Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211066930
Vincent Chukwuma Onwukwe
Ambiguity surrounds the use of the term מְצַחֵק in Gen 21.9, where it is traditionally rendered “playing,” “laughing,” or “mocking.” The verb is used in the piel participle form, without any direct or indirect object. Meanwhile, the LXX’s παίζοντα μετὰ Ισαακ suggests that Ishmael was playing with Isaac, a connotation which is not evident in the MT, but which many scholars endorse. The LXX’s widely accepted rendering obscures the point of the verse; it does not portray the wordplay on the term צחק which is central in Gen 17, 18, and 21. Against this background, through a linguistic analysis of important key terms like מְצַחֵק and וַתֵּרֶא שָׂרָה, my aim is to demonstrate that the best approach to the translation and interpretation of מְצַחֵק in Gen 21.9 is not to disambiguate the term, but to interpret it as a narrative device which the narrator used to express the motif of separation.
{"title":"Looking into Sarah's Eyes: The Meaning of מְצַחֵק in Genesis 21.9","authors":"Vincent Chukwuma Onwukwe","doi":"10.1177/20516770211066930","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211066930","url":null,"abstract":"Ambiguity surrounds the use of the term מְצַחֵק in Gen 21.9, where it is traditionally rendered “playing,” “laughing,” or “mocking.” The verb is used in the piel participle form, without any direct or indirect object. Meanwhile, the LXX’s παίζοντα μετὰ Ισαακ suggests that Ishmael was playing with Isaac, a connotation which is not evident in the MT, but which many scholars endorse. The LXX’s widely accepted rendering obscures the point of the verse; it does not portray the wordplay on the term צחק which is central in Gen 17, 18, and 21. Against this background, through a linguistic analysis of important key terms like מְצַחֵק and וַתֵּרֶא שָׂרָה, my aim is to demonstrate that the best approach to the translation and interpretation of מְצַחֵק in Gen 21.9 is not to disambiguate the term, but to interpret it as a narrative device which the narrator used to express the motif of separation.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122528503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770221086946
R. Green
This study examines the translation of ethnonyms in Inuit Bible translations. An overview of the meanings associated with the concept of ethnicity is provided, followed by an introduction to Inuit languages and the history of Inuit Bible translation. Inuit translations of seven Bible passages containing ethnonyms are analyzed and evaluated. Recommendations are given which can benefit translation teams who are considering how best to express the meanings associated with some ethnonyms in the Bible.
{"title":"Translating Ethnonyms in Inuit Bibles","authors":"R. Green","doi":"10.1177/20516770221086946","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770221086946","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines the translation of ethnonyms in Inuit Bible translations. An overview of the meanings associated with the concept of ethnicity is provided, followed by an introduction to Inuit languages and the history of Inuit Bible translation. Inuit translations of seven Bible passages containing ethnonyms are analyzed and evaluated. Recommendations are given which can benefit translation teams who are considering how best to express the meanings associated with some ethnonyms in the Bible.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115376806","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211069169
Byron M. Jones
In May 2007, the Bible Society of the West Indies (BSWI) announced its translation of the New Testament into Jamaican Creole. This paper examines the perceived weak point of the project, the issue of the “crudity” or “vulgarity” of the Jamaican language in the area of sexuality, which renders it unsuitable for the holy Scriptures. The project designed a set of focus-group instruments to test acceptability in the area of sexual terminology. Findings indicated that focus-group participants generally preferred the uses of English-like forms rather than the more natural Jamaican Creole ones when dealing with sexual concepts. They preferred prignant over briid or get beli, and vorjin over uman we neva tek man yet, and so on. The challenge to the project was how to manage the association of Jamaican sexual terms with vulgarity while remaining faithful to the language. The paper concludes with an account of how this was managed.
