From: Jason Hare (parousia_occ@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Feb 22 2000 - 18:44:44 EST
I have no problem with these translations or with your
opinion. You asked before why someone would chose
Word as a translation and I was remarking that it is
an acceptable way of wording it (pardon the pun). I
am not a defender of the translation, just a suggester
of a side.
Jason
--- Steven Craig Miller <scmiller@www.plantnet.com>
wrote:
> To: Gfsomsel and Jason Hare,
>
> G: << To prescriptively limit the use of "word" to a
> written form is to
> disable the language much as those who wish to
> impose a politically correct
> understanding of the word "man" and substitute
> "person." >>
>
> Of course, no one has limited all uses of the
> English term "word" to "a
> written form." In fact, in the first message of this
> thread, I presented a
> definition of the the term "word" as referring to
> "the concept of discrete,
> meaningful verbal units that are combined to form
> utterances." But I doubt
> that this concept appears anywhere in the NT. And
> yet, it appears that this
> is the basic meaning most people have for the
> English term "word" (i.e. "a
> speech sound or series of sounds that symbolizes and
> communicates a meaning
> without being divisible into smaller units capable
> of independent use").
>
> For many people the term "man" is no longer used in
> an inclusive sense, and
> thus for such people a non-"politically correct"
> translation would violate
> their sense of English idiom. Eugene A. Nida and
> Charles R. Taber, in their
> "The Theory and Practice of Translation" (1982),
> wrote:
>
> << Even the old question: Is this a correct
> translation? must be answered
> in terms of another question, namely: For whom?
> Correctness must be
> determined by the extent to which the average reader
> for which a
> translation is intended will be likely to understand
> it correctly >> (1).
>
> According to Nida-Taber, different translations are
> needed for different
> people.
>
> JH: << By saying "it does not refer to a 'word' (in
> its narrow sense)" you
> admit that "word" has a wider sense in which to be
> understood. Therefore it
> is not such a "limited" means of expression and is
> acceptable as is. >>
>
> For me, the issue is not whether or not the
> translation "word" can in some
> sense be seen as "acceptable," but rather which
> translation better reflects
> the original text's meaning. Perhaps you don't feel
> that the translations
> which I've offered better reflect the original text.
> That is fair enough,
> it seems to me that there is plenty of room for
> differences of opinion
> here. Unfortunately, I'm unclear as to why you feel
> that the term "word" is
> a better translation than what I've offered. Perhaps
> you would like clarify
> this?
>
> -Steven Craig Miller
> Alton, Illinois (USA)
> scmiller@www.plantnet.com
> FWIW: I'm neither a clergy-person, nor an academic
> (and I have no post-grad
> degrees).
>
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
> You are currently subscribed to b-greek as:
> parousia_occ@yahoo.com
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu
> To subscribe, send a message to
> subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:58 EDT