Dawne polskie intensyfikatory wywodzące się od staroczeskiego "přieliš"

Historical Polish Intensifiers Derived from the Old Czech přieliš This article is devoted to a historical-linguistic analysis of the equivalents of the Old Czech přieliš in historical Polish: the words bezlisz, brzezlisz, przelisz, przezlisz and przylisz. The study refers to key findings of researchers about these words, their origins and meaning. On the basis of analysis of linguistic material the author formulates conclusions about word-formation of the equivalents of přieliš in Polish, their frequency in monuments of Polish literature from the Old Polish period to the end of the sixteenth century, their meaning and status in Polish, as well as presumable causes of their disappearance from the language. The paper presents examples that confirm their functioning in monuments of the Polish language, such as Biblia królowej Zofii [Queen Sophia’s Bible] from the mid-fifteenth century and Biblia Jana Leopolity [John Leopolita’s Bible] from 1561, as well as in dictionaries of Polish. The study also considers information about Old Czech and compares parallel verses of Polish and Czech Bible translations. Dawne polskie intensyfikatory wywodzące się od staroczeskiego přieliš Artykuł poświęcony jest historycznojęzykowej analizie odpowiedników staroczeskiego přieliš, czyli wyrazów bezlisz, brzezlisz, przelisz, przezlisz i przy­lisz w dawnej polszczyźnie. Autorka przytacza najważniejsze opinie badaczy o wymienionych wyrazach, ich pochodzeniu i znaczeniu. Na podstawie ana­lizy materiału językowego formułuje wnioski dotyczące budowy słowotwór­czej staroczeskich odpowiedników přieliš w języku polskim, ich frekwencji w zabytkach literatury polskiej od staropolszczyzny do końca XVI w., znaczenia i statusu tych wyrazów w polszczyźnie, a także przypuszczalnych przyczyn ich zaniku. W artykule przedstawiono przykłady potwierdzające funkcjonowanie wspomnianych wyrazów zarówno w zabytkach języka polskiego m.in. w Biblii królowej Zofii z połowy XV w. i Biblii Jana Leopolity z 1561 r., jak i w słowni­kach języka polskiego. Ponadto autorka przywołuje informacje o staroczeskim i porównuje równoległe wersety przekładów Biblii na język polski i czeski.

Bible Translations in Sweden

The article focuses on approaches to Bible translation that existed in Sweden in different periods. Special attention is payed to what is to date the latest translation in 2000 (Bible 2000). On the eve of celebration of the 500th anniversary of the first translation of the Gospels (1526) this topic is particularly relevant and discussed more and more actively in works by Swedish researchers, first and foremost because a new edition of the next Bible translation is planned in 2026. This tradition goes back to 1540-1541 when translation of the full Bible was printed, known as the Gustav Vasa Bible (Gustav Vasas Bibel), which has made an impact on the hearts and minds of Swedish people for almost four centuries and formed the basis of Standard Swedish. The approach declared by Luther has become a fundamental principle of Bible translations into Swedish: text must convey precisely the message, spirit and content of the original, not literally, however, but in the language that is clear to uneducated people. The Gustav Vasa Bible was reissued twice: in 1618 (the Gustav II Adolf Bible) and 1703 (the Charles XII Bible). Whats more, every new edition was redacted officially. In 1773 Gustav III established the Biblical Commission and requested to replace the outdated text with a new one. However, there were numerous changes in the Swedish Language during the XXth century. Besides, the development of linguistics and translation studies, as well as new scientific data have formed the basis of a new Bible translation project that was launched in 1972 and ended up with publishing the Bible-2000. The translation is the result of collaboration between numerous scholars and average readers. It took almost thirty years to perform the work. In the end, a text was created which most people think is unique, as it strives to convey the style of each particular book. However, there is obviously a gap between the new text and the centuries-old tradition of Bible translation, because after textual analysis was complete, scholars and translators often took decisions about how to render separate words and whole phrases. Their decisions had nothing in common with established practice. Consequently, critics consider that the text of Bible-2000 is often greatly oversimplified, everyday, lacking its solemn beauty and magnificence.

