The Bible as Cultural Translation

2021 ◽  
pp. 17-75
Author(s):  
Michah Gottlieb

This chapter explores three aims of Mendelssohn’s Bible translation project: (1) strengthening Jewish national sentiment and halakhic practice, (2) invigorating German nationhood; and (3) fostering love and tolerance between German Jews and Christians. Mendelssohn aimed to strengthen Jewish national sentiment by revealing the beauty and rationality of the Bible. He sought to bolster halakhic practice by defending the Masoretic Text of the Bible and rabbinic interpretation. He aimed to invigorate German nationhood by using Bible translation to enrich the German language and contribute to a cosmopolitan vision of Germanness. By translating the Hebrew Bible into German, he sought to illustrate the translatability of religious truth thereby fostering tolerance and love between German Jews and Christians. Mendelssohn translated two main biblical texts-- the Pentateuch and the Psalms. His aims and exegetical methods in the two works are compared. The aims and methods of Mendelssohn’s Bible translations are also compared with two German Protestant translations with which he was familiar: Luther’s 1545 translation and the 1735 Radical Enlightenment Wertheim Bible of Johann Lorenz Schmidt. The claim that Luther’s translation is closer to the Hebrew original than Mendelssohn’s is refuted. Comparing Mendelssohn’s translation with Schmidt’s Wertheim Bible illustrates similarities and differences between Mendelssohn’s moderate religious rationalism and Schmidt’s radical religious rationalism.

Author(s):  
Jean-Claude Loba-Mkole

This article argues for the importance of Bible translations through its historical achievements and theoretical frames of reference. The missionary expansion of Christianity owes its very being to translations. The early Christian communities knew the Bible through the LXX translations while churches today still continue to use various translations. Translations shape Scripture interpretations, especially when a given interpretation depends on a particular translation. A particular interpretation can also influence a given translation. The article shows how translation theories have been developed to clarify and how the transaction source-target is culturally handled. The articles discuss some of these “theoretical frames”, namely the functional equivalence, relevance, literary functional equivalence and intercultural mediation. By means of a historical overview and a reflection on Bible translation theories the article aims to focus on the role of Africa in translation history.


2021 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-254
Author(s):  
Simon Wong

Bible translations in (or for) Greater China may be classified into three categories: Chinese, Han dialects, and indigenous languages. All these language groups witness translation activities by Protestant missionaries. However, in its earliest history, Bible translation was pioneered by missionaries of Eastern Christianity in the seventh century or even earlier, whereas from the Catholic side, clear historical narrative has recorded Bible translation work in the thirteenth century by John of Montecorvino (1247–1328) into a Tatar language. Sadly, this work was not preserved. The earliest extant Bible translation in this vast area was published in 1661 in the Siriya language of Taiwan. This article reports on two major digitization projects: digitization of old Chinese Bibles (1707–1960), including 51 translations in total, and digitization of Bibles in Han dialects/fangyan and indigenous languages (1661–1960)—about 50 languages (including dialects) and 60 translations. These two projects represent the largest and most systematic full-text digitization of the Bible heritage of the area ever undertaken.


Author(s):  
Anja Lobenstein-Reichmann

In the history of the German language, hardly any other author’s linguistic work is as closely associated with the German language as Martin Luther’s. From the start, Luther as a linguistic event became the embodiment of German culture and was even elevated as the birth of the language itself; his style was emulated by some, scorned by others. Luther forces one to take a position, even on linguistic terms. The Bible is at the heart of the argument, being the most important work of Luther’s translation. However, it is only one particular type of text in the general work of the reformer. The role that the Bible plays both on its own and in connection with Luther’s other works, as well as the traditions Luther drew on and the way he worked with language, will be examined within the matrix of Early New High German, with all its peculiarities.


