Narkissos:
On top of that the addition of bracketed "[(an)other]"s where the idea is implied(hence where other Bibles may use it without brackets/italics) serves as a justification for its addition in more controversial places, e.g. Colossians 1:15ff.Never forget that the NWT is not primarily meant to be "simply read" as any other Bible but to serve as a material store for self-referential argument. From this perspective it makes a lot of sense.
Yes, in the Colossians the same has happened to the brackets in the Norwegian translation. I have got the Kingdom Interlinear here, and it is really easy to see that the word "another" gives a different meaning to this verses.
Of course this use of brackets is bound to be inconsistent. If everyEnglish/Norwegian word that has no formal equivalent in either Hebrew or Greek had to be marked out this way, several brackets would be needed in every sentence.
However it's quite interesting to see that such markers have indeed been lost in the process of translation from English to other languages...
Yes, of course. That's translation and languages in a nutshell. But a conscientious translator would not use words that changed the meaning of the text, would he?
And that's also why it is even more difficult to understand how they could see it as a smart move to use English as the "basic" language for other translations, and "unctitically" also translate the bracketed words (I don't even know if they checked other manuscript in the process...)