Monday, September 22, 2008
Contributors

Subscribe (Atom):
- to Posts
- to All Comments
To subscribe to comments on individual posts, use the link at the end of each post.
Surveys
English Quality of Bibles Survey
Previous Posts
- Mecha Manga Bible
- This Bible is a riot
- Is somebody shutting the gate at Bible Gateway?
- Bible translation and importing N.T. meanings to O...
- NLT Blog: Sentence Structure in the NLT
- NLT Study Bible vs. ESV Study Bible- Introducing t...
- NLT Study Bible and Mark 11:13-14
- Which NLT are you reading?
- NLT Study Bible, ESV Study Bible, NIV Study Bible,...
- Missionary Struggles to Translate "Thee" and "Thou"
Topics
Better Bibles Blog del.icio.us tags inventory
Versions
- BLB (Better Life Bible)
- CEB (Common English Bible)
- CEV (Contemporary English Version)
- ESV (English Standard Version)
- GNT (Good News Translation) / TEV
- GW (God's Word)
- HCSB (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
- ISV (International Standard Version)
- NAB (New American Bible)
- NASB (New American Standard Bible)
- NCV (New Century Version)
- NET Bible
- NIV (New International Version)
- NJB (New Jerusalem Bible)
- NKJV (New King James Version)
- NLT (New Living Translation)
- NRSV (New Revised Standard Version)
- REB (Revised English Bible)
- RSV (Revised Standard Version)
- Tanakh (NJPS)
- TEV (Today's English Version) / GNT
- TNIV (Today's New International Version)
- TM (The Message)
- TSNT (The Source New Testament)
- WEB (World English Bible)
Bible searches
- Bible Gateway
- Crosswalk.com
- eBible.com
- ESV Advanced Search
- GreekBible.com
- Online Translations of the Bible
- Oremus
- RSV searches
- Search God's Word
- StudyLight.org
- TNIV searches
- The Unbound Bible

Technical terms
- Accuracy
- Audience
- Biblish
- Closest natural equivalence
- Collocational clash
- Communicative accuracy
- Dynamic equivalence
- Essentially literal translation
- Field testing
- Functional equivalence
- Inclusive language
- Literal translation
- Literary language
- Meaning-based translation
- Paraphrase
- Periphrasis
- Plain English
- Readability
- Register
- Relevance Theory
- thought-for-thought translation
- Transculturation
- Translation
- Translationese
- Transparent translation
- word-for-word translation
Links
- American Bible Society
- Bible Research (Michael Marlowe)
- Bible sales ranking (CBA)
- Bible sales ranking (amazon.com)
- Bible Translation discussion list
- Bible translation files
- Bible Translation Surveys
- Bible Translation website
- Bible.org
- Biblical Greek Mailing List
- Biblical Hebrew Mailing List
- Biblical Training
- Body Part Metaphors in Biblical Hebrew
- Church language – world’s worst practice?
- Colorado Springs Guidelines (CSG)
- Comments on "accurate" Bible translations
- Comparing Bible Translations (Ronald J. Gordon)
- The God's Story Project
- The History of the English Bible
- How language works
- Liturgical English
- Modern English Bible translations
- New Testament Gateway
- New Testament Resources (Rodney J. Decker)
- Old Testament Gateway
- OpenText.org
- OralBible.com
- Perseus Digital Library
- Plain English Campaign
- PlainLanguage.gov
- Revision—Food for Thought
- Scriptures In Use
- SIL International
- Stylistics
- Textual properties, communicative clues and the translator
- Translation glossary
- Translations Compared
- When literal is not accurate
- Why did translation into English cause arguments?
- Word Choice and Voice
- Wycliffe Bible Translators
Books and journals
- Bible, Babel and Babble
- Bible Translation
- The Bible Translator
- The Challenge of Bible Translation
- Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible Translation Differences
- Doublets in the New Testament
- In Other Words
- Inside Translation
- JETS On-Line
- Journal of Translation
- Meaning-Based Translation
- Relevance Theory: A Guide to Successful Communication in Translation
- The Semantics of Biblical Language
- The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy: Muting the Masculinity of God's Words
- The Theory and Practice of Translation
- TIC Talk
- Translation and Relevance
- Translation Journal
- Translation Problems from A to Z
- A User's Guide To Bible Translations
- What's in a Version?