Author(s):  
Oksana Dzera

The article elaborates the analysis of Ukrainian translations of the Holy Scripture through the prism of Shevchenko’s metabiblical images. Biblical conceptual sphere is defined as a fragment of biblical picture of the world shaped on the basis of Old Hebrew, less frequently Old Greek imagery and represented by the totality of concepts which are connected through overlapping, interrelation, hierarchy and opposition and are thematically grouped. Verbalizers of biblical concepts contain the complex accumulation of senses reflecting correlations between God and people through specific world perception of ancient Hebrews. The mediating link between the Bible prototext and biblical metatexts is created by national translations of the Holy Scripture that shape national biblical conceptual spheres via multiple deviations of the Hebrew and Greek sources. The deviations affect national phraseology as well as individual authors’ interpretations of the Book of Books. Special attention is devoted to recursive deviation which manifests itself when a national biblical conceptual sphere and even national translations of the Bible contain elements of authors’ biblical intertexts. Taras Shevchenko’s poetry is viewed as the primary Ukrainian recursive biblical intertext. His idiostyle is characterized by the verbalization of biblical concepts through overlapping biblical and nationally-bound senses. Metabiblical images of Shevchenko’s idiostyle are tracked down to the Bible translation done by I. Khomenko and edited by I. Kostetskyij and V. Barka. The editors who represented the baroque tradition of the Ukrainian translation domesticated Khomenko’s version and introduced into it elements of the Ukrainian metabiblical conceptual sphere, predominantly Shevchenko’s metabiblical images. I. Khomenko himself did not approve of this strategy and regarded it as a violation of the Word of God. Yet the monastic order of St. Basil the Great that commissioned this translation did not consult the translator before publishing its edited version. Similar domesticating strategy is observed in the first Ukrainian complete translation of the Bible done by P. Kulish, I. Puluj, and I. Nechuj-Levycjkyj in 1903. Shevchenko’s influence is particularly felt in epithets specifying key biblical images, such as enemy (лютий / fierce) and heart (тихе / meek). Though each book of the Holy Scripture in this translation is ascribed to only one translator of the three it seems logical to surmise that P. Kulish, the founder of the baroque translation tradition in Ukraine, was the first to draw images from Shevchenko’s metabiblical conceptual sphere. The article postulates the necessity to perceive Shevchenko’s poetry as a complete Biblical intertext which not only interprets national biblical canon but also generates it.


2021 ◽  
pp. 59-77
Author(s):  
G. A. Kazakov

The article is devoted to the study of the lexical aspects of Russian Bible translations of the 19th—21st centuries in comparative coverage and is a continuation of a study pre-viously conducted by reference to English Bibles. A historical overview of the existing Russian translations is given (the Synodal translation and the texts preceding it, the New Testament of Bishop Cassian, the Bible of the World Bible Translation Center, the “Central Asian translation”, the translation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Bible of the Inter-national Bible Society, the modern translation of the Russian Bible Society, the “Zaoksky Bible”). Special attention is paid to modern editions. Samples of texts are compared according to the lexical parameters of adaptiveness, terminologicalness, style and literalness. On the basis of this comparison, a classification of the considered translations is proposed, and their typological features and interconnections are established. The lexical nature of translations is interpreted in terms of their sociolinguistic effect (public perception). The data obtained confirms the pattern previously found in the English-language Bibles — the inverse relationship between adaptiveness on the one hand and terminologicalness, high style and literalness of the translation on the other.  In terms of lexical characteristics, the Synodal and the “Central Asian” translations differ most from each other, which is probably due to their focus on church tradition and missionary goals, respectively. 


1887 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-392
Author(s):  
R. N. Cust

The annexation of New Caledonia, the Loyalty Islands, and the Society Islands to France ; of the Fiji Archipelago to Great Britain; of a great portion of the Solomon Islands to Germany; and the tripartite division of New Guinea and its adjacent Islands between Great Britain, Germany, and Holland, have given a startling prominence to the remote Islands at our Antipodes. We hear sad stories of Native Races, which at the time of Capt. Cook in 1770 were strong and numerous, dwindling away under the socalled European civilization of intoxicating liquors, infectious diseases, and wholesale man-stealing, the entire credit of which last attaches itself to the English Colonies of Queensland and Fiji. Already the languages of Tasmania, Chatham Island, and the Ladrones, have disappeared with the entire races who once used them. Others are rapidly proceeding in the same direction. As in North America, so in Oceania, the Bible-Translations will remain as the monument of a form of speech, which no longer floats on the lips of men. Before it is too late, I throw together a succinct account of the languages now spoken. In the course of the Session I gave a vivâ, voce address on the subject, which appeared to excite interest, and at the Congress of Orientalists held at Vienna last September, I read an address in the German language on our present knowledge of the Languages of Oceania, but gave no detail of names of languages or authorities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 212-225
Author(s):  
Victor Porkhomovsky ◽  
Irina Ryabova

The present paper continues typological studies of the Bible translation strategies in different languages. These studies deal with passages and lexemes in the canonical text of the Biblia Hebraica, that refl ect ancient cultural and religious paradigms, but do not correspond to later monotheist principles of Judaism and Christianity. The canonical Hebrew text does not allow of any changes. Thus, two translation strategies are possible: (1) to preserve these passages in the text of the translation (a philological strategy), (2) to edit them according to the monotheist principles (ideological strategy). The focus in the present paper is made on the problem of rendering the name of the ancient Semitic goddess ’ashera, attested as the companion of the supreme gods in certain traditions and pantheons (’El /’Il/, Ba‘al, YHWH). Two strategies of rendering the name of ’ashera are attested in different Bible translations: (1) to preserve the name of the goddess (philological strategy), (2) to eliminate this name or to replace it with the names of her fetishes and sacred objects (ideological strategy). The Zulu case of rendering the name ’ashera is particularly looked at in this paper.


