How Bible found a popular language
This recent article in the Boston Globe on the history of and tensions over translating the Bible into the vernacular is interesting.
Rich Barlow, the journalist, begins:
Rich Barlow, the journalist, begins:
As old as faith is humanity's craving for faith expressed in the local tongue. We want to praise the incomprehensible divine in comprehensible language.He ends:
Is the vernacular an unalloyed good? For those traditionalist Catholics in the 1960s, the fact that they might not have understood Latin only added to the mysterious allure of the Mass, a fitting tribute to the majesty of their God.For those who are not traditionalist Catholics, but who prefer traditionalist Bible translations, we could paraphrase:
Hill feels sympathy for the sentiment. But more important to worship than sound or ritual, she argued, is meaning. The people of God should understand what they're saying to God.
the fact that they might not have understood the Church English only added to the mysterious allure of traditionalist Bible versions, a fitting tribute to the majesty of their God.I think that there is a sincere desire among many to honor the majesty of God using non-vernacular language. Obscure, mysterious, outdated, non-standard language helps give them a feeling of sacredness and majesty. I, on the other hand, am a language populist. I prefer the approach of Jerome, Wycliffe, Tyndale, and Luther to use the vernacular (i.e. common language) for Bible translations. I find majesty in the power of the biblical message expressed in standard dialects of English spoken today.
posted by Wayne Leman at 2:56 PM
8 Comments:
I see a place for both, based on the needs of the reader.
I do, too, Matthew. I just think we need to be open about what we want. For instance, I think it is inappropriate for some to decry the use of the vernacular for English versions. It is inappropriate for the same reasons that decrying use of the vernacular for the Bible always has been. I think that's the point of the Boston Globe article.
There is a place for nostalgia and perceived literary beauty in older style English. I don't knock it. But I do desire that people who prefer the vernacular would be allowed to do so without being considered less educated or things like that.
I grew up on the KJV. I still have its lines running through my brain. It is the version I use to locate familiar passages in my computer Bible programs. Does the KJV speak to my mind as well as my soul as well as Bibles written in the current vernacular? No, not to me. Perhaps it does to some, and if it does, I am glad for them.
"Over a score of generations grew up with the KJV" - this may be good rhetoric, but it is not literally true. Even with a minimum generation span of 20 years, "over a score" is at least 21 so this requires a minimum of 420 years, but KJV has not yet been published for 400.
The truth is, however, that the Greek and Hebrew Bibles are themselves obscure and contain archaisms. Native residents of Greece or Israel cannot read the Bible in the original without special training.
And this, of course, is because there has been so much language change between when the originals were written and what people speak and read today. Again, I think that it is helpful to have translations in the vernacular for current speakers.
This does not mean that there is not value in older translations. They do have value and some people have the motivation, energy, and minds that can access older translations and gain from what they offer.
Put another way, I think people should be allowed to read sophisticated translations without being considered as ungodly or snobbish or loving mystery or things like that.
I agree. Prejudice of any kind toward any reading preferences are inappropriate. I intended no prejudice in my post, but I do apologize if my post communicated any.
Greek and Hebrew Bibles are themselves obscure and contain archaisms.
I think we are going to have to establish that there are significant differences between the Greek and Hebrew scriptures. This is recognized in the most off hand way in any good book on literary hermeneutics. Hebrew falls closer to poetry, and is extremely difficult to translate with any kind of fidelity. But the Greek is truly not that hard. Yes, the interpretation is sometimes obscure but the language is truly not.
I would find the GNB, (I assume, Anon, you did not mean the GNT the Greek New Testament) an acceptable way of getting around a translation that uses Latinizations like justification, propitiation, etc. This is simply not acceptable or in any way equivalent to the effect of reading the NT in Greek.
I believe I am in good company with many other readers of Greek in finding that the GNB opens up the Greek in a way that the older translations do not.
And the KJV may be of ultimate importance in understanding English literature, akin to Shakespeare, but surely that is not what we are talking about.
Why didn't she choose a translation that would express the complexity and depth of Scripture -- one that would improve their ability in English -- one that would give them the confidence to tackle any English language translation?
Why indeed?!! Are you reducing scripture to the status of a tool in an English class? Are you trying to reinstate the generic 'he'? Or is this just the usual rant that high school teachers can expect from university profs, and high school teachers then pass on to elementary school teachers and they pass on to parents, and parents to their genes and so on.
I do concede that the Hebrew text has a lot more to it than the usual translation supplies, but I am not entirely sure what to do about that.
Put another way, I think people should be allowed to read sophisticated translations without being considered as ungodly or snobbish or loving mystery or things like that.
Absolutely!
In the meantime, you wouldn't happen to have an electronic copy of the Buber-Rosenzweig tr. would you? I can't find a copy of any kind at the moment and I am feeling a little ticked off at English for the moment.
Good News Translation (GNT) is now the publisher's official name for what was previously known as the Good News Bible (GNB) or Today's English Version (TEV). Confusing, I know.
We have a culture/society where you feel you are either average, stupid or brilliant. The truth is that there are many gray areas, and the lines between average, stupid and brilliant are incredibly thin.
Gray areas or gray matter?!
:-)
Good News Translation (GNT) is now the publisher's official name for what was previously known as the Good News Bible (GNB) or Today's English Version (TEV). Confusing, I know.
Yes, I even remember now reading the reason for that switch.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home