scholarly journals Names of God in Vulgate and the Italian translations of the Old Testament

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 40-55
Author(s):  
Victor Ya. Porkhomovsky ◽  
◽  
Olga I. Romanova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
English Language ◽  
Language Translation ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Grammatical Structure ◽  
Translation Strategies ◽  
Reference Base ◽  
Bible Translation ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Masoretic Text

The present publication expands the analysis of the Old Testament translations into different languages. This line of studies was initiated by the works of the late French scholar Philippe Cassuto and one of the authors of this publication. The purpose of the article is to look at the strategies applied in translating the Old Testament names of the Supreme Being into Latin (the Vulgate version) and modern Italian. This purpose is two-fold: by doing so, we also expand the data base of the Old Testament terms‘ renditions in different languages. The article provides the full nomenclature of the names of the Supreme God in the Old-Hebrew (Masoretic) text of the Old Testament, concentrates on their semantics and grammatical structure, and explains the contexts of their use. A canonical Russian-language translation is used as a reference base to illustrate the fate of the original names of the God in translation. The widely-accepted English-language translations of the Old Testament are included to provide a broader perspective on translation strategies applied to this particular aspect of the Old Testament texts. The analyzed Latin and six modern Italian-language translations demonstrate a considerable degree of uniformity in translating the names of God. The Latin and the Italian translations apply the philological strategy to translating the Holy Bible (as opposed to another option presented by the typology of the Bible translation – the ideological strategy). Notwithstanding the relative lexical uniformity of the translations, they demonstrate the differences between Catholic and Protestant versions. The analysis of the Italian translations of the Old Testament contributes to the typology of the Bible translation and ultimately makes an input to the general theory of translation.

scholarly journals The Zulu version of the old testament from a typological perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 212-225
Author(s):  
Victor Porkhomovsky ◽  
Irina Ryabova
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Hebrew Text ◽  
Translation Strategies ◽  
Bible Translation ◽  
Bible Translations ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Sacred Objects ◽  
Canonical Text

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.

Beyond the Douai-Reims Bible: The Changing Publishing Strategies of the Kellam Family in Seventeenth-Century Douai

The Library ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 344-375
Author(s):  
Alexander Soetaert ◽  
Heleen Wyffels
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Family History ◽  
Old Testament ◽  
Host Society ◽  
Bible Translation ◽  
Three Generations ◽  
The Bible

Abstract The career of the Catholic Englishman Laurence Kellam is often reduced to his most impressive edition, the Old Testament of the Douay-Rheims Bible (1609–1610), an English Catholic Bible translation edited by the English College of Douai. Yet, there has been scarce attention for the remaining 190 editions, printed in English, as well as in Latin, French and Dutch, that bear a Kellam imprint. The discovery of another fifty editions that should be ascribed to the Kellam press demands a reappraisal of its activities and significance. By analysing both printed and archival sources, this article intends to fit the Bible edition of 1609–1610, and English Catholic printing on the continent more generally, into the wider perspective of three generations of publishing activities and family history, highlighting the increasingly tight connections between several generations of the Kellam family and the authors, institutions, and fellow-publishers of their host society.

scholarly journals The portrayal of Africa and Africans in the book of Jeremiah

2018 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David T. Adamo
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Theological Method ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Masoretic Text ◽  
Book Of Jeremiah ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Unanimous Agreement

Since the 1980s, many Jeremianic scholars have spent much time on the study of the various contentious issues in order to resolve them. However, there has been no unanimous agreement yet. One of these contentious issues is the relationship of the prophet Jeremiah to ancient Africa and Africans which is the main focus of this article. The author of the book Jeremiah made references to Ancient Africa and Africans about 53 times in the Septuagint, and 67 times in the Masoretic Text. This indicates that the prophet Jeremiah is very familiar with ancient Africa and Africans. Using a historical–biographical and theological method of reading Jeremiah, this article examines the portrayal of ancient Africa and Africans in the book of Jeremiah. It is also part of an investigation of the African presence in the Old Testament which, to Africans, is an important moral and self–lifting scholarly exercise. It is also gratifying information in itself to know that Africa and Africans have participated in the drama of redemption which has not been recognised as such by either Eurocentric scholars or by the majority of Africentric scholars themselves. While in the Pentateuch references to Africa and Africans appear more than 577 times, in the Major Prophets there are about 180 references. What this means is that not only the author of the book of Jeremiah, but biblical authors in general are very familiar with ancient Africa and Africans, and deliberately took time to identify them. The continued recognition by scholars and non–scholars of Africa and African presence in the Bible has great implications for Christianity in Africa.

