Re: Translation, Anglophiles and Ancient Texts

From: Kevin Stock (
Date: Tue Oct 14 1997 - 02:43:21 EDT

Andrew Kulikovsky <> said:
> Not sure if anyone has pointed this out yet, but the word LOGOS appears
> to focus on the content of the word rather than the word itself. ie. the
> meaning or message of the word.

Absolutely. I first noticed this distinction when I started to read
the Bible in French, where LOGOS is translated "parole" and not "mot".

"mot" means 'word' in the sense of a bunch of letters. "parole" is
more concerned with the meaning of the word, the message behind it.
It also has a sense of 'the ability to speak' (when introducing a
speaker, you speak of giving him the "parole").

This last meaning brought home to me the parallel between Jn 1 and
Gen 1 very clearly. "In the beginning was the power to speak, and
God said, 'let there be light'".

So, in answer to the person who asked whether all these discussions
about the best way to translate a term were really useful, I would
say 'definitely'! It's not just academic.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:34 EDT