the horns of ames

History of Translation

Again, my source here is Leland Ryken's book "The Word of God in English." He summarizes some of the main translations that have come about in the History of English Bible Translation. He summarizes them and I will summarize his summaries, so they'll be very basic, but you can learn more about them by Googling their history if it intrigues you.

Wycliffe Bible (1380). John Wycliffe translated the Bible from the Latin Vulgate into Middle English.

Tyndale's New Testament (1525). This is where Modern English Bible translation begins. William Tyndale was only able to translate the new testament before being killed by a Catholic traitor. 80% of Tyndale's translation eventually found its way into the King James Version. He really started the tradition of English Bible translation as we know it.

Coverdale's Bible (1535). Miles Coverdale was an assistant to Tyndale and continued on his work. This was the first complete Bible in English. It was also the first Bible to include chapter summaries and marginal notes.

Matthew's Bible (1537). John Rogers, pen named "Thomas Matthew", divided the material into chapters and paragraphs, but not verses in included copious notes and cross-references. The first English concordance was based on Matthew's Bible.

The Great Bible (1539). Very large in size, it was championed by Thomas Cromwell, and was a revision of the Matthew's Bible.

Geneva Bible (1560). Bible of the Reformers who fled from Catholic persecution. Contained copious anti-Catholic notes that provided running commentary on the text. Had mass appeal due to it's small size and affordability. It used italics for words not found in the original text but needed to make sense in English and broke paragraphs into verses.

Bishops' Bible (1568). Initiated by Queen Elizabeth to counteract the bias of the Geneva Bible. The committees that produced the King James Version were mandated to use it as the starting point for their translation work.

The King James Version (1611). John Reynolds proposed a new English translation to King James, who commissioned 6 committees of the most knowledgeable biblical scholars of England. It was a revision of previous translations and the beneficiary of the earlier evolving history of English Bible translation. It is an essentially literal translation. Alister McGrath claims that a careful study of the way in which the King James Bible translates the Greek and Hebrew originals suggests that the translators tried to 1) ensure that every word in the original had an English equivalent, 2) highlight all words added to the original for the sake of intelligibility, and 3) follow the word order of the original where possible. Instead of translating the same Hebrew or Greek consistently in the English, the King James translators loved the principles of synonymity (using synonyms instead of verbatim repetition for the same Hebrew or Greek word) and variety; so they multiplied the number of English words used for a given Hebrew or Greek word. Stylistically, the KJV is the greatest English Bible translation ever produced. Its rhythms are matchless. It did not maintain its supremacy after the mid-twentieth century for three main reasons: Its language is now outdated, the translators' knowledge of ancient languages was less reliable than modern knowledge is, and the translation uses a New Testament text (the Textus Receptus) that most scholars no longer consider the most reliable.

Revised Version (1881-1885). Tried to overcome the increasingly obsolete language of the King James Version. Arranged content by paragraphs and improved consistency in placing words added to the original in italics. This was a British movement. American scholars converted it into the American Standard Version to make it less "British," but it didn't catch on.

J. B. Phillips' New Testament (1947-1957). The first real dynamic equivalent Bible. A truly loose colloquial English version.

Revised Standard Version (1946 [NT], 1952 [OT], 1957 [complete], 1971 [rev. NT]). Intended as a revision to the American Standard Version, but also considered a revision to the King James Version. Next to the KJV, the most literary (not literal, literary) translation. Some of its literary excellences, though, carry the price tag of being based on emendations that, although they have the support of ancient versions (especially the Septuagint), have lost credibility in more recent exegetical theory. In translation philosophy, the RSV inclined toward verbal equivalence. It was the first ecumenical (universally accepted across denominations in Christianity) translation. The New Revised Standard Version came out in 1989, but it's not a genuine heir to the RSV, it's a dynamic equivalent that is quite liberal. The true heir to the RSV is the English Standard Version (more on that later.)

New American Standard Bible (1971). For evangelicals who wanted a modern Bible and were distrustful of the RSV, the NASB was the translation of choice until the NIV appeared. The NASB was a revision of the American Standard Version of 1901. It's great virtue is its reliability and fidelity to the language of the original. Its weakness is that it ranks low in readability and literary style.

Good News Bible (1976). Also known as Today's English Version. Pushes new translation philosophy to its limits. Very contemporary American speech. The GNB was sponsored by the American Bible Society, which in 1995 also produced the Contemporary English Version, which is even freer than the GNB, which is gender inclusive and avoids theological terms like atonement, redemption, and righteousness. A Bible without the philosophy of righteousness?

New International Version (1978). A true dynamic equivalent, but on the conservative side, it often moves beyond what the original text says to the interpretations preferred by the translators. Readability was a high priority so as readable on a seventh-grade level. Today's New International Version, however, is completely gender-inclusive and very liberal.

New English Bible (1970), Revised English Bible (1989). British translations not making much of a splash in the US. NEB was the first dynamic equivalent produced by a committee whose members were regarded as the best British linguists in the scholarly world at large. However, looked at by many scholars as experimental.

New Living Translation (1996). Published by Tyndale House, the NLT was based on a desire to refute charges that its predecessor, The Living Bible, was unscholarly. Based on the ancient texts, but firmly committed to the principle of dynamic equivalence.

English Standard Version (2001). Strove to be a more literal translation than was available, wanted more stylistic flair than the NASB, and more accurate than the New KJV. The committee took the RSV (as slightly revised in 1971) as it starting point. The entire Bible was subjected to comparison with the original texts, and the committee ended up changing about 6% from the RSV text, more than originally envisioned. The entire oversight committee of 12 members met in full for all deliberation on spadework done by specialists, with literary interests fully represented at the table in all deliberations. Leland Ryken, who was on that committee, believes it to have the highest possible degree of consistency and unity throughout the Bible.

Ok, that's enough for this blog. I'll let you ponder some of the major translations throughout history and decide which ones peak your interest to learn more about...

In Him,
Aaron

posted by Aaron @ www.HornIT.net @ 12:06 AM