Translating The Bible -- By: Anthony Howard Nichols

Journal: Tyndale Bulletin
Volume: TYNBUL 50:1 (NA 1999)
Article: Translating The Bible
Author: Anthony Howard Nichols


Translating The Bible1

Anthony Howard Nichols

Developments in translation theory have externalised processes used intuitively by translators for centuries. The literature on Bible translation in particular over the last half century is dominated by Eugene A. Nida and his protégés in the United Bible Societies (UBS) and Wycliffe Bible Translators whose work is informed by a wealth of inter-cultural experience.

This thesis is a critique of the Dynamic Equivalence (DE) theory of translation propounded by Nida, exemplified in the Good News Bible (GNB), and promoted in non-Western languages by the UBS. The term ‘functional equivalence’ has been preferred since 1986.

Section I of the thesis surveys the history of translation, its theory and problems, and describes relevant developments in linguistics. Section II examines Nida’s sociolinguistic model and his methods of grammatical and semantic analysis, transfer and restructuring. Section III focuses on the translation of seven texts representing different Bible genres into the Septuagint Greek, English and Indonesian versions, respectively, noting the distinctive features of DE translations. Section IV takes up and examines key issues that have arisen: the nature of biblical language, the handling of important biblical motifs and technical terminology, and the practical implications of naturalness and explicitness in translation.

Nida has provided excellent discussion on most translation problems, as well as useful tools for semantic analysis. However, the DE model is found to be defective for Bible translation. Firstly, it underestimates the intricate relationship between form and meaning in language. Secondly, while evaluation of translation must take account of its purpose and intended audience, ‘equivalence’ defined in terms of the receptor’s reactions is impossible to measure, and blurs the distinction between ‘translation’ and ‘communication’. Thirdly, the determinative role given to receptor response constantly jeopardises

the historical and cultural ‘otherness’ of the biblical text. Finally, the emphasis on explicitness in UBS and Summer Institute of Linguistics manuals in practice guarantees that indigenous receptors approach Scripture through a Western grid and denies them direct access to the biblical universe of discourse. Hence, in one important point the results of the investigation were totally different from the researcher’s original premise. It had been anticipated that Nida’s emphasis on naturalness, communication and receptor response would lead to cultural adaptation and a domestication of the Bible in each target langu...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()