{"title":"Appropriateness versus Naturalness in the Jamaican Creole Bible Translation Project","authors":"Byron M. Jones","doi":"10.1177/20516770211069169","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211069169","url":null,"abstract":"In May 2007, the Bible Society of the West Indies (BSWI) announced its translation of the New Testament into Jamaican Creole. This paper examines the perceived weak point of the project, the issue of the “crudity” or “vulgarity” of the Jamaican language in the area of sexuality, which renders it unsuitable for the holy Scriptures. The project designed a set of focus-group instruments to test acceptability in the area of sexual terminology. Findings indicated that focus-group participants generally preferred the uses of English-like forms rather than the more natural Jamaican Creole ones when dealing with sexual concepts. They preferred prignant over briid or get beli, and vorjin over uman we neva tek man yet, and so on. The challenge to the project was how to manage the association of Jamaican sexual terms with vulgarity while remaining faithful to the language. The paper concludes with an account of how this was managed.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130753611","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-04-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770221080201
M. Winedt
The Dictionary of the Bible and Ancient Media (DBAM) is a response to the massive growth in research and publication in the area of ancient media studies. DBAM aims at providing a tool for the study of the interdisciplinary field of ancient media studies, which includes oral tradition, oral performance, personal and collective memory, ancient literacy and scribal practice and philosophy, visual culture, and ritual. The dictionary does more than touch upon these topics; it engages with issues surrounding critical and exegetical problems in biblical studies, rabbinical studies, studies of the history of Israel, and questions as to the origin of the Christian movement. This massive undertaking is spread out over 504 pages consisting of entries written by more than 120 contributors with high academic and publishing credentials in their respective fields of expertise. This all makes DBAM a very impressive and useful tool for modern Bible translation and Scripture engagement practitioners who want to get up to speed with the discussion in this field in a way that links theory with different fields of biblical studies. The demand for information on communicative strategies and the plausible filling out of details that were ignored or not sufficiently focused on in the written translation paradigm have increased exponentially in our day and age. Modern translation practice from a skopos theory perspective results in the demand for different types of translation (e.g., modernized children’s Bibles, basic language, illustrative translation, video, audio) where visuals as well as cultural understanding of the form of communication of ancient texts, the socio-cultural matrix of the ancient audience, and the tacit rules of engagement have become more and more important. Work with sign
{"title":"Book Review: The Dictionary of the Bible and Ancient Media by Tom Thatcher, Chris Keith, Raymond F. Person, Elsie R. Stern, and Judith Odor","authors":"M. Winedt","doi":"10.1177/20516770221080201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770221080201","url":null,"abstract":"The Dictionary of the Bible and Ancient Media (DBAM) is a response to the massive growth in research and publication in the area of ancient media studies. DBAM aims at providing a tool for the study of the interdisciplinary field of ancient media studies, which includes oral tradition, oral performance, personal and collective memory, ancient literacy and scribal practice and philosophy, visual culture, and ritual. The dictionary does more than touch upon these topics; it engages with issues surrounding critical and exegetical problems in biblical studies, rabbinical studies, studies of the history of Israel, and questions as to the origin of the Christian movement. This massive undertaking is spread out over 504 pages consisting of entries written by more than 120 contributors with high academic and publishing credentials in their respective fields of expertise. This all makes DBAM a very impressive and useful tool for modern Bible translation and Scripture engagement practitioners who want to get up to speed with the discussion in this field in a way that links theory with different fields of biblical studies. The demand for information on communicative strategies and the plausible filling out of details that were ignored or not sufficiently focused on in the written translation paradigm have increased exponentially in our day and age. Modern translation practice from a skopos theory perspective results in the demand for different types of translation (e.g., modernized children’s Bibles, basic language, illustrative translation, video, audio) where visuals as well as cultural understanding of the form of communication of ancient texts, the socio-cultural matrix of the ancient audience, and the tacit rules of engagement have become more and more important. Work with sign","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127562605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211025761
Lénart J. de Regt
Second Samuel 8.18 mentions that David’s sons were priests. This statement has puzzled translators for a long time. How could David’s sons be priests, since they were of the tribe of Judah and not descendants of Aaron? It may be tempting to follow KJV or NIV or other influential translations and say that they were “chief rulers” or “royal advisors.” But this will take us away from the Hebrew text. To say that in 2 Sam 8.18 we should translate “priests” because we translate from the Hebrew and this is what the Hebrew says, so that other renderings are incorrect, is a valid response. But how could the statement in 2 Sam 8.18 and its context be explained more satisfactorily? And how can translation teams be advised when David’s sons are not priests in their drafted translation of this verse?
