Interesting question from DS

[Mandylubug]

We were talking about Bible versions and translations.

 

His question was "how does someone wanting to translate an old english (think Shakespeare type language) into their language. Since our language knows that thou is an "old form" of you, when old english is translated, do they use a modern term and lose the old language sound of it or does it sound like their modern language."

 

I thought it a good question. When reading old texts we read it in our language but it's clearly of different form.

I didn't know how to answer.

[Spryte]

It must be a lot like translating poetry into different languages.

 

I have a no longer living relative (5 greats uncle) who learned ancient greek specifically so he could translate the bible.  I wonder what he'd have to say on the topic.  :)  His translation is obviously different from others, though I've never compared in depth.  It's still in print, apparently someone likes it.  

 

Maybe your son could try his hand at translating some texts (not necessarily tackling something so large a task as the bible!), to get a feel for how things might or might not change.  You could each translate something, and see how your translations differ.  (Do you teach Latin?  Another language?)

[monstermama]

With a lot of difficulty :)  Sometimes the heart of the plot makes absolutely no sense in another cultural context.  Here's a scholarly take on it.  Also, one of my favorite stories from anthropology class in college, Shakespeare in the Bush.

 

Here's a cool link to explore passages from the original Beowulf along with a literal translation and four modern translations.  Not quite what he's asking, but a lot of fun!

[ktgrok]

We were talking about Bible versions and translations.

 

His question was "how does someone wanting to translate an old english (think Shakespeare type language) into their language. Since our language knows that thou is an "old form" of you, when old english is translated, do they use a modern term and lose the old language sound of it or does it sound like their modern language."

 

I thought it a good question. When reading old texts we read it in our language but it's clearly of different form.

I didn't know how to answer.

 

a few thoughts....

 

First, in the case of the Bible, they would be translating (hopefully) from the original languages to their own language, not from English to their languages. 

 

Second, thee/thou/you etc I thought (and could be wrong) preserved the idea of a formal second person and a casual second person, and lots of other languages still preserve that difference, so it might be simple, actually.

 

Not sure that helps at all :)

[In The Great White North]

 

 

Second, thee/thou/you etc I thought (and could be wrong) preserved the idea of a formal second person and a casual second person, and lots of other languages still preserve that difference, so it might be simple, actually.

:iagree:

 

"Thou" is not just  "an old form of you".  It is the informal, second person pronoun, fallen mostly but not entirely into disuse.  (the expression "holier than thou" for example)  So, if someone were to translate an original King James Bible into German, they would use "du" wherever "thou" appeared.

[Mandylubug]

a few thoughts....

 

First, in the case of the Bible, they would be translating (hopefully) from the original languages to their own language, not from English to their languages.

 

Second, thee/thou/you etc I thought (and could be wrong) preserved the idea of a formal second person and a casual second person, and lots of other languages still preserve that difference, so it might be simple, actually.

 

Not sure that helps at all :)

You are right. An example he asked was would Shakespeare sound as poetic in say Chinese?

[ktgrok]

You are right. An example he asked was would Shakespeare sound as poetic in say Chinese?

 

It would totally depend on who was doing the translating and what their goal was. Word for word, or thought for thought? He could look at several different english translations of the Bible to see how differently several people could translate the same phrase. 

[Tanaqui]

Completely irrelevant tangent: Shakespeare is not, of course Old English, but Early Modern English.

 

And the answer to the question is "it depends on the goal of the translation". Certainly Shakespeare wasn't writing in "old-fashioned English" at the time, he was writing the way everybody spoke, so it makes sense to translate his work to modern speech. But yes, translation does funny things to accents and the like.

[Farrar]

I understand you haven't really read Shakespeare until you've read it in the original Klingon. ;)

[Guest]

I had a wonderful opportunity to take some classes with Dr. Bruce Metzger (RIP) who was a key translator of the RSV and the NRSV.  His talks were about the decisions a translator has to make, and how it is really more of an art than a science.  Perhaps if anyone is interested, there is an article or something by him that a Google search would reveal.  

 

It is interesting how much a person's beliefs can influence a translation.  For example, in the NIV, when the word "paradosis" is used to talk positively about the teachings of men, it is translated "teachings".  But when it is used to talk negatively about teachings of men, it is translated "tradition".  This reflects the Protestant view of the NIV translators.  Same word, but different meanings because of different beliefs.  

