Biblical Hebrew Forum

[fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>]

Hello Paul:

Thanks for your simple and direct answer; and your nice explanation.

At least one scholar however, opines that septuagint represents a hebrew
text different from and precedent to, the masoretic text.

Does that opinion change your answer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emanuel_Tov#Septuagint

On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Paul Zellmer <pzellmer AT sc.rr.com> wrote:

> Fred,
>
> The answer is in fact simple.  It is "no," the Greek LXX does not define
> the meaning of the Masoretic text, any more than the versions of the English
> translations define it.  The LXX is a translation, which means that there is
> an interpretive step, which is necessary to take the concept expressed by
> the original vocabulary, grammar, and syntax (the last two parts of which
> your questions always seem to overlook) and state it (the concept) using the
> target vocabulary, grammar, and syntax.  Everyone who tries to understand
> any language that is foreign to them goes through this interpretive step.
>  All that written translations of works do is to standardize the
> interpretation for those of the target language.  The translation is only as
> good as the accuracy of the interpretation and its resulting expression.  To
> some degree, all interpretations have an element of degradation of the
> original message.
>
> By continually trying to use the LXX to define the Hebrew text, most of us
> are actually running into two interpretations.  Because most of us are not
> native Greek speakers, and definitely not native Koine speakers, we have to
> interpret the LXX into English.  This adds a new level of degradation of to
> an already degraded message.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Paul Zellmer
>