{"title":"“And David’s sons were priests”: Translating Perceived Discrepancies","authors":"Lénart J. de Regt","doi":"10.1177/20516770211025761","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211025761","url":null,"abstract":"Second Samuel 8.18 mentions that David’s sons were priests. This statement has puzzled translators for a long time. How could David’s sons be priests, since they were of the tribe of Judah and not descendants of Aaron? It may be tempting to follow KJV or NIV or other influential translations and say that they were “chief rulers” or “royal advisors.” But this will take us away from the Hebrew text. To say that in 2 Sam 8.18 we should translate “priests” because we translate from the Hebrew and this is what the Hebrew says, so that other renderings are incorrect, is a valid response. But how could the statement in 2 Sam 8.18 and its context be explained more satisfactorily? And how can translation teams be advised when David’s sons are not priests in their drafted translation of this verse?","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117317790","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211032690
D. Estes
The formation of variable questions in direct speech is remarkably regular in Hellenistic Greek. There are, however, a few exceptions to the standard rule that the Greek New Testament exhibits. These exceptions occur for rhetorical and social reasons and in such a way that they affect the information structure and meaning of these interrogatives. Questions that follow the rule—and the exceptions—both evidence the regularity of word order in New Testament Greek.
{"title":"Regular and Irregular Variable Questions in New Testament Greek","authors":"D. Estes","doi":"10.1177/20516770211032690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211032690","url":null,"abstract":"The formation of variable questions in direct speech is remarkably regular in Hellenistic Greek. There are, however, a few exceptions to the standard rule that the Greek New Testament exhibits. These exceptions occur for rhetorical and social reasons and in such a way that they affect the information structure and meaning of these interrogatives. Questions that follow the rule—and the exceptions—both evidence the regularity of word order in New Testament Greek.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116646808","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211031266
R. K. Duke
Proverbs 25.27, particularly the second verset (27b) as found in the Masoretic Text, has created problems for interpreters. This paper identifies those problems and then lists, summarizes, and evaluates the major options that interpreters have offered as well as offering a couple of new options based on recognizing a double entendre.
{"title":"Understanding and Translating Proverbs 25.27: Weighing the “Honorable” Options","authors":"R. K. Duke","doi":"10.1177/20516770211031266","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211031266","url":null,"abstract":"Proverbs 25.27, particularly the second verset (27b) as found in the Masoretic Text, has created problems for interpreters. This paper identifies those problems and then lists, summarizes, and evaluates the major options that interpreters have offered as well as offering a couple of new options based on recognizing a double entendre.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"161 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121509185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211031619
Charles L. Quarles
The evidence favoring the reading ἅμα τῷ πατρι in Col 1.12 is more compelling than is generally recognized. This variant is the reading supported by the earliest extant witnesses (P46 B), the more difficult reading, and the reading that best explains the origin of the other readings. Scholars who have viewed the reading as a palpable error are likely misreading the variant in the same manner that prompted early scribes to omit the ἅμα. This earliest attested reading supports Tischendorf's punctuation of the verse, the translation adopted by many major English versions, and the structure and exegesis of the passage affirmed by most recent commentaries. These versions and commentaries demonstrate how suitable this reading is in this context. Critical editions of the Greek New Testament should reconsider adopting this reading in their base text.
