Wonderment I have one question:
Did Fred Franz wear a cape with a big F on it with with a lightning/bible theme?
-Sab
No need to know Hebrew and Greek for Bible Translation, according to the Watchtower's Branch Organization Manual revised 2003
by dgp 48 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Wonderment
sabastious:
That is funny.
-
TD
This is something of a tangent, but there is a point to be made:
A good example of a religious leader who did not know Greek was Joseph Smith. This lack of knowledge directly resulted in linguistic faux pas in the Book of Mormon.
In the Book of Mormon, Lehi & Co. come to America in the late 7th century B.C., well before Alexander conquered the Holy Land and the Jews started speaking Greek. Therefore there should be zero Greek influence in the Book of Mormon --No Greek words and no Greek expressions.
For example, the word "synagogue" should not appear in the Book of Mormon because the word was not coined until centuries after Lehi allegedly came to America. But it does.
A more subtle example revolves around one of John's pet expressions. John was fond of saying "Αμεν αμεν λεγω σοι"
If you translate this expression for idiomatic content, you would translate it; "Most truly I say to you" or something similar. But the AV translates it ultra literally as "Verily, verily I say unto thee." This expression should not be in the Book of Mormon, because it is not a native English expression. It entered the English language via a poor translation of this Greek idiom. (i.e. The AV)
But a poor farm boy who didn't know any Greek wouldn't know that. He would have no way of knowing which expressions it was safe to borrow from the King James Version and which ones would be anachronistic in the Book of Mormon. "Verily verily I say unto thee" appears a number of times in the BOM. --And it shouldn't.
Similarly, there are subtle pitfalls (Which I've mentioned already) that someone with zero knowledge of Greek would fall into if they tried to create a translation simply by aping an interlinear. If you or anyone tried this, scholars would have a field day picking the flesh from your bones afterwards.
-
Paulapollos
DGP,
the reference work you have posted on here was (partially) revised in early 2008, but as far as I know, there were very little significant changes to it. The key to all Society translation projects regardijng the NWT is to follow as closely as possible the English language version of the NWT.Nobody is ever required to have any knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, understandably, since most people do not have familiarity with such languages. The important thing is that the Bible translation team is familiar with English. "Each translator should be equipped with his own set of basic dictionaries and reference works that are used frequently. Normally a translator should have at his desk a copy of the English Reference Bible, the standard vernacular Bible(s), the organization’s standard English dictionary, a dictionary of English idioms, an accurate and up-to-date English-vernacular dictionary, and a grammar reference for the vernacular language."
In order to school the prospective translation team, a brother is sent out from Brooklyn's Translation Services Department. Usually, translation starts with a gospel. The role of the trainer is to work with the team to explain 3 primary things: 1) the role of the WTBTS Bible Translation Questions database; 2) to explain the importance of faithful adherence to the published English Bible translation; 3) to advise on what kind of translation choices are considered permissible.
The key principle that is considered by the organisation is: "Above all, they should convey the truth as it is expressed in the original English. The translator is not the author. He has no liberty to insert his own ideas, nor is he authorized to summarize a paragraph and put it in his own words.—Compare Luke 1:3, 4." This quote is vital. It is the default position of the organisation in both publication and Bible translation. For Bible translation, the translator must express what is said in the original English New World Translation. Where you are unsure of that the verse says and means, the Society will tell you what it means. This is done by the following process:
The translation team comes across a problem scripture, such as Matthew 24:45-47. Typically, the "problem" is considered to be in regards to the idea that the word "slave" implies a singular, and the resulting application of the verse in the Societys' publications is in direct contradiction to that.
The team then searches the BTQ database, and comes back with numerous replies to the issue, given by the Writing Department to various translation teams. If they seek to apply a particular solution, they ask for approval, either from the Bible Translation Team Overseer, or if needed, the Branch Committee. However, in many cases with that particular scripture, the translation team is split between those who wish to translate the offending scripture as it is in the Bible, and those who want to ensure that nothing that may get them in trouble with the Society is done. It then comes down to a straightforward battle within that team, and in the end, the BTT Overseer's personal preferences. In the end, you often end up with a strikingly wooden translation, or a meaning-based translation that is subjected to much puzzlement in the field, since it often lies at odds with what the field thought the Bible said, or a shoddy compromise that pleases no-one. The invariable result is bitter recriminations within Bethel amongst the translators, and a field of peopl who have doctrinal concerns. Anyone who has translated the Bible and the publications for the Society knows exactly what I am talking about.