- The Word of God in English
Bible study programs
- Accordance (for Macintosh computers)
- Bible Explorer
- Bible Navigator
- BibleWorks
- Davar (freeware)
- e-sword (freeware)
- Gramcord
- iLumina
- Laridian
- Logos for PCs; for Macintosh computers
- Olive Tree
- Online Bible (freeware)
- PC Study Bible
- Quickverse
- SWORD Project
- Theophilos
- WORDsearch
* = new post
Biblioblogs
Inspirational blogs
Podcasts
- 1 Year Daily Audio Bible
- The Godcast Network
- Living Water
- Living Word
- PodBible
- Rachel's Choice
- Reflections
- RevTim
- WAYN
Bookshelf
How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth, by Gordon D. Fee and Mark L. Strauss
A User's Guide To Bible Translations: Making The Most Of Different Versions, by David Dewey
(amazon.co.uk)
What's In a Version, by Henry Neufeld
Bible Translation: Frames of Reference, edited by Timothy Wilt
(amazon.co.uk)
The Challenge of Bible Translation, edited by Glen G. Scorgie, Mark L. Strauss, and Steven M. Voth
Linguistics for Students of New Testament Greek: A Survey of Basic Concepts and Applications, by David Alan Black
The Contemporary Parallel New Testament: King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version, Contemporary English Version
The Essential Evangelical Parallel Bible: New King James Version, English Standard Version, New Living Translation, The Message
The Evangelical Parallel New Testament: New King James Version, New International Version, English Standard Version, Holman Christian Standard Bible, Today's New International Version, New Living Translation, New Century Version, The Message
The Hendrickson Parallel Bible: King James Version, New King James Version, New International Version, New Living Translation
Today's Parallel Bible: King James Version, New International Version, New American Standard Version, New Living Translation
Morning Song, by Wayne Leman
Are There Mosquitos In Heaven? Experiencing God's Presence in West Africa, by Jeannie Sindlinger
Writing the Wrongs / Righting the Wrongs, by Al Johnson (e-text)
Blog posts that contain Bible Translation per day for the last 30 days.
Get your own chart!
14 Comments:
I knew them all, because I read the KJV. But you didn't capture the primary reading of "hoary" as it is used in the KJV -- it means "old" -- "whitish" is a secondary meaning (from the white hairs of an old person).
But let's cut to the chase: Is this so hard? "Straightaway" is still used in ordinary contemporary speech ("I'll get on it straightaway:). And isn't "asunder" from Matt. 19:6 part of the BCP marriage ceremony?
I used "hoary" last week. The meaning of "inditing" is obvious from its grammatical form (even more so when it is spoken aloud, when there is no possibility of confusing it with "indicting"). And since I gainsay so often, I certainly know what it means.
I suppose an immigrant or someone with limited exposure to sophisticated English might stumble here or there, but even then, from context, the meaning of the word is obvious.
If there are people who can't understand these words, then I blame the NIV for watering down our society's grasp of vocabulary.
Wow, I just saw the poll results -- it seems a lot of people have trouble distinguishing "hoary" from "hairy" and "inditing" from "indicting." Hilarious. I wonder if those are the same people who wondered how Gary Trudeau had time to both pen the Doonesbury comic strip and be prime minister of Canada.
When I saw "inditing", I suspected that you misspelled "indicting". So I looked it up in the dictionary and was surprised to find that there is such a word. I'm not aware that I ever heard it, and I know I never used it.
I think you meant "straightway", a word in KJV, not "straightaway", which is not. I think the meaning is the same, but I'm not sure.
Iyov, I think you have trouble distinguishing "hoary" from "hairy". The former clearly has a primary meaning of whitish like hoar frost. And how would you pronounce "inditing" and "indicting" differently, or are you doing a spoof of yourself here? Come to think of it, are you in fact altogether a spoof of yourself?
