[b-hebrew] MT for all OT Translations?
Reinier de Blois
r.de.blois at solcon.nl
Mon Jun 21 12:02:01 EDT 2004
That does not make your answer irrelevant. What you said is still true
for most translations produced by the UBS. Yet there is a tendency to
stay a little closer to the MT these days and not rush to other versions
whenever a translator runs into a somewhat obscure text. If you look at
the preliminary and interim report of the Hebrew Old Testament Text
Project published by UBS you see that in the majority of cases where
there is a textual problem the report advises to follow the MT. An
example of a very recent English translation that has followed the MT
more than most other translations (but certainly not exclusively!) is
the Contemporary English Version.
Reinier de Blois
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of
> Harold R. Holmyard III
> Sent: maandag 21 juni 2004 15:43
> To: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] MT for all OT Translations?
> Dear Philip,
> I just noticed that you had capitalized Bible Societies, perhaps
> referring to the United Bible Societies. In that case, forget my
> answer as irrelevant. I somehow took you to mean Bible translations
> produced by organizations.
> Harold Holmyard
> >>"All Bible Societies in the world use the Masoretic Text for Old
> >>Testament translations and note the variants in the footnotes".
> >>Would you agree with the above statement?
> >HH: No, I wouldn't. It's not true. Many translations seek what they
> >believe was the original reading, and that may be preserved in the
> >LXX, the DSS, or possibly something else. Translations occasionally
> >resort to emendations on the assumption that the preserved readings
> >are not original but testify to the presumed original reading of the
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b> -hebrew
More information about the b-hebrew