[B-Greek] 1 Sam 2:26 AGAQON
Iver Larsen
iver_larsen at sil.org
Sat Dec 27 23:50:35 EST 2008
The LXX is certainly a wooden rendering here. I hesitate to call it a translation, and it is not
accurate as a translation, since it loses too much of the meaning of the original Hebrew. My
sympathies to those who had to make sense of that kind of Greek without having access to the Hebrew.
Everyone with experience in very literal renderings knows that you can often only make sense of it
AFTER you have translated it back into the source language. And then - if you are a translator - you
are tempted to make a better translation.
Whether NETS should reflect the Hebrew sense, that is more or less lost in the LXX, depends on the
purpose of the translation. My impression is that the purpose is to reflect as closely as possible
the LXX, whether the Greek text makes sense or not. How a Greek person at the time would have
understood it, is difficult to say. People have a way of making sense of a text in spite of the
words used and based on overall context and common sense, especially if the text itself makes little
sense as it stands. If you want to understand the Hebrew text without knowing Hebrew, you go to a
translation of the Hebrew, not the LXX.
In this case the NETS rendering (and the boy Samouel kept going and became great and was in
favor with the Lord and with people) is somewhat better English than the LXX is good Greek since it
translates AGAQON as "was in favor", but the expression "the boy S. kept going" is as poor and
unclear English as the source is poor and unclear Greek. The verse only makes sense if you look at
the Hebrew.
Iver Larsen
Translation consultant
----- Original Message -----
From: "Albert Pietersma" <albert.pietersma at sympatico.ca>
To: "timothy mcmahon" <targum at msn.com>
Cc: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: 27. december 2008 23:52
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] 1 Sam 2:26 AGAQON
On Dec 27, 2008, at 3:48 PM, timothy mcmahon wrote:
>
> Looks like TWB in the Hebrew is not a participle but a simple
> adjective, in which case AGAQON in LXX is a woodenly accurate
> rendering which makes difficult sense, if any, in the Greek. The
> NETS translation cited above sounds like it's drawing on the Hebrew.
Meaning that NETS does not reflect the Greek?
Al
>> I'm looking at 1 Sam 2:26 in both Hebrew and Greek. Part of the
>> Greek says SAMUHL EPOREUETO KAI EMEGALUNETO KAI AGAQON KAI META
>> KURIOU KAI META ANQRWPWN, which seems to mean something like
>> "Samuel was going and was growing also good both with the Lord and
>> with people. However AGAQON translates a Hebrew participle and
>> therefore it seems that this might not be what is meant. I'm
>> pondering whether to try to force the Greek to have a meaning
>> similar to the Hebrew (since this part of the LXX is fairly
>> "literal" in its rendering of the Hebrew text as opposed to, say,
>> Isaiah or Micah) or to try to come up with a reasonable translation
>> of the Greek on its own, supposing that most who used the OG did
>> not know the underlying Hebrew. Any comments?
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list