Great Divide
J. Garnier
nomre2me at home.com
Tue Sep 19 23:07:47 EDT 2000
Dear Clayton,
Am I correct in understanding that a FLFA is the analyst, the lexicographer, and the grammarian, and a SPA is the linguist, and the orator? You speak as if the FLFA working from the bottom up, taking the denoted elements of a language, applying them rigidly to a work of translation, and returning with a rigid and stiff work. Is this a correct understanding?
You say the SPA "will begin the investigation of a text with the analysis of the medium and high level semantic structure." Surely the SPA must take recognition of the foundational elements of a language before he can appreciate medium and high level structures. I agree with you that the logical structure of a synthetic language can become a fixation, and thereby an obstacle to understanding the arguments made by the totality, but isn't an FLFA approach a necessary intoduction to any coherent work of translated literature?
You say "One of the side effects of learning an ancient language is that the student
spends a great deal of time struggling with formal language features." You are exactly right, but it is not limited to novices, and there is a reaction to this approach which has equally grievous results. Many take the fixation with rigid structure far beyond the years as a student, and produce tedious and uninteresting Biblical translations even after they are generally acknowledged to be "experts". The reaction that is equally dangerous is that a translator will omit any but the basic structure, and give himself great poetic license to make his translation agree with what he personally believes. The resolution to this problem is beyond my ability to formulate. Perhaps you have some idea?
Joseph Garnier
Seattle WA
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/attachments/20000919/01b0fd0f/attachment.html
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list