Am I missing something?
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2005 4:06 pm
I have only read the Gospels in translation. Am I missing something?
A Classical Language Learning Forum
https://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-forum/
https://www.textkit.com/greek-latin-forum/viewtopic.php?t=3751
Someone asked if I saw the Passion, and I told them "no I read the book"
It depends on what translation. Honestly when you read the Gospels in Greek you may still miss something depending on what Greek text you read. There are two types of Greek texts: Traditional Received Text (Textus Receptus) and Critical (Scholarly Reconstruction) Text. If you read the Traditional Text in Greek or you know a decent amount of Elizabethan English (specifically that thee and thou are you-singular and ye and you are you-plural) and read the King James Version, the only good translation based on the Traditional text, then you aren't missing anything. However, if you read any other translation based on the Traditional text, such as the NKJV, you are missing the distinction between a plural and singular you, and that's pretty much it. If you read a translation of a Critical Text, such as NIV or NASB, then you are missing the disctinction between a plural and singular you and missing a lot of words because scholars have removed many phrases and entire verses--and these translation are usually very paraphrase like, so you are missing a WHOLE lot. If you read a Critical Text in Greek, you are missing many phrases.I have only read the Gospels in translation. Am I missing something?
I agree. Some things are almost always lost in translation. For example, John 1:1 reads: In the beginning there was the "word" (λόγος) and the "word" was near to God and the "word" was God. Well, of course λόγος translates as "word," but it was also the name of deity worshiped by some gnostic groups at the time. Some of them believed that the λόγος was a higher deity than the God who created the world, and, in fact, that God was created by this λόγος. So, in that context, it may have been that John was really addressing these groups, saying, "no, this God is the λόγος, there is only this God..." I guess you can get this stuff from the footnotes, but I don't think it's the same.Geoff wrote: Even still you can get some "nuggets" from reading the Greek that would be missed in almost any English translation.
That information you will not get get by just reading the NT, either in the original texts or in any translation. It is a knowledge that you have already and want to check in the original texts, or the translator will provide or mention in the footnotes, which than you may than investigate further (that's the great contribution of a good translation). By just reading the original texts one gets not wiser. I would say, on the contrary.edonnelly wrote: Well, of course λόγος translates as "word," but it was also the name of deity worshiped by some gnostic groups at the time. Some of them believed that the λόγος was a higher deity than the God who created the world, and, in fact, that God was created by this λόγος. So, in that context, it may have been that John was really addressing these groups, saying, "no, this God is the λόγος, there is only this God..." I guess you can get this stuff from the footnotes, but I don't think it's the same.
Well, as I scientist I'll never accept that going back to an original source is inferior to reading one that has been in some way modified by an intermediary.ThomasGR wrote: By just reading the original texts one gets not wiser. I would say, on the contrary.
I do not speak of an scientist, but for common people and students; I suppose they will make up to 99,99 %. If a translator misses something, whom I expect to be a scholar himself, so will I certainly do as well, if not more.edonnelly wrote: If the translator misses a subtlety or doesn't include it in the footnotes, then that subtlety is gone forever for the future readers of the translation. To have all of these subtleties available to you would require a "perfect," not just a good translation, which, of course, is impossible.