在Col 1.12中，支持读数为ζ μα τ ο πατρι的证据比一般认为的更有说服力。这种变体是由现存最早的见证人支持的阅读(P46 B)，更困难的阅读，也是最能解释其他阅读来源的阅读。学者们认为这是一个明显的错误，很可能是误读了这个变体，就像早期的抄写员省略了ς μα一样。这最早的证明阅读支持蒂申多夫的标点符号的诗句，翻译采用了许多主要的英语版本，和结构和训诂通过最近的评论肯定。这些版本和注释表明，在这种情况下，这种阅读是多么合适。希腊文新约的批判版本应该重新考虑在其基础文本中采用这种阅读方式。
{"title":"Colossians 1.12a: A Case for the Reading of the Earliest Witnesses","authors":"Charles L. Quarles","doi":"10.1177/20516770211031619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211031619","url":null,"abstract":"The evidence favoring the reading ἅμα τῷ πατρι in Col 1.12 is more compelling than is generally recognized. This variant is the reading supported by the earliest extant witnesses (P46 B), the more difficult reading, and the reading that best explains the origin of the other readings. Scholars who have viewed the reading as a palpable error are likely misreading the variant in the same manner that prompted early scribes to omit the ἅμα. This earliest attested reading supports Tischendorf's punctuation of the verse, the translation adopted by many major English versions, and the structure and exegesis of the passage affirmed by most recent commentaries. These versions and commentaries demonstrate how suitable this reading is in this context. Critical editions of the Greek New Testament should reconsider adopting this reading in their base text.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115156197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211062189
Stephen Pattemore
This issue includes two Practical Papers which should be of interest to all translators: Lénart de Regt examines the statement in 2 Sam 8.18 that “David’s sons were priests”—a statement which is so puzzling and controversial (David being well-known to be of the tribe of Judah) that many translations, starting with the LXX, have changed it. De Regt argues that it should be translated as it stands, as another quiet criticism of David’s rule—that he even attempted to take charge of the priesthood. In a move away from a long-standing convention, the editors of the Nestle–Aland twenty-eighth edition and the UBS fifth edition of the Greek New Testament have made some thirty-four changes to the previously printed text, all in the Catholic Epistles and all based on readings which were approved in volume 4 of the Editio Critica Maior. Vilson Scholz has done all translators a favour by examining many of these places and deciding that in half of them, the change in text has some implication for translators and revisers. Technical Papers in this issue cover a wide range of specializations: interpretation, textual issues, and close examination of texts from both Testaments. Interpretation of sermons in church services is different in a number of ways from Bible translation. And yet there are many points of convergence. Simon Mlundi presents the results of a study based on interviews with both participants and audience members which highlights features considered desirable in a “good interpretation.” These show remarkable overlap with features often discussed as desirable in Bible translations. But the paper also urges greater attention to professional development for church interpreters, which echoes the need for professional training of translators. Isaac Boaheng takes us to the opening lines of the book of Ruth. Examining the story from the perspective of the Akan language and
这期包括两篇实用论文，所有翻译者都应该感兴趣:l nart de Regt检查了撒母孙记下8:18中“大卫的子孙作祭司”的说法——这是一个令人困惑和有争议的说法(大卫是众所周知的犹大支派的人)，从LXX开始，许多翻译都改变了它。De Regt认为它应该被翻译成现在的样子，作为对大卫统治的另一种无声的批评——他甚至试图掌管祭司的职位。为了摆脱长期以来的惯例，雀巢-奥兰第28版和瑞银第五版希腊新约的编辑们对以前印刷的文本进行了大约34处修改，所有这些修改都是在天主教书信中进行的，并且都是基于《主要批判版》第4卷中批准的阅读。维尔森·肖尔茨(Vilson Scholz)检查了许多这样的地方，并决定在其中一半的地方，文本的变化对翻译人员和审校人员有一定的影响，这对所有的翻译人员都是一个帮助。这期的技术论文涵盖了广泛的专业领域:解释、文本问题，以及对两本《遗嘱》文本的仔细研究。教会礼拜中讲道的解释与圣经翻译在许多方面是不同的。然而，有许多共同点。Simon Mlundi介绍了一项基于对参与者和听众的采访的研究结果，该研究突出了“好的解释”所需要的特征。这些特征与圣经翻译中经常讨论的理想特征有显著的重叠。但本文也呼吁更多地关注教会口译员的专业发展，这与翻译专业培训的必要性相呼应。以撒·波亚恒带我们去看路得记的开头几行。从阿坎语的角度来审视这个故事
