From: Paul Schmehl (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 22 2000 - 23:30:34 EST
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Leman" <email@example.com>
To: "Paul Schmehl" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
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
> >> translate the original into English and other languages as
> >> (accurately) as possible. Translating inclusive ANQROPOI with
> >> English "man" is actually changes the meaning of the original,
> >> 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
> 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,
> >Maybe it would be better to refer to the art of translation in
> >of "literal" and "meaningful".
> Actually, it's not an issue of literal vs. meaningful, but of how
> works, that is, how words get their meanings and get extended
> The core (or primary) meaning of ANQROPOI was "men". That is
> for speakers of Hellenistic Greek there was also an extended meaning
> 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
> time in history, had a core meaning as well as extended meaning, a
> translation can be either "men", for those contexts where "men" is
> correct translation, or "people", for those contexts where the
> Many people confuse literal with accurate. Accuracy in translation
> having the same meaning as the original meaning. Literal refers to
> up forms between two different languages, without necessarily taking
> 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?!! :)
email@example.com (Paul Schmehl)
Technical Support Services Manager
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [firstname.lastname@example.org] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:58 EDT