Women are permitted to help translate, because even the Society recognises that women have abilites equal to men in this field - although even this "recognition" is grudging. In most cases, women make up the bulk of the translation team, and they are often the ones under most mental strain. Their natural language skills are repressed because the male overseer typically applies the Society guidelines stringently. In every single translation team I have ever seen, it was gifted women carrying out the natural language translation, and limited male overseers telling them "you can't do that." I have seen numerous female translators leave Bethel after major translation projects suffering from mental issues.
The key to choosing a Bible translator in the organisation is his or her's "spiritual qualifications." In essence, what this means for Bible Transaltion Teams is - do they follow our "directions", do they kick up as minimum a fuss as possible, and how has their performance under the pressure of printing deadlines been? Non-JW translators are, as a rule, almost never ever used. The idea of a "native speaker" who is not a JW, reviewing the Bible translation, is very strictly controlled. It can be done, under the Society's guidance during a process called field-testing, but it is typically a native who is undergoing a "progressive" bible study, or an unbaptized publisher. However, these are considered only in execeptional circumstances. A scholar or objective review of the Society's Bible translation is never sought.
The other internal Society publications that are relevant to the these processes are "Translating for Our Publications" and the "Guidelines for Meaning Based Translation" (GMBT Manual). Geoff Jackson was primarily responsible for the collation of GMBT, along with the now India Branch Co-ordinator, and at least two other brothers, one in the UK branch. The laughable "Translating for Our Publications" begins with the Babel account, and proceeds to explain the basis for the "techniques" to be used in translation. Quite how the Babel account truly plays any part in modern day translation is indeed a mystery, despite the TOP's ridiculous insinuation that God will help you translate, thru the direction of his spirit and the guidance of the Writing Committee. And if you think that is bad, you should see the "training" that is given to Bible translators and publication translators. It's a painful thing to witness.
PP
-
Paulapollos
Wonderment,
I just read your comment: "Now, why are NWT teams showing this flexibility if they don't know what they are doing? Or, if they could not read the originals? Somehow, the translation teams have some individuals who know what they are doing, and apparently there is a team of translators who bridge differences between the English, the originals, and the target languages."
I'm afraid there is no "team" that "bridges differences between the English, the originals, and the target languages." You are mistaken. The choices made by the Greek and Spanish teams are when they have checked the BTQ Database beause they could not translate the English verse in a understandable, natural way in their target language. They then applied a solution that has been pre-approved for another language. Or, in an extreme circumstance, they have written direct to the Writing Committee, been given express guidance and have followed that. The guidance they recieved is added to the BTQ Database. That guidance may contain a brief discussion of why a Greek or Hebrew word may allow a different rendering - but that is the province of the Writing Committee, who generally quote a scholar from "Christendom" and then say 'perhaps this alternative rendering may sound more natural in your language."
Translation teams do NOT, under any circumstances, check extant copies of the "original language manuscripts" or discuss the various shades of meanings of Greek and Hebrew amongst themselves and come to translation decisions. Translation Teams do what they are told. If there are differences in the translations of Greek and Spanish, it is because Brooklyn said it was allowed. If Brooklyn is not aware of these changes, disfellowshippings may follow.
PP
-
dgp
Paulapollos, I agree with most of what you say, and I am under the impression that you made the same points I made, only in a more succint and readable way.
May I just raise your attention to one point:
Nobody is ever required to have any knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, understandably, since most people do not have familiarity with such languages.
Yeah. Most people are not familiar with Chinese, either, and you have to master Chinese for people to ask you to do a translation from or into that language. I am aware that most people don't speak Greek or Hebrew. That is not the point in question. The point in question is, this people are working from a translation, not an original, and then a translation that was made by people who were not exactly the best candidates to do the job. These people are required to be true to that questionable translation, and, should they find a doctrinal problem, they need to follow what the organization says, not what the Bible says. The organization is claiming that they translate from English consulting the originals, and that is a blatant lie, used only for the general public. They, and the translators working under their control, know that no use is made of the originals.
Simple point: If you want people to devote their lives to "what the Bible really teaches", would you please be decent enough to have it correctly translated, no matter the language? Would you please recognize doctrinal problems - meaning mistakes in your doctrine- whenever they come up? Would you please not lie about how the translation is really made?
Now, if anyone would give me the more updated copy of that manual, I would be very happy.
