From: Steven Cox (scox@ns1.chinaonline.com.cn.net)
Date: Tue Dec 16 1997 - 09:00:42 EST
Dear Andrew, and b-greek
This is going to sound a very stupid comment because
my Hebrew is lousy, but as a more mundane translator I
get the strong feeling that the quality of the Torah is
more "literal" than later books. This may partly be the
difference between history books and poetry/prophecy,
but I don't think that is entirely to blame, because
it keeps coming into mind.
Just for one simple example "Sons of God" is UIOI TOU
QEOU in Gen6:2 but AGGELOI TOU QEOU in Job1:6. Maybe
there's something in the Hebrew MSS that justifies
this but the layman (me) would think that the Job
translator was just being more paraphrasistic.
Steven
>At 10:00 PM -0600 12/15/97, Andrew Kulikovsky wrote:
>>Hi All!
>>
>>I realise that the quality of the LXX translation of the Hebrew OT
>>varies substantially from book to book, so I was wondering how good and
>>accurate is the LXX translation of Genesis?
>>
>>Does it accurately convey the Hebrew structure, idiom and rhetorical
>>features?
>>
>>Is it overly literal? or very paraphrastic?
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:37 EDT