scholarly journals Inspiration and the Texts of the Bible

1997 ◽  
Vol 53 (1/2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Buchner
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Dead Sea Scrolls ◽  
Dead Sea ◽  
Early Church ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Masoretic Text ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Book Of Hebrews ◽  
Textual Research

This article seeks to explore what the inspired text of the Old Testament was as it existed for the New Testament authors, particularly for the author of the book of Hebrews. A quick look at the facts makes. it clear that there was, at the time, more than one 'inspired' text, among these were the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text 'to name but two'. The latter eventually gained ascendancy which is why it forms the basis of our translated Old Testament today. Yet we have to ask: what do we make of that other text that was the inspired Bible to the early Church, especially to the writer of the book of Hebrews, who ignored the Masoretic text? This article will take a brief look at some suggestions for a doctrine of inspiration that keeps up with the facts of Scripture. Allied to this, the article is something of a bibliographical study of recent developments in textual research following the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls.

scholarly journals Sociolinguistic Aspects of the First Translations of the Bible into the Russian Language

Slovene ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 191-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander G. Kravetsky
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Language Translation ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
National Language ◽  
Language Version ◽  
The Bible ◽  
European Languages ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
The Church ◽  
The Russian Language

The first translations of the New Testament into the Russian language, which were carried out at the beginning of the 19th century, are usually regarded as a missionary project. But the language of these translations may prove that they were addressed to a rather narrow audience. As is known, the Russian Bible Society established in 1812 began its activities not with translations into Russian but with the mass edition of the Church Slavonic text of the Bible. In other words, it was the Church Slavonic Bible that was initially taken as the “Russian” Bible. Such a perception correlated with the sociolinguistic situation of that period, when, among the literate country and town dwellers, people learned grammar according to practices dating back to Medieval Rus’, which meant learning by heart the Church Slavonic alphabet, the Book of Hours, and the Book of Psalms; these readers were in the majority, and they could understand the Church Slavonic Bible much better than they could a Russian-language version. That is why the main audience for the “Russian” Bible was the educated classes who read the Bible in European languages, not in Russian. The numbers of targeted readers for the Russian-language translation of the Bible were significantly lower than those for the Church Slavonic version. The ideas of the “language innovators” (who favored using Russian as a basis for a new national language) thus appeared to be closer to the approach taken by the Bible translators than the ideas of “the upholders of the archaic tradition” (who favored using the vocabulary and forms of Church Slavonic as their basis). The language into which the New Testament was translated moved ahead of the literary standard of that period, and that was one of the reasons why the work on the translation of the Bible into the Russian language was halted.

scholarly journals Lexical Aspects of Russian Bible Translations

2021 ◽  
pp. 59-77
Author(s):  
G. A. Kazakov
Keyword(s):  
Public Perception ◽  
English Language ◽  
Bible Translation ◽  
Bible Translations ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Central Asian ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
The One ◽  
Church Tradition

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. 

scholarly journals Translation Discourse 4.0: Variety of Formats, Genres and Trends

2021 ◽  
pp. 5-17
Author(s):  
Elina Novikova ◽  
◽  
Anna Naumova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Language Translation ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Discursive Practices ◽  
Dynamic Nature ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Translation Tools ◽  
The One ◽  
New Phenomena ◽  
The Russian Language

The article considers the specific character of modern translation discourse, trends and opportunities of realization in the era of changes and global challenges. The relevance of the article is determined by the need to establish common and distinctive forms of expression and formats of translation discourse. The representative sources of three communicatively active discursive practices constitute the empirical base of the paper: scientific / translation studies translation discourse; professional / industry translation discourse; didactic translation discourse. The textual material of the discourse under consideration is analyzed in order to identify thematic dominants of three subtypes under consideration. The similarities and differences of the topics discussed by the translation community within the framework of the selected discursive practices are determined. Sources of translation discourse in Russian and German linguistic cultures were also involved in the analysis to identify common and distinctive features. The analysis revealed the tendency of the Russian-language translation discourse to be a more profound scientific search and substantiation of translation problems, and, on the contrary, the tendency of the German- and English-language discourses to discuss applied issues. The analyzed subtypes of translation discourse reveal certain unifying features: current challenges reaction rapidity, new phenomena and trends in society. However, these subtypes have translation tools of their own, traditions and formats that shape thematic dominants of each direction of the discourse. Thus, the paper revealed the dynamic nature of the discourse, on the one hand, and its sustainable development, on the other.

