Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>]

IAO is evidently a transliteration of YaHoW which could 
well be a shortened form of YaHoWaH (the origianl verb).
Furthermore, this shortened form is well attested in 
theophoric components of many hebrew names where it is 
reasonably assumed that the correct has been preserved to 
the extent that evolution of pronuniciation permits.

Therefore, I find your argument to be weak.


-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Vadim Cherny
Sent: Fri 7/29/2005 8:01 AM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew] YHWH pronunciation
 
I still got no reply. Guess no one here could explain why do you discuss 
vocalization of the Tetragrammaton, though it is clearly and widely attested 
by ancients as Iao. Doesn't seem to me like a standard of honest scholarship: 
you simply disregard hard evidence when it doesn't fit your preconceptions. 
Iao cannot be a verb, so forget Iao. That kind of reasoning?

Vadim Cherny
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk  Fri Jul 29 06:40:42 2005
Return-Path: <k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail56.messagelabs.com (mail56.messagelabs.com 
[193.109.254.67])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 820304C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 06:40:42 -0400 
(EDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-8.tower-56.messagelabs.com!1122633639!99287428!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.4.15; banners=kingston.ac.uk,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [141.241.2.18]
Received: (qmail 22459 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2005 10:40:39 -0000
Received: from kuexim2.king.ac.uk (141.241.2.18)
        by server-8.tower-56.messagelabs.com with SMTP;
        29 Jul 2005 10:40:39 -0000
Received: from [141.241.17.18] (helo=KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk)
        by kuexim2.king.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1DySIA-00063k-SC
        for b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:40:39 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:40:37 +0100
Message-ID: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A3D3 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: VERBS
Thread-Index: AcWUKfTEuiDTQsNSRKGyazXvDhhgQg=From: "Read, James C" 
<K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] VERBS
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:40:43 -0000

There are many considerations to a good translation and there 
is no perfect answer to the 'best translation' as there is 
always a little lost at the expense of the gain of one priority 
over another. Many considerations have been touched upon, such 
as clarity, natural speech, uniform translation, literal etc.

On the view of translating the original sense of the verbs I have 
the following examples to make. I intend in now way to suggest 
that this is a superior method of translating hebrew texts but 
just one which I feel would adequately capture Rolf's ideas of 
hebrew verbs.
In English it is quite possible to create tenseless narratives 
which can be interpreted as future, past or present. We do this 
by limiting ourselves to the use of the present coninuous, 
present simple, present perfect and past perfect tenses.

e.g.

Abraham and Isaac go out together. Isaac picks up the firewood 
and puts it on his back. Abraham sets off and Isaac follows him. 
Isaac asks his Father 'Where are we going?' but Abraham doesn't 
answer. Abraham and Isaac walk up the hill together and then 
Abraham takes his son, lays him to the altar and ties him to it. 
He raises his knife and is about to kill Isaac when a yahowah's 
messenger appears and tells Abraham to stop. The messenger tells 
Abraham that there is a ram in the bushes which he can offer 
instead.
Abraham finds the ram and offers it to yahowah...

The above is not a translation of a hebrew text but a summary from 
memory of a story we all know well. 
Subconsciously we put the story in the past because (AND ONLY BECAUSE) 
our tradition relates the story to a well series of past events.
However if I put the same story in a context like:

'This is the vision Yahowah has given me...' The story can be told with 
the exact same words and understood as a prophecy for the future.

NB I am not saying this is the one true way of translating hebrew 
texts because there are clearly other factors to consider such as 
natural speech etc.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk  Fri Jul 29 06:43:45 2005
Return-Path: <k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from mail59.messagelabs.com (mail59.messagelabs.com 
[195.245.230.83])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C8FC84C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 06:43:44 -0400 
(EDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: k0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-7.tower-59.messagelabs.com!1122633822!73644810!1
X-StarScan-Version: 5.4.15; banners=kingston.ac.uk,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [141.241.2.18]
Received: (qmail 17605 invoked from network); 29 Jul 2005 10:43:42 -0000
Received: from kuexim2.king.ac.uk (141.241.2.18)
        by server-7.tower-59.messagelabs.com with SMTP;
        29 Jul 2005 10:43:42 -0000
Received: from [141.241.17.18] (helo=KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk)
        by kuexim2.king.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
        id 1DySL8-00067l-Bw; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:43:42 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:41:40 +0100
Message-ID: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A3D4 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [b-hebrew]  etymology opinion question for the list
Thread-Index: AcWT0tEkZo3F9OMgQe6CAdaw8JmxfwAV0mqb
From: "Read, James C" <K0434995 AT kingston.ac.uk>
To: "Gene Gardner" <g_gardner1234 AT yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.6
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] etymology opinion question for the list
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:43:45 -0000


This is a good case in point because the name has changed in 
meaning drastically in its journey through the various languages.

In hebrew this was a normal, everyday and very popular name.
In English, this is a name which can only rightly be used by 
the Messiah and anyone calling himself Jesus would be looked on 
as either a crackpot or someone with severe delusions of grandeur.

-----Original Message-----
From: b-hebrew-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org on behalf of Gene Gardner
Sent: Fri 7/29/2005 1:16 AM
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: [b-hebrew]  etymology opinion question for the list
 
As an example, the way that the English name Jesus was
derived from the semitic Yeshua. Starting in Hebrew or
Aramaic, to Greek, to Latin, and then to English. It
is stated that the original meaning ends up with the
name Jesus through all of these language processes.
Would the list members consider this the norm?