2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Radegundis Stolze

Recently many new German bible translations have appeared. The article first presents a comparison of paragraphs from ten different translations, with examples taken from the New Testament. This shows some basic trends. On the one hand, the objective of bible translation is Christian education, edification and worship usage. On the other hand, some translations focus on the cultural information, easy readability and inclusive language. Such orientation accepts purposeful adaptation and thus modifies the original text. And there are a few translations that constitute the product of an individual interpretation of the text, and its presentation in a literary form. The discussion of these translation trends is complemented by a critique of the prominent focus on the language rather than on the message, and the question of a text's truth and a translator's linguistic awareness is raised. The traditional translation criticism distinguishing between literal and target-oriented translation, and even cultural adaptation, is integrated here by a discussion of the procedural, functional, objectivistic and ethical implications of the new bible translations. One feature of all recent projects of bible translation seems to be a pedagogical concern. Authors think that they need to guide readers in their interpretation, because those may be unable to understand the very old, strange and often opaque text; or they might misunderstand it and thus miss the true message; or they should learn something about the historic culture; and last but not least, traditional patriarchal attitudes promoted by Christianity should be overcome with a new text. The idea is that people's thinking can be directed by language. Thus the question is raised, whether a translation should also be an interpretation. In a critical view of the interpretive translation, this article presents the hermeneutic approach to translation. This implies a well-informed openness as an attitude towards the original message, rather than a method. The focus is neither on language structure nor on the addressees, but on the text's message. This includes the problem of understanding a written text, what is never a matter of fact. The text's theological exegesis is a prerequisite for the translation, but the value of that translation is not only based on that. Translation aims at a faithful representation of the message and opens the direction of a text, but the individual interpretation is always done by the readers themselves. When the translator as a reader identifies himself with the message, s/he will cognitively produce formulations apt to give resonance to this message. The translator becomes a co-author of that text, and just as for the original author, one will never totally govern the readers' understanding. The translator's voice will be more convincing, when only one person is responsible for the text production, different from the team works in various official projects of bible translation. Even if the bible as such is a composition of many different books and pieces of texts, these manifold voices may be better noted by one translator alone, rather than by many contributors, each of whom as a specialist only translates one book. Finally, the stylistic shape of the target text is decisive. The bible translator should have an excellent knowledge of the target language, in order to present various nuances. Translating is not an information about an original text, it represents that original message in another language.


Author(s):  
Michah Gottlieb

Beginning in the late eighteenth century, Jews entered the German middle class with remarkable speed. This process has often been identified with Jews’ increasing alienation from religion and Jewish nationhood. In fact, this period was one of intense engagement with Jewish texts and traditions. An expression of this was the remarkable turn to Bible translation. In the century and a half between Moses Mendelssohn’s pioneering translation and the final one by Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig, German Jews produced fifteen different translations of at least the Pentateuch. Buber and Rosenzweig famously critiqued bourgeois German Judaism as a craven attempt to establish social respectability to facilitate Jews’ entry into the middle class through a vapid, domesticated account of Judaism. Exploring Bible translations by Moses Mendelssohn, Leopold Zunz, and Samson Raphael Hirsch, the author argues that each sought to ground a “reformation” of Judaism along bourgeois lines, which involved aligning Judaism with a Protestant concept of religion. They did so because they saw in bourgeois values the best means to serve God and the authentic actualization of Jewish tradition. Through their learned, creative Bible translations, Mendelssohn, Zunz, and Hirsch presented distinct visions of middle-class Judaism that affirmed Jewish nationhood while lighting the path to a purposeful, emotionally rich, spiritual life grounded in ethical responsibility.


Author(s):  
Dora R. Mbuwayesango

The essay surveys how Bible translations produced by modern colonial missionaries distorted African cultures and religions with special focus on the Shona people of Zimbabwe. It also explains, by focusing on the Shona translation of Genesis 1–3, how the adoption of the name of the Shona god, Mwari, into the Bible introduced foreign patriarchal notions to the Shona understanding of their god, and also a conception of gender and sexuality that promoted the marginalization of women and oppressive homophobic ideas. The essay concludes with pointing out the need to apply postcolonial feminist approach to Bible translation in order decolonize and depatriarchalize Bible translation and interpretation in Africa.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document