Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Dave Washburn <dwashbur AT nyx.net>]

On Monday 09 August 2004 04:11, Peter Kirk wrote:
> On 07/08/2004 21:10, Dave Washburn wrote:
> >...  The NIV is a
> >more "dynamic equivalence" translation than the other two, ...
>
> This is true I suppose, but is a bit like saying that Washington DC is
> nearer to California than New York is. NIV is one small step nearer to
> true "dynamic equivalence", but is very far from all the way. If you
> want a dynamic equivalence translation, look for the Good News Bible
> (Today's English Version) or the New Living Translation. I don't
> recommend this style of translation for Hebrew study, but I do recommend
> it for general understanding, especially of more difficult parts of the
> Bible by those not already familiar with them.

As a rule, I don't recommend "dynamic equivalence" versions such as the TEV 
at 
all, especially in a forum such as this one.  That's why the NIV is as far as 
I went in that direction, with the accompanying caveat.  But I didn't make 
that clear, so I thank you for the elaboration.

-- 
Dave Washburn
http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
"No good.  Hit on head."   -Gronk