Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
06-04-2008, 04:22 AM | #1 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pua, in northern Thailand
Posts: 2,823
|
Why do Biblical translators ... ?
... transliterate the original Aramaic before then translating it into English in certain passages of Mark?
I'm thinking specifically of Mark 15:34 (NIV)... Quote:
The only reason I can think of is that the Greek manuscripts the translators were using also did this, although I can't see why the Greek writers would have wanted to show the Aramaic in these specific instances, either. Any ideas ...? (And yes, I know it's not an Earth-shattering question, but it is bothering me). |
|
06-04-2008, 07:13 AM | #2 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,719
|
The Greek seems to have the same thing:
Quote:
[Edit]The server is up again. LSJ does give "Translate" as the only translation of "methermêneuô".[/Edit] Gerard Stafleu |
|
06-04-2008, 12:19 PM | #3 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
|
Quote:
The reason for the Greek writers doing this probably varied in different cases but in Mark 15: verse 35 Quote:
Andrew Criddle |
|||
06-04-2008, 02:10 PM | #4 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
Quote:
Make someone who knows nothing about the local culture look as if they do? What is this assumption of original aramaic? The Gospels are Greek documents aren't they? |
|
06-04-2008, 03:25 PM | #5 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
|
Quote:
There is no need for assumption. Unless you are referring to the theory that the entire gospel was written in Aramaic. Ben. |
|
06-05-2008, 10:54 AM | #6 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,719
|
Quote:
Gerard Stafleu |
||
06-05-2008, 02:14 PM | #7 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
Quote:
And Eloi etc are records of Jesus' words, and not the result of an author getting his character to say something in the local lingo that an Aramaic speaking acquaintance told him in Rome. In the same way that the geography is iffy, why is not the same scepticism used on these allegedly authentic tidbits which have clear dramatic effect? Conan Doyle - The Complete Sherlock Holmes (or via: amazon.co.uk) A Study in Scarlet p39 Quote:
And Conan Doyle does not provide a translation! (Btw, who knew Dr Watson was married?) |
|||
06-05-2008, 02:33 PM | #8 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Getting a bit off topic here -
I think I recall that Dr. Watson at some point acquired a wife, although we don't meet her. The educated readers of Sherlock Holmes would have learned Latin. (That phrase is translated here: Quote:
|
|
06-05-2008, 02:54 PM | #9 |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
She is the wronged heiress in The Sign of Four!
But actually this is on topic - authors commonly put a bit of foreign in their writing, like an early crossword puzzle for their readers. So are there versions without these phrases translated? Might we have handed down to us versions for the common folk complete with answers? |
06-07-2008, 03:48 PM | #10 | ||||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Nazareth
Posts: 2,357
|
Quote:
Spin described it as Abracadaver but I think CrossWord puzzle is more appropriate. I think "Mark's" source for the use of Aramaic is Paul: http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Romans_8 Quote:
http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Mark_5 Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I say unto thee, Arise Be opened (heaven) Father (God) My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Joseph http://errancywiki.com/index.php?title=Main_Page |
||||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|