 

There were other examples that he gave, but I can't remember them all now and am too lazy to go dig up my notes.  

 

Oh, and one of the good reasons for the use of Thee and Thou is that modern English is limited to one word for the single and the plural second person--You.  We end up doing funny things to compensate--coming up with you/y'all (or for my friends from the South y'all/all y'all)--to make the distinction.  Thou/Thee does this for us, and eliminates a lot of confusion about what individuals vs. groups / congregations are being told to do or be.  

 

TranslationNerdAlert should have been issued at the beginning of this post. 

[Farrar]

Seriously speaking... my feeling is that when you can read something in the original, such as Shakespeare, you should. When you cannot, such as is the case with the Bible or, say, the Epic of Gilgamesh or Beowulf or The Odyssey or whatever, for the vast majority of people, I don't personally understand why you wouldn't get a translation that uses language that's accessible. There is a value in the quality of the writing in the translation and in adhering to a sense of the poetry if possible. However, I appreciate new translations and scholarly work that takes into account a deeper understanding of the work than perhaps we had previously - as well as an understanding based on the here and now. I don't think a century old translation (or a multi-century old one or whatever) of something that is much, much older still is somehow superior just because it's older. In reality, our cultural and linguistic understanding has often moved forward since then.

[Guest]

Seriously speaking... my feeling is that when you can read something in the original, such as Shakespeare, you should. When you cannot, such as is the case with the Bible or, say, the Epic of Gilgamesh or Beowulf or The Odyssey or whatever, for the vast majority of people, I don't personally understand why you wouldn't get a translation that uses language that's accessible. There is a value in the quality of the writing in the translation and in adhering to a sense of the poetry if possible. However, I appreciate new translations and scholarly work that takes into account a deeper understanding of the work than perhaps we had previously - as well as an understanding based on the here and now. I don't think a century old translation (or a multi-century old one or whatever) of something that is much, much older still is somehow superior just because it's older. In reality, our cultural and linguistic understanding has often moved forward since then.

 

An interesting example of this is the modern translators of the great Russian works, Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky.  They realized that the Russian writers were deeply steeped in Orthodox Christianity, which has a different understanding of concepts such as sin, salvation, the Church, atonement, suffering, confession and so on than does the Western church.  They attended an Orthodox seminary for a year (or more) so they could take in the mindset and culture of the Russians.  This nuanced their already terrific ability in translation and has given the world a whole new set of translations of Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy and given new insights into what the authors intended, as through Russian eyes.

 

I think translation is so interesting and I DO wish I could read in original languages.  Even if one can, however, it still helps a great deal to have deeper understanding of the culture, the history, the religion and philosophy of a nation/language group.

[Incognito]

An interesting example of this is the modern translators of the great Russian works, Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky.  They realized that the Russian writers were deeply steeped in Orthodox Christianity, which has a different understanding of concepts such as sin, salvation, the Church, atonement, suffering, confession and so on than does the Western church.  They attended an Orthodox seminary for a year (or more) so they could take in the mindset and culture of the Russians.  This nuanced their already terrific ability in translation and has given the world a whole new set of translations of Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy and given new insights into what the authors intended, as through Russian eyes.

 

I think translation is so interesting and I DO wish I could read in original languages.  Even if one can, however, it still helps a great deal to have deeper understanding of the culture, the history, the religion and philosophy of a nation/language group.

Thank you for this information!  So interesting. :)

[Ausmumof3]

This is one of the interesting things about les miserables. The translators had to try to capture the feeling of the french slang. It's kind of funny in the movie where they use the cockney accent.

[Mandylubug]

Thank you everyone for an enjoyable discussion :)

[gardenmom5]

 

 

His question was "how does someone wanting to translate an old english (think Shakespeare type language) 

I just have to pipe up - Shakespeare used middle English.   olde (yes, the 'e' on the end is correct)/pre-norman English is VERY different.

[Tanaqui]

I just have to pipe up - Shakespeare used middle English.   olde (yes, the 'e' on the end is correct)/pre-norman English is VERY different.

 

No, he did not. He used Early Modern English. He was about two centuries too late for Middle English.

 

[GailV]

No, he did not. He used Early Modern English. He was about two centuries too late for Middle English.

