In our inventory of Bibles we also have two TNIVs and one NRSV. One issue that these translations raise (the NLT also) is how to translate masculine pronouns and words like "brothers." If you are trying to do a very literal bible translation, this is an easy call. You just keep the words as they are in the original language. The problem comes if you are trying to do a thought for thought translation instead of a word for word translation. TNIV stands for "Today's New International Version." I guess they thought that sounded better than "ENTV" (Even Newer International Version). When the new testament writers were writing to the churches they would typically address them by saying "brothers." I have never met anyone who thought they were only talking to the men. It was just the way their language worked that you could say brothers and be talking to everyone. To an extent you can do this in English now with "guys." Through most of the 20th century, English worked the same way as Greek. When you said "good will to men" everyone knew you meant mankind and so the communication wasn't garbled. Over the last 40 years or so, there has been a protest against this type of language and a desire by some to move away form using masculine pronouns and words to address men and women simultaneously. This creates the problem for new Bible translations that are trying to go thought for thought. If you say "brothers" someone today might really think that only men were being addressed if they are used to people using inclusive language when talking to women as well. In other words, as contemporary English changes (whether for better or worse) thought for thought translations will have to change to reflect the way people speak now.
I know a lot of people have strong feelings on both sides of this issue. Some see the TNIV as an attack on Biblical teachings on gender while others see the older translations as sexist. My own view is that the substantive issues of what the Bible teaches about gender roles in the family and church are very important but that it is a mistake to get too worked up over the translations. Try the following experiment. Look up one of the controversial passages like Ephesians 5 or 1 Timothy 2 in the TNIV or NRSV and ask yourself whether it says anything different from the NIV. For the issues that really matter, it has very little to do with the translations and everything to do with how people interpret the translations. I think the TNIV actually does a pretty good job of discerning whether everyone is addressed in a passage or only men and translating accordingly.
The TNIV is actually Anastasia's current favorite translation. Setting aside the gender issue, the other changes they made to it actually do make the text slightly more accurate and readable. I got the NRSV back in grad school when I was getting ready to backpack across Europe. I only had room for a couple of books, so I went with "Let's Go Europe" and a Bible. I wanted to have a Bible with me and I wanted something new to read while I traveled and so I figured "I have never read the apocrypha, why not?" The NRSV was my best option for a paperback bible that also had the apocrypha. I don't particularly like the flow of it, but it is still easier to read than the King James.
2 comments:
I have been really enjoying your Bible translations posts. I would love for you to consider posting about how you learned to move beyond just reading the Bible to truly studying it. PS--New kid pics on my blog.
2 comments:
1. Personally, when I hear "brothers" or "blessed is the man who...", I picture men. I know the text includes women, but at gut level I picture men, and thus not myself. Therefore I prefer inclusive language, even though I "know" what it's supposed to mean.
2. Did you read the Apocrypha? I never have--in our house, the deal was, if you read it, you have to talk to Mom and Dad about it, and that was sufficient deterrent for us. :)
Post a Comment