Hatrack River Forum: New Bible translation worth a read?

This is topic New Bible translation worth a read? in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=029284

Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :

It's only the first five books but I'd be interested in taking a look at it.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/books/11/18/arts.bible.translation.reut/index.html

I think it would be interesting to read. They didn't have any comments from religious denominations really.

AJ

Posted by Intelligence3 (Member # 6944) on :

Gonna go see if I can find it tonight.

Posted by zgator (Member # 3833) on :

That's pretty interesting. My wife used to work for Ligonier Ministries with RC Sproul. I'm going to pass this through them and see if I can find out what he thinks.

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :

Of the samples cited in the article, I agree with some, and strongly disagree with others. *shrug* Overall, I don't care much. I'll be sticking with Artscroll. [Wink]

Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :

I find this fascinating. I love translations that try to get give one the flavor of a relatively alien language and culture, however much we have grown up with these stories.

I do find it interesting, however, that no mention is made of Everett Fox's The Five Books of Moses. It attempts to do much the same, but with one addition.

The Hebrew texts contain certain puns, onomatopoeia, and word plays that a fluid, conversational English translation will miss. Fox's goal was to, as best as possible, recreate the the AURAL effect of the spoken Torah, which is how most of it's earliest audience received it. It too begins with "When God was creating the heavens and the earth..." in Genesis 1:1. Another stated goal was to force us to discover the texts anew by using a foreign (though arguably more true to the original language) manner that did not allow us to mentally 'glide' over the text with familiarity. It made the text new and fresh and forced people to look at it from a new perspective and wrestle with its meaning.

I just find it odd that Alter doesn't mention this work or what he, perhaps, found wrong with it. I still plan to get this, though. It always makes for good reading.

Posted by digging_holes (Member # 6237) on :

New translations are always interesting. I have four different ones myself. It can be very revealing how different translators use different words to get the same meaning across, depending on the target audience, the language level used, their personal tastes and preferences as far as language goes...

In any case, this certainly seems like an interesting one to check out.

Posted by MattB (Member # 1116) on :

Ian, John Updike's review talks about Fox's try at it:

http://www.newyorker.com/critics/books/?041101crbo_books

Posted by IanO (Member # 186) on :

Thanks. That was interesting.

Posted by digging_holes (Member # 6237) on :

Indeed. Too bad he spent more time critiquing the Bible itself than he did the actual translation.

[ November 19, 2004, 05:26 PM: Message edited by: digging_holes ]