Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 07/08/2005 17:40, Vadim Cherny wrote:

> > It is much better to put the
> > explantory reading in the text, and if necessary add a footnote giving a
> > more literal rendering.
> >
> >    
>
> A dangerous path, indeed. Honestly, it should be called exegesis, not
> translation. Why keep literal rendering from the readers? At the minimum, an
> honest translator must state his preference at the beginning--something
> which I have yet to see--as to the method. ...

Most translators, at least of modern English versions, explain their 
translation principles in a preface to their translations.

I am not suggesting keeping the literal rendering from the readers, but 
putting in a footnote where it can be consulted by anyone who is interested.

> ... Does he choose statistically most
> common translation? Or, perhaps, a translation justified by the context? Or,
> by the historical perspective? Or, by his exegesis needs? ...

Not his or her personal needs of course, but his or her exegesis of the 
text, with a view to the context, the historical perspective etc. It is 
impossible to translate without doing this kind of exegesis.

> ... How improbable
> translation he could adopt? Say, if the translation chosen is attested for
> only 10% of the word' entries, does that warrant a footnote of caution? I
> always found it a bit odd: manuals for electric kettles contain all kinds of
> superfluous precautions, but a manual for supposedly the salvation
> translated very vaguely.
>  

I have nothing against precautions. But if the text is all precautions 
and no clear instructions, how will you know even how to switch on the 
kettle?

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