Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Bill Rea <bsr15 AT cantsl.it.canterbury.ac.nz>]

Peter wrote:-


>
> Perhaps you can explain to me and this group where they fitted, because
> if you remember you left me very confused about your model and its
> terminology.

If you think of the spectrum running from left to right from word-for-word
through to paraphrase, then the NASB is to the left of the NIV which is to
the left of the TEV, with the NIV sitting closer to the NASB than the TEV.
If you look at Leman's accuracy figures from the link you posted yesterday
you can see this:-

NASB(1995) 37.5%
NIV        54.2%
TEV        91.7%

Basically these ``accuracy figures'' are a measure of the extent to which
the version has used dynamic equivalence or paraphrasing rather than
a more literal word-for-word rendering. (That's assuming their end
meaning matches what Leman thinks is right!) This is very close to
what my spectrum idea is about, but I don't use right and wrong as
my descriptors.

> And is this person "biblically illiterate"? I doubt it, after at least 8
> years of studying two different Bible versions. So your anecdotal
> evidence doesn't even support your thesis.

You missed my point completely. Jeff Zizz claimed for the USA there is
an over-emphasis on word-for-word translations. I presume this would
be reflected in sales figures. In NZ they sell so rarely they are not a
stock item in some Christian book stores. I could have cut the story and
just stated some Christian book stores don't stock the NASB because it
doesn't sell.

Bill Rea, IT Services, Canterbury  University \_
E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz              </   New
Phone 64-3-364-2331, Fax  64-3-364-2332      /)  Zealand
Unix Systems Administrator                  (/'