Hebrew into English that is never written or spoken that way. It is like translating "maison blanc" from French to English as "house white". For example, no native English-speaking person would have said "coals of fire" (Romans 5:20), and yet, that is the literal rendering of the Greek, but what it means in English is "burning coals" (NIV) or "live coals" (NEB).

The problem with a free translation, especially for study purposes, is that the translator updates the original author too much. A free translation is always done by a single translator and comes too close to becoming a commentary. This is especially true of the popular, but unfortunately not too accurate, Living Bible. We can live with such translations as "flashlight" (Psalm 119:105), or "handshakes" (1 Peter 5:14), but to translate the Greek word charismata ("spiritual gifts") as "special abilities" in 1 Corinthians 12-14 is to take too much liberty. The Living Bible translation of 1 Corinthians 11:10, "as a sign that she is under man's authority," is especially misleading since the original implies that she is the one who has the authority.

The way various translations handle the problem of "historical distance" can be seen by looking at some of the problems involved:

1. Weights, Measures, Money

This is a particularly difficult area. Do we translate the Greek and Hebrew terms ("ephah," "homer," etc.), or do we try to find their English equivalent? If you choose to go with equivalents in weights and measures, do you use the standard "pounds" and "feet", or do you look to the future and translate "liters" and "meters"? And no matter what you choose to use, in just a few years inflation will have made a mockery out of your translation.

If you can, look at the following examples:
Isaiah 5:10 (NASB & GNB)
Matthew 18:24,28 (NASB & GNB)

2. Euphemisms

Almost all languages have euphemisms for matters of sex and toilet. And so a translator has three choices: (1) Translate literally and leave the English speaking reader somewhat bewildered or guessing, (2) translate the literal equivalent and run the risk of offending or shocking the reader, or (3) translate with an equivalent euphemism.

Option 3 is probably the best. To have Rachel say, "I'm having my period" (Gen. 31:35 NIV) is to be preferred over the literal "the manner of women is upon me" (KJV). Similarly, "He forced her, and lay with her" (2 Sam. 13:14 KJV) becomes simply "He raped her" in the NIV.

It is also possible for a translator to miss the meaning of a phrase. Such as in 1 Corinthians 7:1 NIV: "It is good for a man not to marry." The phrase "to touch a woman" in every other case in antiquity means to have sexual intercourse with a woman, and never means anything close to "marry." The NAB has found the preferred equivalent: "A man is better off having no relations with a woman."

3. Vocabulary

It is finding the precise right word that makes translation so difficult. Many Greek and Hebrew words have ranges of meaning that are different from anything we have in English. And many of these words have different shades of meaning.

Which translation, then, should you read? The NIV and The Message are as good a translation as you can get. The GNB and the NAB are also very good.

NEXT POST: The Epistles