Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 29/07/2005 05:54, Bearpecs AT aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 7/28/2005 10:21:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,  
> peterkirk AT qaya.org writes:
>
> At the  very least it is wrong to say that any unclear or unnatural 
> translation  "must not be avoided", which seems to be a suggestion that 
> clarity and  naturalness in translation are invalid as criteria and must 
> not be taken  into account in translation. 
>
>
> I can't speak for Newmark, but I think that while naturalness is a valid  
> criterion, it is not as much a priority as conveying as much as possible of the  
> sense of the original.  The same goes for clarity, ...

Hayyim, I understand that different people put different priorities on 
clarity and naturalness. And that is appropriate as the strength of this 
requirement depends on the target audience. But Newmark seems to suggest 
that it is illegitimate even to take these into account. I disagree.

For a good defence of the need for clarity, accuracy and naturalness in 
Bible translation (including a New Testament focus), see 
http://www.ibs.org/niv/munger/index.php.


--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.6/59 - Release Date: 27/07/2005