{"title":"From the Editor","authors":"Stephen Pattemore","doi":"10.1177/20516770211062189","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211062189","url":null,"abstract":"This issue includes two Practical Papers which should be of interest to all translators: Lénart de Regt examines the statement in 2 Sam 8.18 that “David’s sons were priests”—a statement which is so puzzling and controversial (David being well-known to be of the tribe of Judah) that many translations, starting with the LXX, have changed it. De Regt argues that it should be translated as it stands, as another quiet criticism of David’s rule—that he even attempted to take charge of the priesthood. In a move away from a long-standing convention, the editors of the Nestle–Aland twenty-eighth edition and the UBS fifth edition of the Greek New Testament have made some thirty-four changes to the previously printed text, all in the Catholic Epistles and all based on readings which were approved in volume 4 of the Editio Critica Maior. Vilson Scholz has done all translators a favour by examining many of these places and deciding that in half of them, the change in text has some implication for translators and revisers. Technical Papers in this issue cover a wide range of specializations: interpretation, textual issues, and close examination of texts from both Testaments. Interpretation of sermons in church services is different in a number of ways from Bible translation. And yet there are many points of convergence. Simon Mlundi presents the results of a study based on interviews with both participants and audience members which highlights features considered desirable in a “good interpretation.” These show remarkable overlap with features often discussed as desirable in Bible translations. But the paper also urges greater attention to professional development for church interpreters, which echoes the need for professional training of translators. Isaac Boaheng takes us to the opening lines of the book of Ruth. Examining the story from the perspective of the Akan language and","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124291034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/20516770211039438
I. Boaheng
One of the key steps in interpreting a biblical text is to identify its literary genre correctly. It is important for Bible translators to ensure that the translated text takes account of the genre of the source text and that an appropriate genre from the receptor culture is employed. The book of Ruth is generally recognized as a story. Yet, the translation of Ruth 1.1 into three Akan dialects—Asante, Akuapem, and Fante—does not introduce what follows in the book as a story and so Akan readers may not correctly interpret Ruth as a story. It is against this backdrop that this paper examines storytelling elements in the book of Ruth through a discourse analysis and then offers an alternative Akan translation of Ruth 1.1 that will lead to an improved interpretation and appropriate application of the message of the book.
{"title":"Reading Ruth as an Akan Story: A Proposal for an Alternative Akan Mother-Tongue Translation of Ruth 1.1","authors":"I. Boaheng","doi":"10.1177/20516770211039438","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20516770211039438","url":null,"abstract":"One of the key steps in interpreting a biblical text is to identify its literary genre correctly. It is important for Bible translators to ensure that the translated text takes account of the genre of the source text and that an appropriate genre from the receptor culture is employed. The book of Ruth is generally recognized as a story. Yet, the translation of Ruth 1.1 into three Akan dialects—Asante, Akuapem, and Fante—does not introduce what follows in the book as a story and so Akan readers may not correctly interpret Ruth as a story. It is against this backdrop that this paper examines storytelling elements in the book of Ruth through a discourse analysis and then offers an alternative Akan translation of Ruth 1.1 that will lead to an improved interpretation and appropriate application of the message of the book.","PeriodicalId":354951,"journal":{"name":"The Bible Translator","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122575781","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：