[B-Greek] re my wooden interlinear translations

Dan Gleason dan-bgreek at hotmail.com
Fri Nov 4 17:35:00 EST 2005


GS Wrote: >I don't mean to attack or encourage you in your project, but did 
you ever
>consider that a better way might be to do a real translation in which you
>do not ** mimic ** Mark's Greek style but to attempt to find an **
>equivalent ** style in English which would convey a sense of what you
>believe you find in Mark?
>
>george
>gfsomsel
________________________________________

Hello George

I thought about doing a "real translation" - as if was a cleaned up, 
proofed, edited, eyewitness or hearsay account - and it doesn't work.
The most literal wooden translation following Mark's word order brings out 
the visual puns and imagery.
Every phrase in Mark's text is like a planed plank of wood.
Every KAI is like a wood joint, a miter, a rabbet, a dado, or a nail.
Translating into "proper English" obscures or destroys the visual puns in 
the text as it was written.
I don't even think about proper English when I read Mark.
When my translation sounds "a little wierd but plausible in a strange way" - 
to me, that's a "sign" that I got it right.

Imitation Is the Sincerest Form of Flattery - but Mimicry is the Greatest 
Form of Flattery.

Dan Gleason



>From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel at juno.com>
>To: dan-bgreek at hotmail.com
>CC: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
>Subject: Re: [B-Greek] re my wooden interlinear translations
>Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 16:39:40 -0500
>
>On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 15:11:05 -0600 "Dan Gleason" <dan-bgreek at hotmail.com>
>writes:
> > re my wooden interlinear translations
> >
> > Dr Conrad wrote: Dan, you've made perfectly clear that you intend to
> > persist
> > with  this  "interlinear" mode of transliteration despite the fact
> > that
> > several  respondents have called attention to its inaccurate
> > representation
> > of  the sense of the Greek. So here "immerse" for  "BAPTIZW" has
> > been
> > faulted by several respondents as inaccurate  certainy for the
> > second  verb
> > form here (BAPTISEI), and while you  might think "a Holy Spirit"
> > accurately
> > represents the Greek text  PNEUMATI hAGIWi, what you're  deriving
> > from the
> > Greek is pidgin- English rather than an equivalent  of what the
> > Greek text
> > says.  What's wrong with this "interlinear"  style of "translation"
> > is  that
> > it's based on an assumption that the  "forest" of a sequence  of
> > discourse
> > is no less and no more than but  exactly equal to the  sum of the
> > "trees" of
> > words inside that  sequence. I think that's  been stated in
> > different ways
> > in several of  the responses to your  idiosyncratic renderings of
> > Marcan
> > texts, but I  felt it was worth  reiterating "yet once more again,"
> > despite
> > the fact  that you've  made it obvious that you intend to go on
> > doing it
> > this way.
> >
> > DG: Dr Conrad and others have criticized the way I translate many
> > times. As
> > you can deduce, there is a night and day difference between the
> > grammar in
> > my posts verses the grammar in my translations. I am very cognizant
> > of the
> > fact that my translations sound like pidgin English and that the
> > grammar is
> > tortured. I know my translations sound idiosyncratic. And I know it
> > rubs
> > many of you the wrong way - it's not a proper translation - it's
> > frustrating
> > to read - I should know better - and all that.  I thought that the
> > comment
> > of the "forest of trees being equal to the sum of the trees" was a
> > very
> > accurate description of my translations. I just want you all to know
> > that is
> > the way I read the Greek text.  I read it in painfully literal way -
> > and I
> > do it on purpose - for a purpose. And the reason is not to get
> > people mad at
> > me. And the reason is not to make fun of the text. And (kai) the
> > reason is
> > not to insult your intelligence. I do it to emulate Marks style,
> > which
> > appears on the surface, at times, to be grotesque. I do it because I
> > am
> > writing a book on Mark - that views the imagery of the text as a
> > form of
> > stagecraft one would see in a Greek play. The scenes are simple and
> > so are
> > the props. You have characters and choruses. The descriptions are
> > minimal.
> > The dialogue is easy to remember. My commentaries on the text are
> > going to
> > be from a metaphorical viewpoint in the style of Friedrich Weinreb
> > who wrote
> > Roots of the Bible. The grotesque grammar is not to be corrected.
> > The
> > translation is to be as wooden as I can render it. That's where the
> >
> > "carpentry" begins. That's what joining this list is all about. I
> > don't want
> > any mistakes in my translation. I want my translations to look like
> > raw
> > lumber - and out of that lumber I will build the commentary on the
> > "play."
> > It's all about visual stagecraft puns.
> >
> > So, in closing, I just want to let you all know I am not mad or
> > upset. I'm
> > not interested in defending my translations, my take on the text, my
> >
> > incorrect grammar, winning anyone over to my point of view, or
> > anything like
> > that. I just want to ask some simple questions about how to
> > literally
> > translate the text. I thought that doing it through the buffer of a
> > standard
> > English bible translation might be the best policy to keep everyone
> > happy.
> >
> > Dan Gleason
>______________-
>>I don't mean to attack or encourage you in your project, but did you ever
>consider that a better way might be to do a real translation in which you
>do not ** mimic ** Mark's Greek style but to attempt to find an **
>equivalent ** style in English which would convey a sense of what you
>believe you find in Mark?
>
>george
>gfsomsel
___________

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/




More information about the B-Greek mailing list