                
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs 
 
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.


This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.
>From peterkirk AT qaya.org  Fri Jul 29 07:29:48 2005
Return-Path: <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from pan.hu-pan.com (unknown [67.15.6.3])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDCBD4C00B
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:29:47 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from 213-162-124-237.peterk253.adsl.metronet.co.uk
        ([213.162.124.237] helo=[10.0.0.1])
        by pan.hu-pan.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.51)
        id 1DyT3f-00058Q-FW; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:29:46 +0100
Received: from 127.0.0.1 (AVG SMTP 7.0.338 [267.9.6]);
        Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:27:40 +0100
Message-ID: <42EA12AC.3070405 AT qaya.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:27:40 +0100
From: Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
        rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050511
X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en, en-us, az, ru, tr, he, el, fr, de
To: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
References: 
<6B84A53BD25BCA46B070A05DD8C8C9F813A3C1 AT KUDBEX01.kuds.kingston.ac.uk>       
<008a01c5933d$6b84f190$ea81fea9@ttttt>  <42E8D501.6060706 AT qaya.org>     
<001201c593a3$30b24930$ea81fea9@ttttt>  <42E92EBF.6060107 AT qaya.org>     
<006001c593c2$41569920$ea81fea9@ttttt>
        <42E96103.6080703 AT qaya.org> <003f01c59426$0c80e890$ea81fea9@ttttt>
In-Reply-To: <003f01c59426$0c80e890$ea81fea9@ttttt>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
        please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - pan.hu-pan.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.ibiblio.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - qaya.org
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] VERBS
X-BeenThere: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: Hebrew Bible List <b-hebrew.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/b-hebrew>
List-Post: <mailto:b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew>,
        <mailto:b-hebrew-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 11:29:48 -0000

On 29/07/2005 11:12, Rolf Furuli wrote:

>... If people thinks that their
>theoretical translation principles are the only ones that can convey meaning
>from the SL accurately and very different principles/theories cannot, then
>Jesus` words can be applied.
>
>

This does not apply to me. I have never claimed that relatively literal
translation is invalid, only that it is appropriate only for a certain
rather limited audience. Whether this applies to Newmark and to
yourself, I will leave for you to judge. Presumably not to yourself,
because you do acknowledge below "I do not say that modern idiomatic
translations should not be made." But the passage you quoted from
Newmark suggests that he considers such translations invalid, in so far
as they depart from literalness in ways which are not strictly required
by referential and pragmatic accuracy. But then you also wrote "Neither
I nor Newmark has said that a word-by-word translation is the only fine
translation.", so presumably you understand Newmark's position as more
qualified than it seems to be from the short passages you quoted.

By the way, I have put some of my observations on this thread on the
Better Bibles Blog,
http://englishbibles.blogspot.com/2005/07/newmark-on-word-for-word-translation.html.

>Any translator wants to convey the SL text clear and accurate to the TL
>readers. However, the methods of modern Bible translators (Newmark deals
>with translation generally) often prevent both goals to be achieved at the
>same time, and
>the translators do not understand it! Therefore they are fooling themselves,
>according to Newmark.
>
>

Well, I am sure that Newmark has some valuable criticisms. But your
necessarily brief and selective summary of his position requires
significant qualification.

>...
>
>I do not say that modern idiomatic translations should not be made. To the
>contrary, such versions serve the interests of the general Bible reader in a
>very
>fine way. What I do say is that the translators should admit that such
>translations are not the best ones for *any* target group. ...
>

I am sure that most such translators would admit that. Eugene Nida
certainly has [not "did" because he is still alive and so has probably
not stopped admitting it], and so have I. We would agree that other
styles of translation are required for the relatively small group of
those who want, need and are capable of in depth Bible study, but do not
read the original languages. But the needs of such readers have been
reasonably well met, at least in major languages, for centuries, whereas
the needs of a more typical audience of non-specialists with little
Bible background knowledge were not being met when Nida put forward his
principles of dynamic equivalence and idiomatic translation.

>... Those advocating an idiomatic method believe that the only way to make
>a good translation is to use clear and natural English.  Those advocating a
>literal translation accept that this is fine for many or most Bible readers. 
>...
>

It seems that the only point on which we really disagree here is which
group is the majority. And as this issue is hardly related to Hebrew, I
suggest that we agree to differ on this point.
...

>
>I do not appeal to the authority of anybody, but I referred to one author
>whose book was a part of the curriculum in applied linguistics i Oslo. And I
>found his thoughts very interesting. I do not fight against translation
>orthodoxy, but I argue against the view that "our orthodox translation
>theory is the only theory that can create translations that convey the
>meaning of the SL accurately," and the keyword here is "target group". ...
>

Here you are arguing against a straw man, or possibly against Newmark.
No one else in this thread has suggested that their theory is the only
valid theory.

>... And
>I argue against the view that single words are not important for
>translation, but units above the word must be used.
>
>
>
Well, this is a separate issue, and one on which I strongly disagree if
you really mean that units above the word must not be used. Now I accept
that words are important, but how they are organised into phrases,
clauses, sentences and entire discourses is also important. But in
practice you seem to admit this, as for example when you wrote in
another posting (which I have not studied in detail) "there are
important aspectual distinctions in many contexts which should be
conveyed in translation" - in other words, you have to take into account
the context and not just the word in deciding how to translate verb forms.

--
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