Peter thought:
I think you meant "straightway", a word in KJV, not "straightaway", which is not. I think the meaning is the same, but I'm not sure.
You're right, Peter. What confused me were two dictionary entries, one for "straightway", the other for "straightaway." I have corrected the spelling in the poll. Thanks.
Iyov wrote:
Wow, I just saw the poll results -- it seems a lot of people have trouble distinguishing "hoary" from "hairy" and "inditing" from "indicting." Hilarious.
It might seem hilarious, but it's not from a linguistic point of view. Those words are unknown to the majority of fluent speakers today, so they can only guess at their meaning. I wanted to make the poll longer but I didn't want to overload poll takers.
The NIV has nothing to do with it. The NIV has no impact on word usage for English speakers. The English language, like every other language, is constantly undergoing changes, some slowly some more quickly. Some words become obsolete or archaic for the majority of speakers. New words enter the language; just "google" for some of them! :-)
Well, the NIV had something to do with it because it caused a large number of people to stop reading the KJV!
I hardly think that "straightaway" or "asunder" are unknown to the majority of fluent speakers today. Perhaps "hoary", "gainsay", and "inditing" are less well-known, but I think that most college graduates should know at least the first two.
Arguably, those words would be more common today if the KJV were more widely read.
This is interesting. I am more or less certain Peter is right that 'hoary' means old because it originally meant white haired deriving from frost.
I too am fairly sure that 'straightway' and 'straightaway' are different versions of the same word, with the same meaning, but stand ready to be corrected by someone who actually knows.
'Asunder' I'd be more precise on and say it would originally have meant simply apart, as in the old marriage service, but now more likely to be used with the more specific sense of 'divided' or 'in two'.
I will admit that I too was thrown by indite, which I'd guessed as being an alternative spelling for indict.
I'm puzzled by 'sawed' by the way. If asunder did mean that, wouldn't it be 'sawn'? Or does that demonstrate that my own idiom has become antique without my realising it? Perhaps it has. The spellchecker on my browser has just questioned 'sawn'.
Dru, thanks for the support.
Personally I use "sawed" for the past tense: "I sawed the wood"; but "sawn" for the past participle: "a pile of sawn wood" or "I have sawn the wood". But I would allow "I have sawed the wood". My own UK spelling checker allows both words.
Thanks Peter. My usage would be the same as yours.
Indeed, "indite" and "indict" are two forms of the same word -- the latter developing a specialized meaning of the first over time.
To suggest that "hoary" (like a hoar) meant frosty in 1611 is akin to suggesting that "naughty" (like naught) meant non-existent. Hoary has always meant "old" in English. The OED gives the earliest usage, from Lesclarcissement de la langue françoyse (1530) as "Hoory as a man or beestes heare is" followed hard upon Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey's Songes and sonettes, "What will she do, when hory heares are powdred in her hedde?" Now, if you are used to seeing young people with hoar's hair, then please feel free to disagree.
No, Iyov, you are committing the linguistic blunder of confusing the meaning of a word with its reference. Maybe "hoary" is used only or primarily of older people's hair. But that does not imply that the word in itself means "old". Consider an old man whose hair had in fact unusually remained jet black. Would you call his hair "hoary"? Surely not. But consider someone whose hair had become prematurely grey perhaps in his 30's. Would you call his hair "hoary"? Well, I wouldn't because I would never use the word, but I would think the usage justified. And your 1530 example makes it clear that this is not a matter of age as most "beestes" do not go grey with age as humans do. So the evidence suggests that this word is simply a colour term, used primarily of hair.
So I guess that in Isa 46:4, Peter would say that the KJV offers no solace for those who their hair. (By the way, the KJV is a brilliant translation of the Hebrew idiom.)
Iyov, you mean "even to hoar hairs will I carry you"? I understand "hoar" as a noun, short for "hoarfrost", and so "hoar hairs" are hairs or filaments of hoarfrost. So I suppose God is promising here to carry us to a place covered with hoarfrost.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home