gennawing males

Steve Long steve at allegrographics.com
Wed Dec 1 13:50:41 EST 1999


>   The reason I'm interested in GENNAW just now is because 1 Clement
>quotes Ps. 2:7 (or, at least, quotes the quotation of Ps. 2:7 in Heb. 1).
>Why *not* translate it: "You are my son, today I have given you birth"?
>Is it only because we know that God is a man instead of a woman, and so
>can't give birth?  Seems like the logic of that could be pushed in lots of
>directions (e.g., the pressure points: "know," "man," "and so").  But are
>there other reasons?
>
I think you have to take into consideration culture and current usage when
you're translating into a target language. English does not have a single
word that conveys the meaning of GENNAW for both sexes. Women give birth,
men become fathers. It is a very passive act on our part. That's why the
passive is used in English. If you don't like the active 'today I have
fathered you.' You could put it in the passive as 'today I have become your
father.' That may actually be better because father in the active sense
could refer to the sexual act, where as becoming a father usually refers to
the actual birth. I know there are spiritual implications, God doesn't have
a sexual gender, etc., but He does have a grammatical gender, even in
English. I don't think you can cross gender lines in English usage without
sounding a trifle ridiculous.

We can read it in the greek and understand it as a birth with God as
active, but in English it comes off rather weird. Just my $.02

Steve

Steve Long
Allegro Digital Media, Inc.

Print Host -- Order your printing online!
http://www.printhost.com/

Kinja -- What is it? You'll never know, unless you go.
http://www.kinja.com/





More information about the B-Greek mailing list