 

But it was closer to Middle than to Old. And I'm liking the comment just because I'm apparently tense about Shakespeare or KJV being called "old English" rather than "older English" - it grates on me for no reason considering I am relatively clueless about literature.

 

I think Middle was Chaucer, correct?

[Alessandra]

I had a wonderful opportunity to take some classes with Dr. Bruce Metzger (RIP) who was a key translator of the RSV and the NRSV. His talks were about the decisions a translator has to make, and how it is really more of an art than a science. Perhaps if anyone is interested, there is an article or something by him that a Google search would reveal.

 

It is interesting how much a person's beliefs can influence a translation. For example, in the NIV, when the word "paradosis" is used to talk positively about the teachings of men, it is translated "teachings". But when it is used to talk negatively about teachings of men, it is translated "tradition". This reflects the Protestant view of the NIV translators. Same word, but different meanings because of different beliefs.

 

There were other examples that he gave, but I can't remember them all now and am too lazy to go dig up my notes.

 

Oh, and one of the good reasons for the use of Thee and Thou is that modern English is limited to one word for the single and the plural second person--You. We end up doing funny things to compensate--coming up with you/y'all (or for my friends from the South y'all/all y'all)--to make the distinction. Thou/Thee does this for us, and eliminates a lot of confusion about what individuals vs. groups / congregations are being told to do or be.

 

TranslationNerdAlert should have been issued at the beginning of this post.

OMG, you are lucky! The Text of the New Testament is a book that I read over and over (before kids came along). Superlative book. I have done NT Greek. One skill in translating is knowing how the author used a particular word, I.e. Paul's use of a word may not fit the standard dictionary definition. Thank goodness for Biblical dictionaries.

 

Adding some random thoughts, since this thread is going in many directions:

 

-- something I absolutely hate is preachers who do not know a language using it as part of a sermon. Example: Sophia is feminine in Greek, therefore God can be feminine. I want to yell out and ask if they have a clue as to what *grammatical* gender is.

 

-- iirc, many 19th Germans (Goethe?) learned English in order to read Shakespeare. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

-- I have a family member (American) who speakers Arabic completely fluently. But he says he will never be an truly educated speaker because he does not know the Koran and cannot include the cultural allusions that are as much a part of Arabic as Shakespeare or KJV is for many English speakers.

[Alessandra]

No, he did not. He used Early Modern English. He was about two centuries too late for Middle English.

 

Exactly.

 

Shakespeare -- relatively easy to read and pronounce

Middle English -- readable, but pronunciation has to be learned. Many words sound quite different. Really different. Try googling Canterbury Tales Prologue Middle English you tube.

Old English -- incomprehensible, IMO. Google Beowulf Old English you tube.

[gardenmom5]

Old English -- incomprehensible, IMO. Google Beowulf Old English you tube.

 

dd (classics major) took an olde English course in college. she said the words that scared her were the ones that looked familiar.  notice I used the word *LOOKED*.

I looked through her text book - and nothing looked familiar to me. 

 

modern English has far more in common with middle English than middle English has in common with olde English.

[Tanaqui]

Relatively easy to read is the important word there, I think.From a gap of 400 years, most readers miss the nuance and bawdy jokes.

 

As far as "easy to pronounce" goes, I'll just link to this awesome video on Shakespeare with the original pronunciation. Do yourself a favor, set aside 10 minutes to watch the entire thing.

[Guest]

OMG, you are lucky! The Text of the New Testament is a book that I read over and over (before kids came along). Superlative book. I have done NT Greek. One skill in translating is knowing how the author used a particular word, I.e. Paul's use of a word may not fit the standard dictionary definition. Thank goodness for Biblical dictionaries.

 

Adding some random thoughts, since this thread is going in many directions:

 

-- something I absolutely hate is preachers who do not know a language using it as part of a sermon. Example: Sophia is feminine in Greek, therefore God can be feminine. I want to yell out and ask if they have a clue as to what *grammatical* gender is.

 

-- iirc, many 19th Germans (Goethe?) learned English in order to read Shakespeare. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

-- I have a family member (American) who speakers Arabic completely fluently. But he says he will never be an truly educated speaker because he does not know the Koran and cannot include the cultural allusions that are as much a part of Arabic as Shakespeare or KJV is for many English speakers.

