Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Tna Swg <tnaswg AT yahoo.com>]

Hebraista/e:
   
  While this may not seem to be onlist, please bear with me. I recently was 
lucky enough to get a copy of Louw and Nida's Greek-English Lexicon of the 
New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. I was reading at it random, what a 
delight, and I remember someone, I remember not their names, said that 
interpretation was not the same as translation.
   
  While I consider that all interpretation is not translation with target and 
source languages, where these two are different beyond what I understand 
Diakonov’s level of dialect is, but all translation is interpretation. Is 
this based in definitions? Interpretation is to make clear, to proclaim, if I 
can be so silly, and translation, good translation, of course, doesn’t it or 
isn’t it the hope to mean something clearly. Preferably what the intentio 
auctoris was/is/shall be.
   
  Just asking. I don’t know if this qualifies as onlist type of discussion. 
If it doesn’t, mea culpa.
   
  Regards,
   
  Marc Bauer
  

                
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze. 
>From kwrandolph AT email.com  Sat Feb 25 12:05:56 2006
Return-Path: <kwrandolph AT email.com>
X-Original-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from webmail-outgoing.us4.outblaze.com
        (webmail-outgoing2.us4.outblaze.com [205.158.62.67])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ECDE4C008
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:56 -0500 
(EST)
Received: from unknown (unknown [192.168.9.180])
        by webmail-outgoing.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix) with QMQP id
        7436018001C4
        for <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:05:52 +0000 
(GMT)
X-OB-Received: from unknown (205.158.62.50)
        by wfilter.us4.outblaze.com; 25 Feb 2006 17:05:57 -0000
Received: by ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com (Postfix, from userid 1001)
        id B9CD5164278; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:05:54 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:54 -0500
Received: from [69.226.237.3] by ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com with http for
        kwrandolph AT email.com; Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:05:54 -0500
X-Originating-Ip: 69.226.237.3
X-Originating-Server: ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com
Message-Id: <20060225170554.B9CD5164278 AT ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] translation v. interpretation
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: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 17:05:56 -0000

Marc:

You have walked onto a mine field that has been=20
hotly contested on this list in the past. Suffice=20
it to say, all translation is interpretation.

More accurately, the question is one of how literal=20
should a translation be, or how much paraphrasing=20
is allowed, before a translation is no longer=20
considered a translation but a paraphrase? All=20
translations have a certain amount of paraphrase in=20
them, just because of the differences in languages.=20
It is often impossible to have an understandable=20
translation without paraphrasing. But where does it=20
cross the line? There is no hard and fast rule, so=20
each person will have his own read on the question,=20
i.e. each person will have his own subjective=20
response to where that line should be.

I don't want to rehash prior arguments. And yes it=20
is a legitimate discussion for this list.

Karl W. Randolph.

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tna Swg" <tnaswg AT yahoo.com>
>=20
> Hebraista/e:
>=20
>    While this may not seem to be onlist, please bear with me. I=20
> recently was lucky enough to get a copy of Louw and Nida's=20
> Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic=20
> Domains. I was reading at it random, what a delight, and I remember=20
> someone, I remember not their names, said that interpretation was=20
> not the same as translation.
>=20
>    While I consider that all interpretation is not translation with=20
> target and source languages, where these two are different beyond=20
> what I understand Diakonov=92s level of dialect is, but all=20
> translation is interpretation. Is this based in definitions?=20
> Interpretation is to make clear, to proclaim, if I can be so silly,=20
> and translation, good translation, of course, doesn=92t it or isn=92t=20
> it the hope to mean something clearly. Preferably what the intentio=20
> auctoris was/is/shall be.
>=20
>    Just asking. I don=92t know if this qualifies as onlist type of=20
> discussion. If it doesn=92t, mea culpa.
>=20
>    Regards,
>=20
>    Marc Bauer

--=20
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/