The Bible Translator: Volume 71, Issue 3

This paper explores the background of the phrase stoma pros stoma as it occurs in 2 John 12 and 3 John 14. If John drew from Num 12.8 and the “Prophet like Moses” theme in the Pentateuch when writing this phrase, then it may have not only rhetorical, but also theological significance in these letters. A translation of this phrase is offered that maintains John’s connection to the Septuagint and remains sensitive to the context of the letter closings. View Less

This project addresses the problem of Bible translations that appear wooden as a result of following a source language text too closely. It examines what effect a discourse workshop focusing on receptor language structures had on translators and their revisions to selected Scripture texts in three translation projects in Liberia. The article evaluates the process, material, and outcomes of the workshop and gives recommendations for improvement and further training. View Less

When a change of speaker in a Scripture text is not explicitly introduced by a speech orienter, Bible readers may feel the text is “intrusive.” This article proposes a taxonomy for categorizing such intrusive voices in various passages of Scripture. The intrusion may be external (due to scribal activity) or internal (as written by the original author). Internal intrusions can be further classified as citations or unmarked conversational turns. Textual signals that a change of speaker has occurred in the original texts include a change in deictic reference (primarily pronominal) and change in semantic content. The article lists orthographic and linguistic devices that translators have used in existing Scripture translations to clarify that a change of speaker has occurred, and also examines several passages where it is not fully clear whether an intrusive voice is present or not. View Less

Three major English translations, NRSV, ESV, and NASB, render וְאֵיךְ נֹאמַר אֵלָיו מֵת הַיֶּלֶד וְעָשָׂה רָעָה׃‎ as “How then can we tell him the child is dead? He may do himself some harm.” These translations insert the reflexive pronoun “himself” as the object of עשׂה‎. While such a reading is possible, it is not at all probable when we take into account how reflexives are expressed in Biblical Hebrew, as well as the syntax and semantics of עשׂה‎. This article contributes to our understanding of 2 Sam 12.18 not by offering a new translation of וְעָשָׂה רָעָה‎, but by providing a linguistic explanation for why translators should reject the reflexive “harm himself” and instead render the phrase as “he may do harm” (so MEV). View Less

The word wĕḥārûṣ in Dan 9.25 may mean something different from the usual rendering “moat.” A study of (1) the use of ḥārûṣ in the Hebrew Bible, (2) the fact that Dan 9.25-27 contains intertextual allusions to Isa 10.22-23 and 28.22, 27, where ḥārûṣ and neḥĕrāṣāh are found in prophecies of destruction, (3) the context of the verse that concludes with ûbĕṣôq hāʿittîm “and in a time of distress,” and (4) the surrounding passage that reinterprets Jeremiah’s prophecy of seventy years of exile as seventy “weeks” of years, which includes the postexilic era, may lead to a new understanding of wĕḥārûṣ in this verse. View Less

Much of Western Christianity continues to follow late medieval translation practices in translating yahweh and kurios. Since then, mainstream usage of “Lord” has slumped and evolved, with the little remaining usage often carrying a distinctly sinister connotation. The deep attachment to “Lord” within Christianity constitutes a second problem: although it creates methodological inconsistency, its historical super-sanctified status is likely the reason the terminology seems so impervious to change. Septuagint data highlight a further problem for sustaining “the LORD/Lord,” since doing so creates a grammatical mismatch with kurios (with regard to the definite article). These three problems call for reassessment of the ongoing suitability of “Lord” in English Bible translation and for a more context-driven methodology. This is defined and applied in a range of New Testament contexts for the purposes of demonstrating feasibility (rather than finality). View Less

The style of James’s epistle receives much acclaim. Among other techniques like alliteration and rhythm, James enjoys a play on words. I propose that James puns on the concept of “filling” with three words in Jas 2.20-23: κενέ (“empty,” v. 20), ἐτελειώϑη (“be complete,” v. 22), and ἐπληρώϑη (“be fulfilled,” v. 23), to the effect that an “empty” person is told to learn from the “filled out” faith of Abraham whose willingness to sacrifice Isaac “fulfilled” the earlier pronouncement about his righteousness. This suggestion builds on discussions concerning the relationship between vv. 20, 22, and vv. 22-23. It also draws out often neglected connotations of τελειόω. This wordplay fits into a wider “completion” theme in James and may even have been picked up by the Shepherd of Hermas and the Didache. View Less

This note summarises the different ways numerous translations have rendered the Greek word toiautēn in 1 Cor 11.16, the implications that the different options could have for interpreting the verse, and how readers in various cultures may perceive Paul’s attitude towards his original readers. View Less

In response to two articles by Izaak de Hulster in The Bible Translator, this note describes ideophone use in the Gbaya translation of the Song of Songs as a type of pleonastic translation. View Less