Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 17/11/2005 18:46, Read, James C wrote:

> ...
>
> When I say that I agree with the NWT policy of consistency I mean that 
> I agree
> that a particular concept should be translated consistently otherwise the
> translator could rightly come under the accusation of forcing his own
> interpretation on the poor readers who often remain in ignorance of the
> decisions which have been taken for them.

I agree with this, and I am sure that every reputable translator would 
do so. When the meaning of the original text is the same in two places, 
the translation should generally be the same - although some stylistic 
leeway should be allowed. The problem arises when consistent translation 
is enforced where the original language meaning varies.

> Where I disagree with the NWT is that those core concepts, according to my
> experience, cannot be mapped onto our current definition of a 'word'. ...
>
> In conclusion,
> a) I agree that consistency is a requirement
> b) I do not agree that the unit of consistency should be the arbitrary 
> division
> we currently ascribe to 'words'
I totally agree with you, with the consistency requirement understood as 
avove.


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