Question Concerning Inspiration (was Joe)
mc2499 at mclink.it
Mon Dec 11 16:57:30 EST 2000
>Ian, is the comment below intended personally against me? Translation may
>my main occupation, and I admit to being an amateur at history, but I don't
>see why a translator cannot also be a good historian, unless you are
>at a personal level. In fact I am seriously trying to understand the
>principles of history. I had hoped to find that they were based on proper
>scientific logic. If their foundation is the type of logic I have often
>in your postings, then those foundations need to be relaid. I may be forced
>to agree with Henry Ford (was it?) that "history is bunk" and start an
>alternative way of looking at the past on proper scientific principles.
>I would love to do a study of your uses of the word "if". It seems that you
>love to prefix an outrageously speculative statement with "if", state a
>logical (sometimes) conclusion from it, and then continue as if your
>conclusion has been demonstrated. This is not logic! How about this for a
>proof that 2+2 is not equal to 4: If 2+2 = 5, then 2+2 is not equal to 4,
>From: Ian Hutchesson [mailto:mc2499 at mclink.it]
>Sent: 11 December 2000 11:22
>To: Biblical Hebrew
>Subject: Re: Question Concerning Inspiration (was Joe)
>If one doesn't want to understand the principles of history, then I don't
>see why one should even bother to comment.
I hope that this is a clear generic statement.
>History is not important to such a person.
This does follow from the first conditional, doesn't it?
ie those people who show no interest in the principles of history
>wash their hands of significant input
(the input provided by historical contextualisation for a text)
>if they are in the business of translation.
In the business of translation, the contextualisation of a text is extremely
important. Without such aid as a historical contextualisation can provide,
one limits the efficacy of one's translation work.
I fall over my own rhetoric at times.
More information about the b-hebrew