The ‘Daemonium meridianum’ and Greek and Latin Patristic Exegesis

Traditio ◽  
1958 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 17-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudolph Arbesmann
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
First World War ◽  
World War ◽  
Popular Belief ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Masoretic Text ◽  
The First World War ◽  
Rapid Changes ◽  
The Hours ◽  
First World

The three decades preceding the publication of the new Latin translation of the Psalter by the Biblical Institute in Rome in 1945 have seen a number of studies and articles which throw revealing light on the interpretation of Psalm 90.6. Discussing the laws of purification and diet in the Old Testament, J. Döller thought it possible to discover in the Bible a few faint vestiges of a popular belief in demons among the Israelites and saw a plague demon especially in ‘the destruction that lays waste at noonday’ (Ps. 90.6b). Referring to Döller's study, S. Landersdorfer pointed to a parallel Assyrian belief which regarded midnight and noonday as periods especially dangerous and haunted by demonic agencies, and was inclined to assume even for the Masoretic text the idea of a demon of night (6a) and a demon of noonday (6b). Both demons were thought to exercise their power especially at the hours of the chilling midnight cold and the scorching noonday heat, and to be responsible for certain bodily disorders, such as sunstroke and malaria fever, and for other diseases caused by the rapid changes of temperature in the southern deserts. In this case the psalmist would already have alluded to a popular belief, though such an allusion would not necessarily imply that he himself shared the view, Landersdorfer's article had been written ten years prior to its publication, that is, in a period when, owing to the disturbances during and shortly after the First World War, access to foreign publications was difficult and often impossible. Thus he was apparently unaware that, only about a year before the completion of his article, W. H. Worrell had pointed out some similar parallels from oriental countries.

The Bible as Cultural Translation

2021 ◽  
pp. 17-75
Author(s):  
Michah Gottlieb
Keyword(s):  
German Language ◽  
German Jews ◽  
Bible Translation ◽  
Religious Truth ◽  
Bible Translations ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Masoretic Text ◽  
National Sentiment ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Radical Enlightenment

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.

Dilemmas of the Diaspora: The Esther Narrative in Josephus Antiquities 11.184-296

Ramus ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Kneebone
Keyword(s):  
Old Testament ◽  
Religious Practice ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
Central Section ◽  
The Bible ◽  
Masoretic Text ◽  
Moral Qualities ◽  
Biblical Scholar ◽  
Second World

Esther is the only book of the Hebrew Old Testament never to allude to God, and to refer to neither the Covenant, the sacred institutions of Israel, nor to Jewish religious practice. The book has long engendered a fascinated revulsion in many of its readers, not only for its notable lack (or writing-out?) of God, but also for its overt celebration of genocide and the dubious moral qualities of its protagonists. Luther famously wanted the book excised from the Christian canon altogether, and the nineteenth-century biblical scholar Heinrich Ewald declared that the story of Esther ‘knows nothing of high and pure truths’, and that on coming to it from the rest of the Old Testament ‘we fall, as it were, from heaven to earth’. Humphreys terms Esther one of the ‘most exclusive and nationalistic units within the Bible’, and for Anderson, writing in the aftermath of the Second World War, the tale resonates horribly with twentieth-century history and ‘unveils the dark passions of the human heart: envy, hatred, fear, anger, vindictiveness, pride, all of which are fused into an intense nationalism’.Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, on the other hand, placed the Book of Esther on a par even with the Torah, a sentiment echoed, centuries later, by Maimonides, who famously declared that when the Prophets and Hagiographa pass away, only Esther and the Law would remain. And this triumphant assertion of the scroll's worth is reminiscent of the attitude of Josephus, who specifically includes Esther in his list of the twenty-two Jewish records, and who devotes the extensive central section of AJ 11 to the Esther pericope. The dating, both relative and absolute, of the texts of Esther has been fiercely disputed, and need not concern us here; it should suffice to note that two extant Greek translations, or rather adaptations, of the Book of Esther—the Septuagint (LXX) and the highly variant Alpha Text (AT)—offer countless minor variations on the Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT), and insert six extended passages into the narrative.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document