 

It was a great opportunity.  He was as modest as a bug, as well, and so easy to talk to...you knew you were in the presence of a great man, and yet, at lunch, you felt like a dinner guest and totally at ease talking about everyday things.  A kind and gentle man. 

 

Question:  Sophia is feminine, but it is also not a person but a descriptor.  At least I THINK that is what it is ...  I'm kinda not sure where you are going with the first bullet point above.  It's interesting to me...I think that the soul is called "anima" but I don't know if that is the descriptor of soul or the word for soul...and that is feminine.  So it is interesting to wonder if that means that all of mankind has a feminine soul.  I've been listening to some podcasts where this has come up and I'm not sure quite what to make of it.  

 

In Genesis, at the creation of mankind, the words are "male and female He created them..." and that is interesting, too.  Kind of even Steven.  :0)

 

ITA about your last point.  It's interesting to do a study of a book from another culture/time because you have to learn just a TON about that culture/time as well, and it's sort of never-ending.  For example, even though _Pride and Prejudice_ is written in English, it absolutely cannot be read with eyes of the 20th Century or the whole thing falls apart.  

[Alessandra]

It was a great opportunity. He was as modest as a bug, as well, and so easy to talk to...you knew you were in the presence of a great man, and yet, at lunch, you felt like a dinner guest and totally at ease talking about everyday things. A kind and gentle man.

 

Question: Sophia is feminine, but it is also not a person but a descriptor. At least I THINK that is what it is ... I'm kinda not sure where you are going with the first bullet point above. It's interesting to me...I think that the soul is called "anima" but I don't know if that is the descriptor of soul or the word for soul...and that is feminine. So it is interesting to wonder if that means that all of mankind has a feminine soul. I've been listening to some podcasts where this has come up and I'm not sure quite what to make of it.

 

In Genesis, at the creation of mankind, the words are "male and female He created them..." and that is interesting, too. Kind of even Steven. :0)

 

ITA about your last point. It's interesting to do a study of a book from another culture/time because you have to learn just a TON about that culture/time as well, and it's sort of never-ending. For example, even though _Pride and Prejudice_ is written in English, it absolutely cannot be read with eyes of the 20th Century or the whole thing falls apart.

I remember reading Bruce Metzger's obituary and wishing so much that I could have heard him talk or even met him. It is nice to hear your memories.

 

I should have been clearer about the sophia thing. I haven't read the Bible recently as much as I should have -- please, no one jump at me. But I was thinking of passages about Wisdom, with a capital W. Wisdom is then compared with/equated to God -- no doubt someone else can say this better and in more detail than I can. So the Greek word for wisdom is sophia, and sophia is a feminine noun. Therefore, God is partly female. Btw, if people haven't read up thread, this is NOT my reasoning!

 

Or, I have heard sermons where someone takes a word with a lot of meanings and states that, say, 'ana' means 'up,' when in fact Paul or whoever wrote the passage in question meant no such thing, according to Biblical scholars.

 

Just echoing the sentiments here that there is more to good translation than one might realize at first.

[ktgrok]

Exactly.

 

Shakespeare -- relatively easy to read and pronounce

Middle English -- readable, but pronunciation has to be learned. Many words sound quite different. Really different. Try googling Canterbury Tales Prologue Middle English you tube.

Old English -- incomprehensible, IMO. Google Beowulf Old English you tube.

I took a class in college that ws basically learning to read Old English. Except, for whatever reason, I kept missing class, not doing the work, etc. I showed up for the exam terrified. Yeah. Turns out, most of it made perfect sense to me. I have no idea why. I couldn't translate word for word, but definitely could read a sentence or two and get the main point. Which was enough to pass the class. No idea why. 

[Alessandra]

I took a class in college that ws basically learning to read Old English. Except, for whatever reason, I kept missing class, not doing the work, etc. I showed up for the exam terrified. Yeah. Turns out, most of it made perfect sense to me. I have no idea why. I couldn't translate word for word, but definitely could read a sentence or two and get the main point. Which was enough to pass the class. No idea why.

Really!!! Amazing. I just pulled up the text courtesy of Fordham a University. Completely incomprehensible to me. But I generally have no instinct for languages, although I find the history of English to very fascinating.