Five Centuries of Bible Translations into Kashubian

This paper discusses translations of biblical passages into Kashubian, which originated in the Lutheran circles between the 16th and the 19th centuries, followed by translations made in the Catholic circles in the 20th and the 21st centuries. The history of these translations has been divided into two periods: “old translations” and “contemporary translations.” The former comprise various bibli[1]cal texts preserved in manuscripts and printed monuments, which came into being between 1586 and the second half of the 19th century. The fundamental texts of this period include the works by Szymon Krofey (1586), Michał Pontanus (1643), and Perykopy smołdzińskie (1699–1701). The old translations were done from German in the Protestant circles in West Pomerania. In turn, the “contemporary trans[1]lations” of biblical texts into Kashubian embrace translations from the second half of the 20th century, which were produced in the Catholic environment of Gdańsk Pomerania: from Latin (Mk 4:3-20) by Alojzy Nagel (1973), from Latin (four Gospels) by Rev. Franciszek Grucza (1992), from Polish (the New Testament and the Psalms) by Eugeniusz Gołąbek (1993–2007) and my own translations from Hebrew and Greek (the Four Gospels, the Pentateuch, Ecclesiastes) prepared in 2001–2020.

ЛЕКСИКО-СТИЛІСТИЧНІ ОЗНАКИ КОНФЕСІЙНОЇ СФЕРИ В АНГЛІЙСЬКІЙ ТА УКРАЇНСЬКІЙ МОВАХ: ЗІСТАВНИЙ АСПЕКТ (ЧАСТИНА 2)

The paper deals with the contrastive analysis of the Ukrainian (Ivan Ohiyenko) and English (King James Bible) translations of the Old Testament (Genesis, Chapter 1) with the purpose to establish their comparative lexical and stylistic features. The assessment of the stylistic devices in the Ukrainian (UTT) and English (ETT) target texts proves a high degree of their similarity. There is a considerable parallelism in the use of repetition, paraphrase, aphorisms, generic nouns, stylistically coloured lexemes, rhetorical address and homogenous elements’ structure. The polysyndeton is a distinctive feature of both texts as well as gradation and a systematic use of archaic or unusual words. The dissimilarities of the two texts include alliterative repetition in verse 10, a double-focus repetition and a weakened polysyndeton in verse 29 in ETT, repetition in ETT (verses 14-15) which appeared to be impossible in UTT due to the specifi c structure used there and the strengthened verb repetition in the refrain of each period in UTT. Other distinctions include a systematic use of the state verb (be) in ETT, whereas the UTT utilizes a range of dynamic verbs indicating the transition from one state to another; the use of two monotypic metaphors in ETT, as compared to neutral lexemes in UTT; or, conversely, the ETT counterpart of an elevated style word is stylistically neutral in UTT. Another divergence is the use of parceling in ETT, which shifts the stylistic emphasis to the parceled fragment, while in the UTT the preference is given to the double synonymic structure; the use of archaism, metaphor and synecdoche in ETT whereas they are absent in UTT. Other unilaterally used stylistic devices include personifi cation in ETT versus alliteration and assonance in UTT; the use of an infi nitive stricture in ETT and a verbal noun in UTT to render purpose; greater variability of attributes (prepositional, postpositional, subordinate clauses), as well as lexical stylistic means in UTT; greater phonetic and lexical diversity of generalizing attributes in UTT. Overall, a somewhat greater variety of lexical stylistic means in UTT may be assumed, although it can hardly be regarded as the latter’s advantage because the standards of stylistic acceptability substantially vary in diff erent languages and cultures. The scope of further research is outlined. Key words: English and Ukrainian languages, Bible (Genesis), comparative stylistics, comparative lexicology, confessional style, teaching translation and interpreting, comparative lexical and stylistic analysis, lexical and stylistic features.

Language and Religion

This chapter explores the influence of religion and hegemony on language by concentrating on English, German and the Romance languages widely spoken in Europe and the Americas.Bible translations have helped to keep alive native languages. German and English are associated with the Reformation and have thus been highly influenced by the Bible. In turn, Roman languages are associated with the status quo of the Roman Empire, i.e. Roman Church-State. The Roman Church-State condemned—and sought to impede—any effort to bring the Holy Scriptures within reach of common people, in order to prevent what happened in Germany and England. Thus, the influence of the Bible on Latin languages has been limited.

