Gender-specific or gender-inclusive?
Paul Schmehl
baldeagl at airmail.net
Tue Feb 22 23:30:34 EST 2000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Leman" <wleman at mcn.net>
To: "Paul Schmehl" <baldeagl at airmail.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 10:07 PM
Subject: Re: Gender-specific or gender-inclusive?
> Paul responded:
>
> >> Who is messing with the original, George? People are just trying
to
> >> translate the original into English and other languages as
> >faithfully
> >> (accurately) as possible. Translating inclusive ANQROPOI with
> >exclusive
> >> English "man" is actually changes the meaning of the original,
and
> >that's
> >> not faithful translation.
> >
> >Perhaps the real problem is with the use of the term "accurate" to
> >refer to translation. That can mean a lot of things to a lot of
> >people.
>
> You're on to an important issue, Paul.
That's what I thought.
> >
> >For example, one might say "man" is an "accurate" translation of
> >ANQROPOI, whereas another might say "mankind" is "more accurate".
>
> And who would be right?
That's a matter of opinion! :-) Which is the crux of the matter,
isn't it?
>
> >Maybe it would be better to refer to the art of translation in
terms
> >of "literal" and "meaningful".
>
> Actually, it's not an issue of literal vs. meaningful, but of how
semantics
> works, that is, how words get their meanings and get extended
meanings.
>
> The core (or primary) meaning of ANQROPOI was "men". That is
accurate. But
> for speakers of Hellenistic Greek there was also an extended meaning
which
> was "people". That was accurate also.
>
> Literal actually has nothing to do with it when we are discussing
> translation to English. Since the original word, like many words, at
any
> time in history, had a core meaning as well as extended meaning, a
literal
> translation can be either "men", for those contexts where "men" is
the
> correct translation, or "people", for those contexts where the
author meant
> "people".
>
> Many people confuse literal with accurate. Accuracy in translation
means
> having the same meaning as the original meaning. Literal refers to
matching
> up forms between two different languages, without necessarily taking
the
> meaning within context into consideration.
>
> A "literal" translation of ANQROPOI
> >then, would be "man", but a "meaningful" translation (in modern
> >English) would be "mankind".
>
> No, both are accurate. And both are meaningful and correct,
depending on the
> meaning in context, intended by the original author.
I see we agree, but we don't communicate in the same terms.
>
> >
> >Or have I just muddied the waters even further?
>
> Hmm, literal mud?!! :)
Indeed!
pauls at utdallas.edu (Paul Schmehl)
Technical Support Services Manager
http://www.utdallas.edu/~pauls/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list