Click on the chart for a larger view.
EDIT: 5/22/10 I switched some of the Word-for-Word tabs to reflect a cleaner view on Formal Equivalence (i.e. NASB77 and KJV). I like this new version better. Thanks Ben for the catch!
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Bible Translation (BT) Spectrum
Here is a chart I made of the spectrum as mentioned previously.
Click on the chart for a larger view.
EDIT: 5/22/10 I switched some of the Word-for-Word tabs to reflect a cleaner view on Formal Equivalence (i.e. NASB77 and KJV). I like this new version better. Thanks Ben for the catch!
Click on the chart for a larger view.
EDIT: 5/22/10 I switched some of the Word-for-Word tabs to reflect a cleaner view on Formal Equivalence (i.e. NASB77 and KJV). I like this new version better. Thanks Ben for the catch!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Interesting...I see you have the NASB77 as the most literal word-for-word translation. I went out and bought an ESV because I heard that was the most accurate equivalency.
ReplyDeleteDoes the "77" on NASB mean the year is was published?
Hey Ben!
ReplyDeleteThat is correct. The NASB77 was published in 1977. I probably should switch the location of NASB77 and KJV.
The NASB77 still utilizes the 'thees' and 'thous' in prayer language while the NASB 1995 update took them out.
I like the ESV as an 'essential' literal translation. I do not know if I would state that it is the most accurate translation, but it is one of the most up-to-date translations.
Language is always changing and especially the English language. English Translations are always in need of revision and updating.
Ben,
ReplyDeleteI switched the NASB77 and KJV to better reflect the word-for-word scale. Good catch.
FYI - I also use an ESV for my Bible Study and have enjoyed it
1) NIV is really in the middle? Previously I love this version, but later I have found that version affected heavily by their theological bias.
ReplyDelete2) Recently when I study it with other versions using the Greek text as a basis. I find its translation quite different from the Greek Text.
Hey Philip,
ReplyDeleteThanks for stopping by. Here are my thoughts:
1) NIV translators (no matter which theological bias you may be referring to - which does happen even though translator teams for any translation try to compensate against such bias) strived to make a translation that fit between the word for word versus the thought for thought style. I would easily concede that some passages in the NIV are more thought for thought, but overall the NIV team took a balanced approach to their translation. Could it be moved a little towards the dynamic side? Sure, but not by much as compared to the New Living Translation which is totally a dynamic translation. I have found the Holman Christian Standard Bible to more of a middle translation as well.
2. Keep working with the Greek. It is the best way to go. I do encourage the more Greek the better. Just doing word studies does not do justice to the syntax behind the Greek. Keep comparing though. Translations are always in need of revision because language changes so rapidly.
Do you have a specific example in mind of what was so different? I am curious as to your thoughts. :-)
Again, Thanks for stopping by!