Spy Car Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 If we're getting technical, wouldn't any English Bible be a transliteration, since English uses neither the Hebrew nor Greek alphabet? No. Transliteration is substituting one alphabet for another, but retaining the "words" of the original language in a phonic sense. That's different from a translation. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 No. Transliteration is substituting one alphabet for another, but retaining the "words" of the original language in a phonic sense. That's different from a translation. Bill Thanks for answering, Bill, that makes sense. So, one first has to transliterate, then translate for the best (culturally, perhaps?) appropriate word or comparable thought? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Thanks for answering, Bill, that makes sense. So, one first has to transliterate, then translate for the best (culturally, perhaps?) appropriate word or comparable thought? No, you don't generally transliterate during translation. The only reason for transliteration is for phonetic purposes. For example, if you're discussing Russian with no Cyrillic font available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 (edited) Thanks for answering, Bill, that makes sense. So, one first has to transliterate, then translate for the best (culturally, perhaps?) appropriate word or comparable thought? No. There is no need to "transliterate" Hebrew or Greek or Aramaic works into Latin alphabet versions with approximate phonic equivalence in order to do a "translation". Transliteration aims to reproduce the "sound" of one language using a different alphabet. Translation is an attempt to get the meaning same "meaning across from an original language to another language. This is a "transliteration" of the opening line of the Hebrew Bible: Beresh*t bara Elohim et hashamayim ve'et ha'arets. A "translator" would simply read the original alphabet and translate the meaning. An intermediate step of transliterating the original language would be fruitless. A transliteration is only helpful to those wanting to verbally reproduce the sound of the original without learning a new alphabet, or as an aid in looking up words in a concordance or dictionary without dealing with Hebrew of Greek characters. Does this make sense? ETA: I can't believe the transliteration got censored :lol: Bill Edited November 10, 2009 by Spy Car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MyLittleWonders Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures. The Jewish Publication Society's translation of the Hebrew Bible. Well written, and clear. Bill I forgot about my Artscroll Tanakh. I love reading from it after I've read something from my NRSV. The language is beautiful (and I love seeing the Hebrew on the facing page even though I can't read it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6packofun Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I use the ESV most because it's simply a more readable version of the NASB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrissiK Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I voted NASB, but I use ESV and I like them both equally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caitilin Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 NRSV This is us too. Closest to beautiful language of the KJV, but more accurate. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuntieM Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Mrs. Mungo & SpyCar, thanks, your explanations are clear and helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Me Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 I almost always use my NASB. My dh loves his ESV. And although I sometimes read the Message, I really don't like when folks teach from it. There are a couple of Sunday School teachers in our church who do this, saying that it is more 'understandable' to the class. I really disagree, I'm sorry to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsabelC Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 And although I sometimes read the Message, I really don't like when folks teach from it. There are a couple of Sunday School teachers in our church who do this, saying that it is more 'understandable' to the class. I really disagree, I'm sorry to say. Some people claim that the recent text message version is understandable to young people, but that doesn't stop it from being an abomination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creekland Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 But that link doesn't tell if it is translated from original language or not does it? I admit I didn't look closely at it---but I don't think it gave that info. Yes, it does. Just click on each version itself for specifics on each, but the graphic shows how close each are to a literal translation even IF they were translated from another version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 :D I know how the translation I use was um translated. And I guess I could pour over a copy of every other translation....Looking for the Cliff Notes I guess. :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 Yes, it does. Just click on each version itself for specifics on each, but the graphic shows how close each are to a literal translation even IF they were translated from another version. Oh! We were posting on top of each other. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crowscreek Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Great thread!! I really do like hearing what others think...I have a KJV and a NIV and read NASB online @ Bible Gateway. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in Neverland Posted November 12, 2009 Author Share Posted November 12, 2009 Some people claim that the recent text message version is understandable to young people, but that doesn't stop it from being an abomination. there's a TEXT MESSAGE version????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsabelC Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) there's a TEXT MESSAGE version????? Check it out. In da Bginnin: Bible is translated for text message generation By Kathy Marks in Sydney Friday, 7 October 2005 The Bible has already been translated into more languages than any other book. Now, thanks to Australian evangelists, it is available in text message form, enabling uplifting verses to be sent by mobile phone. In the excruciatingly abbreviated version, the first line of Genesis is rendered as: "In da Bginnin God cre8d da heavens & da earth". The verse 1 John 4.19 becomes "We luv coz God luvd us 1st". The project, called "SMSBible", was launched yesterday, accompanied by a press release headed: "It's your Bible calling". All 31,173 verses are available in text form, and can be downloaded from the website of the Bible Society in Australia direct to mobile phones. Its spokesman, Michael Chant, said the idea was to make it possible to spread the word of God to family and friends by mobile. "The old days when the Bible was only available within a sombre black cover with a cross on it are long gone," he said. "We want to open it up for people of all ages, backgrounds and interests, and the SMS version is a logical extension of that." It took one person four weeks to translate the whole Bible - both Old and New Testaments - into SMS form. And, according to Mr Chant, it would require more than 30,000 messages to send it in its entirety by phone - at a cost of 11p per message. The society used the Contemporary English Version of the Bible, and says it remained faithful to the original text. The meaning and order of words were retained, with spellings only altered in order to accord with the idiosyncratic language of texters. The new software, which can be downloaded for free, is "ideal for church leaders, youth leaders, teachers and home group leaders to send verses of encouragement, reminders of bible study themes, reminders of Sunday sermons", according to the website. It calls this latest version of the Bible "the full Contemporary English Version with a modern twist" and adds: "It is our prayer that many can be touched with the Word of God through this programme." People with a mobile phone and data cable can connect to their computer and send messages directly. Otherwise, messages go via the internet to the Bible Society server, which passes them to recipients on the sender's behalf. The verses cost nothing to access but transmission is on a strictly pre-paid basis. Selected passages can be sent together with a personal message, amounting to a maximum of 150 characters. Mr Chant said: "The idea is the Bible can be used and be relevant and up-to-date, just like getting a verse of the day or reading a horoscope." It is not the first time established religions have used modern technology to get their wisdom across. Two years ago, the late Pope John Paul II launched a service sending his "thought of the day" via mobile phones. His successor, Pope Benedict XVI, sent his first thought of the day - "Let us go forth in the joy of the risen Lord and trusting in his permanent help" - in April. Subscribers who no longer wish to receive daily pontifications are told to send a message reply stating "Stop Pope". The Word... or da Word GENESIS 1:1 In da Bginnin God cr8ed da heavens & da earth. Da earth waz barren, wit no 4m of life; it waz unda a roaring ocean cuvred wit dRkness OR... In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. PSALMS 82:3 Be fair 2 da poor & 2 orphans. DefNd da helpless & evry1 in need. OR... Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. JOHN 1:1 In da Bginnin waz da 1 who is called da Word. Da Word waz wit God & waz truly God. OR... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God JOHN 14:27 I giv u peace, da kind of peace dat only I can give. It isnt like da peace dat dis wrld can give. So dun be worried or afraid. OR... Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not you heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. MARK 8:36-37 Wat will u gain, if u own da whole wrld but destroy urself? Wat cld u give 2 get bak ur soul? OR... For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? You can also look here http://www.textament.com/ Edited November 12, 2009 by Hotdrink Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 The language of the KJV is just so beautiful. I would assume that is why it is often studied as literature and not just religion. I find that most of the Bible studies I've participated in prefer the NIV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.