TD: I am glad you made this post. I didn't know those inconsistencies appear in the Book of Mormon. Your post is not tangential, in my opinion. A qualified translator would notice that "synagogue" does not belong in the book. If a similar thing happened within the Watchtower and the translator asked uncomfortable questions, those questions would be swept under the rug, according to Watchtower procedure. This would be right before Jehovah's eyes, or at least the organization.
Wonderment, what about my questions?
You keep saying the same thing: "The ENGLISH NWT was made by great scholars, namely Fred Franz and George Gangas, and others". Were you there to see them pick Greek and Hebrew originals and laboriously translate? What about ALL OTHER TRANSLATIONS?
I can answer one of your questions right now:
Now, if he was able to dominate those languages the way he did, why would someone here in this website doubt that he was not able to dominate the bible languages?
We have no proof that he "dominated" (meaning "master") those languages. Now, tell me: Does the fact that you "dominate" one foreign language automatically means you will "dominate" another?
-
JustHuman14
Indeed, there are 30,000 Greek JW's that read NWT a translation that violeted every Hellenic grammar and meaning( in order to fit GB's dogma) and still believe it is the best translation ever made for the Greek Scriptures!!!
-
Paulapollos
Hi DGP,
I thought you might pick out that point I made about not knowing Greek and Hebrew, rightly!
"The point in question is, this people are working from a translation, not an original, and then a translation that was made by people who were not exactly the best candidates to do the job. These people are required to be true to that questionable translation, and, should they find a doctrinal problem, they need to follow what the organization says, not what the Bible says. The organization is claiming that they translate from English consulting the originals, and that is a blatant lie, used only for the general public. They, and the translators working under their control, know that no use is made of the originals."
I would absolutely agree with this. For the record (!), the organisation's claims about NWT translations are worded in such a way as to convince people that the original languages play some part in the translation, and that there is an objective scholarly approach to how the New World Translation is translated into new languages. I can honestly say, from personal experience, that nothing could be further from the truth.
The Society's position, if challenged, is simple (and you can get this in writing by simply writing to your Branch Office and asking them) - the translation of the Bible into the vernacular is carried out by a team that pays strict attention to the accuracy, and naturalness of the translation. They work with the guidance of an experienced comittee that has a fine track record in translating the Bible from the original Greek and Hebrew.
In short, their answer is boiled down to - so what if the translators have no knowledge of Greek and Hebrew? We have an English translation that is excellent, and that is the source text. We have extensively consulted Greek and Hebrew manuscripts when translating the English NWT. So, in a sense, the new translation is a "translation", where the translators have "consulted" the original languages.
The Society and the supporters of the NWT are adept at playing fast and loose with words. When you deal with how the Society translates the NWT into various languages, the foundation argument is - "The English NWT is accurate, reliable, unbiased, has a natural flow, and so is a fine base to work from. There is no need for translators to consult the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts." Everything hinges on the English NWT. It's a laughable way to run something as potentially serious as Bible translation. Well, it would be laughable, if so many people weren't using whatever that translation says as a basis on which to live their lives.
PP
-
botchtowersociety
@DGP
I find it curious that Wonderment says that Spanish is "closer to Hebrew". I suppose he means "closer to Hebrew than English". Well, it's not. I happen to know that because we took long lessons in the origins of Spanish while we were in school, on a subject called, erm, "Spanish". But, for the benefit of others, I am copying a link to "Influences on the Spanish language" (Wikipedia): https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Influences_on_the_Spanish_language
Great post, but I think that Spanish might be more similar to Hebrew than this leads to believe. Arabic had a huge influence on the language, and Arabic belongs to the same language family as Hebrew. (I am also a Spanish speaker of Latin American Spanish).
-
Band on the Run
When it was released at the convention to great note, they said an eminent group of Bible Scholars performed the translations. My mind whizzed to Oxbridge, Harvard, Penn, Columbia, Berkeley, Sorbonne, etc. Outsiders all, yet driven by the truth of the matter to the NWT. I was a very naiive.
Months passed and my aunt and my mom had one of their sisterly chats where they cautch up with everyone from their pioneering circle. My aunt returned from special needs pioneering with no health left in her. She said it was translated bys some Bethelite whose name we heard frequently through the years. He performed my aunt's wedding. What!! So I suppose all of us are eminent in our chosen fields.
The Foundating Framers of the U.S. Constitution did not publish their notes detailing all the politicla traditing that happened. They wated a const'n, not a piece of legilsatiion. If the press ever reported the wheeling and deeling, and the sectional disputes, it would have zero dignity. The NWT appearing magically has gravitas. Hearing about Bro. Larry, Bro. MO and Bro Curly does not inspirite confidence.