Joseph’s Food Politics as Life-Keeper of Many People: A Close Rereading of Genesis 47:13–26

The Septuagint reading predominantly influences the interpretation of Genesis 47:13-26 (primarily v. 21). Despite a positive portrayal of Joseph, he is also seen as Pharaoh’s accomplice to enslave the Egyptian people. This connection with slavery activities contradicts the traditional image of Joseph as the life-keeper of many people. Solution for the negative portrait of Joseph usually refers to the Masoretic Text, although it is not a reference to many modern Bible translations and commentaries. The Septuagint as a reference, in this case, is indeed difficult to reject. However, that does not mean that Joseph promotes the slavery of the Egyptian people throughout the land, but rather an ancient form of state capitalism. This article draws on textual criticism, word studies, form criticism, and agricultural knowledge background in the ancient Middle East. The contribution of this research is to show that, instead of enslaving, Joseph formulated an Egyptian food politics in the larger context of Joseph’s narrative reality as the life-keeper of many people.

Religious Print in Settler Australia and Oceania

A distinctive feature of the study of religion in Australia and Oceania concerns the influence of European culture. While often associated with private interiority, the European concept of religion was deeply reliant upon the materiality of printed publication practices. Prominent historians of religion have called for a more detailed evaluation of the impact of religious book forms, but little research has explored this aspect of the Australian case. Settler publications include their early Bible importation, pocket English language hymns and psalters, and Indigenous language Bible translations. As elsewhere in Europe, Australian settlers relied on print to publicize their understanding of religion in their new context. Recovering this legacy not only enriches the cultural history of Australian settler religion, it can also foster new avenues through which to appreciate Australia’s multireligious and Indigenous heritage.

KAJIAN HERMENEUTIKA FRASA SELAMATKANLAH MEREKA DENGAN JALAN MERAMPAS MEREKA DARI API BERDASARKAN YUDAS 23a DAN IMPLEMENTASINYA DALAM KEHIDUPAN ORANG PERCAYA MASA KINI

The problem discusses in Jude 23a is that there are different Bible translations and interpretations of the phrase, “save them by plundering them as if from fire”. This study aims to find the meaning of the phrase save them by depriving them of the fire based on Jude 23a and to find out how the meaning of the phrase is implemented in the lives of believers. The research method used is the hermeneutic method. The result of this research is the phrase, “save them by robbing them like from the fire” is not interpreted as something done with violence but a maximum and continuous effort to guide people who have fallen into heresies with love.

Translation types and niche translations: Comparing five Afrikaans translations

Before the introduction of the dynamic-equivalent translation method by Eugene Nida, most Bible translations, in terms of translation type, were literal and formal correspondence translations. With the expansion of Bible translation globally over the past 60 years, alternative translation types started to appear – sometimes claiming uniqueness and even superiority. That, in turn, led to a reverse situation where ‘literal only’ or ‘literal-superiority’ claims were made. This has been a cause for significant debate and controversy. The purpose of this comparison of translation types is to indicate how translations differ from each other on a continuum and to determine if some versions in Afrikaans align with translation typology. The method followed in this article is to classify translation types in two main groupings: more literal and more dynamic; and four subtypes: corresponding translations, resembling translations, clarifying translations, and simplifying translations. In light of this classification, five publications of the Bible in Afrikaans are compared to Bible publications in English and Dutch. This study has found that each of the five Afrikaans translations does fit under one of the four types for which the criteria were laid out. The finding was that the typology applied to Bible versions in English, Dutch and Afrikaans. This typology implies that translations from different types are not necessarily in competition with each other, but that they complement each other. Each version in Afrikaans has then been compared to each other in terms of an end-user market niche and, based on that, there seems to be a continuing need for versions in all the different types. Translations do improve over time as translation theory and source-language scholarship evolve, but the validity of each type and publications in each type argue for versions of several types to endure.Contribution: This article is not the first attempt to describe translation types. Several translators, as well as some functionalist translation studies did important scientific work in this regard. However, this article’s principal contribution to translation studies is to propose a simplified yet adequate model of four translation types with new terminology, terms which do not overlap but are descriptive of function. And then secondly, to align each type with scripture engagement and the translation niche.