Comments on: Translation, Exposition, and Communication

By: Henry Neufeld

Henry Neufeld — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:37:27 +0000

Good catch. I read all five in order and must have had Sarna on the brain! Or at least I’ll use that as an excuse.

More likely it’s write in haste, repent at leisure!

By: Iyov

Iyov — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:25:33 +0000

A minor nitpick: the JPS Leviticus volume is edited by Levine, not Sarna (he did the Genesis and Exodus).

By: Henry Neufeld

Henry Neufeld — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:35:58 +0000

And I could hardly disagree with you on that point. I think, however, that one loses one or another variety of equivalence, no matter how one translates.

I must note also that I like your Psalm 51 translation. I may comment on it further later.

By: John Hobbins

John Hobbins — Sun, 14 Oct 2007 14:21:41 +0000

Thanks, Henry, for joining the conversation.

I agree with you that translations like GNB and CEV accomplish what they set out to do, which does not include offering an REB-like translation even when the original language text translated, for example, a psalm like 51 which I have been treating, is as literary as REB is.

GNB and CEV deliberately translate at a lower level linguistic register than that in which the source text is written in the case of the Psalms, Job, and so on. My point is that in so doing, the translation offered is dynamic alright, but not equivalent.

Thank you for your many helpful contributions to the study of the Bible.