Near the end of our time in seminary, when we had first decided to pursue Bible translation, I remember having a conversation in class about translating a Greek word. The Greek word was a familial term that referred to a group of Christians of both genders. Some translations translate this word into English as “brothers,” others as “brothers and sisters,” still others as “brethren.” In class, I argued that since there was an English word that had the same meaning as the Greek, we should just translate it as “brethren.” At the time, I had spent 4 years getting a BA in Bible, and was just about to complete a 3-year MDiv in Bible. I had taken 4 semesters total of biblical Hebrew and 8 semesters of biblical Greek. And I considered myself pretty ready to do Bible translation. And I was so wrong.
By the end of seminary I was often criticizing Bible translations and had a pretty proud view of my own knowledge. Then came linguistics school, which taught me that languages are so much more complex than I ever could have imagined. I realized that translating from Greek (an Indo-European language) into English (another Indo-European language) was far simpler than what would face me in the future. Further, any translation I can make into English comes with almost 500 years of translation history behind it. I simply cannot translate into English without in some way relying on the work of thousands who have come before me. In linguistics school we learned more about translation theory, where I discovered (much to my chagrin at the time) that translation is actually meaning based.
Then, we studied French. You guessed it, French is another Indo-European language, but this time one I was unfamiliar with. Seeing how things have been translated into French forced me to wrestle even more with the things that I thought I knew about translation. It made me question what I knew about the meaning of words! For instance, in my mind I always wrestled with the idea of pride. Pride is sin, right. But then, when my kid does something honoring to the Lord I feel something that is akin to pride, but it doesn’t seem sinful. The only English word I had for that was pride, but that felt wrong. Learning French, I found that they have two separate words for these ideas – orgueil which is selfish, sinful pride, and fierté which is more like ‘pleasure in success.’ The later can be sin, but often is not. This forced me to wonder how much of what I think is true about the meaning of words in the Bible is really true?
Then, the bombshell – Kwakum (nope, not Indo-European, not even close). Learning Kwakum was like becoming part of a real-life fantasy novel. It was like meeting the elves in the Lord of the Rings or the hrossa in Out of the Silent Planet. It was not just a new language, it was a new way of looking at the world. The Kwakum put things in categories that I had no category for (e.g. the Kwakum have a word that means “all the male relatives on the mother’s side”). They also lack categories for things I have categories for (e.g. the Kwakum have no word for the broad category of “insect”). The Kwakum lack words and concepts for – grace, gift, etc. All of this shocked my system and opened my eyes to the fact that translation is not as clear-cut as I had supposed. There are very few easy answers in translation, and in fact many different ways to faithfully translate the same passage. In fact, biblical Hebrew has categories found neither in English or Kwakum (e.g. Hebrew has a category of “creeping things” which includes lizards, turtles, insects, rodents, and other small animals).
Stacey and I have spent the last 12 years pursuing Bible translation, completing a MA in Bible Translation, analyzing the Kwakum language, helping them develop an alphabet, working in literacy, and we have now completed around 30 Bible stories in Kwakum. We are planning to continue this work and do everything we can to get the whole Bible translated into Kwakum. The process has shaped not only how I look at translation, but how I look at meaning, communication, and what I would consider to be a good Bible translation. I just finished writing several blogs which discuss this topic, and I encourage you to read through them as you have time.
The basic expectations that I now have for a good Bible translation are: accuracy, clarity, naturalness, and acceptability. These are not my ideas, but those that have been developed through years of hard work of those who have gone before me. I have given my take on these areas in the blog posts I will link below and give you a few key points that I hope I emphasized in the posts.
PREPOSTS – there were three posts I wrote before getting to ACCURACY, which discussed meaning and audience, and explication.
- On Meaning – in this post I concluded that words do not have single dictionary meanings, but rather words have a range of meaning which depends heavily on context and audience. Words rarely share this same range of meaning between languages.
- On Audience – even within the same language, words can have different meanings, or different ranges of meaning to different audiences. Because of this, translation cannot happen without appealing to a particular audience. If the question of audience is ignored, the target audience will be only the translation team, which is less than ideal.
- On Explication – explication is when translators reveal information in the target language that does not occur explicitly in the words in the original text. This might sound scary, but all translation does this. The question is not “Do we explicate?” but rather “How much should we explicate?” My response to this is, “As much as is helpful and necessary.” I do not believe that explication is a hindrance to accuracy, or at odds with accuracy in any way, because you should never explicate inaccurate information.
POSTS ON TRANSLATION
- On Accuracy – with the above posts adding additional context, I offer this definition of accuracy – A translation is accurate when the original message is communicated to a new audience. No meaning should be added, removed, or changed in the translation.
- On Clarity – with regard to clarity I have offered this definition – A translation is considered clear when the target audience is able to understand the meaning of the text with the same level of ease as the original audience. I also believe that clarity is deeply tied to accuracy, as the original documents were meant to be clear. If we translate them to be less clear, I believe that (at least at times) that also makes them less accurate.
- On Naturalness and Acceptability – For naturalness I said that we are seeking to translate into “good Kwakum,” that is to say that as much as possible the translation should feel like it was written by a native speaker of the target language. I distinguished between Naturalness and Clarity in that an unclear translation obscures the meaning, whereas with an unnatural translation the meaning is still clear, but the translation does not feel like good Kwakum. Acceptability deals with how the community accepts the translation. We seek to avoid any unnecessary offense.
So, with all of that as context and with those definitions, I would say that a “good translation” should be: accurate, clear, natural, and accepted. This is what we strive for in our translation ministry. This is always a difficult balance, but an exciting challenge.
Now, which of the English translations would I consider “good”? Honestly, almost all of them. The more I have studied translation, and have myself translated, the more I have seen how excellent our English translations are. When you take into account their intended audience, I believe that most English translations are in fact “good.” If that seems shocking to you, you might want to read, One Bible, Many Versions by Dave Brunn. You might be surprised at how similar the different translations really are in their translation methodology. And following Brunn’s conclusions, I too believe that it is best not to fixate on a single translation, but to use multiple translations as you study the Bible.
This entire discussion began by my seeking to respond to a post by my friend, and fellow translation advisor, Aaron Shryock. In discussions, he has communicated that he disagrees with my definitions and priorities. I would have certainly disagreed with me when I was in seminary, though I would not have done it with the kindness that Aaron has. I was in need of some serious humbling!
We have been able to disagree on this as friends, and for that I am very thankful. I would encourage my friends who are reading this to consider what we have both written and try to make informed decisions about translation theory. I hope in doing so we can avoid condemning perspectives that we do not understand or like. These issues can be contentious, but they do not have to be. May God grant us all wisdom and humility!
