03.06.2013 Views

JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

JUDAICA - Wisdom In Torah

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Knox’s translation can be said to be a translation of a translation<br />

of a translation.<br />

Knox has many deft characteristics in his translation.<br />

The poetry of the Bible is not printed as such. Describing<br />

parallelism, he said “To our notions of poetic composition,<br />

these remorseless repetitions are wholly foreign; when you<br />

have read a page or two on end, they begin to cloy.” Knox was<br />

always looking for “what an Englishman would have said to<br />

express this.”<br />

His translation of the acrostics in the Hebrew Bible (seven<br />

Psalms, Prov. 31, and Lam. 1–4) appealed to him. <strong>In</strong> 1924, Knox<br />

had already published A Book of Acrostics and to get a literary<br />

taste of the original was his purpose: Ps. 25 (24 in Vulgate)<br />

An Alphabet of Trust: “All my heart goes out to thee … Belie<br />

not the trust … Can any that trust in the … Direct my way,<br />

Lord … Ever let thy truth guide … Forget not …”<br />

Knox used “thou” throughout, and Latin spellings of<br />

proper names, for example, “Osee” for “Hosea” and “Paralipomena”<br />

for “Chronicles.”<br />

Many of his translations are idiomatically pleasing. For<br />

the Song of Songs 1:1: where RSV has “O that you would kiss<br />

me with the kisses of your mouth! For your love is better than<br />

wine,” Knox reads: “A kiss from the lips. Wine cannot ravish<br />

the senses like that embrace.”<br />

Acceptance. <strong>In</strong> 1943, Roman Catholics were given the<br />

freedom to translate from the original Hebrew and Greek.<br />

Knox’s translation has thus been dubbed the “last translation<br />

of the Vulgate.” Other Catholic translations (Jerusalem Bible<br />

[JB] and New American Bible [NAB]) have overshadowed the<br />

work of Knox, although not for their prose style. Knox’s aspiration<br />

was: “To secure, as far as possible, that Englishmen<br />

of 2150, if my version is still obtainable then, shall not find it<br />

hopelessly ‘dated.’” The translation still reads well, but is at<br />

present out of print.<br />

Revised Standard Version [= RSV] (1952) and New Revised<br />

Standard Version [= NRSV] (1989). History. The RSV is the<br />

most scholarly and most modern revision in the tradition of<br />

the King James Version. <strong>In</strong> 1929 the <strong>In</strong>ternational Council of<br />

Religious Education already began to plan a revision of the<br />

American Standard Version, which is a 1901 revision of the<br />

KJV. <strong>In</strong> 1937 the council authorized a new version “which embodies<br />

the best results of modern scholarship.”<br />

The continuing committee of the RSV and NRSV has been<br />

working and publishing for half a century: the New Testament<br />

(1946), the Old Testament (1952), the books of the Apocrypha<br />

(1957), a second edition of the New Testament (1957), an Oxford<br />

Annotated Bible with a Catholic imprimatur (1966), an<br />

ecumenical [for Protestants, Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox]<br />

expanded edition with the Apocrypha (1977), a Reader’s<br />

Digest Bible, which abridged the Old Testament to one-half of<br />

its original length (1982), and most recently the NRSV (1989).<br />

The RSV’s formal correspondent translation lends itself to an<br />

effective use of a concordance, and one such was published by<br />

Richard Whitaker in 1980.<br />

bible<br />

The RSV is a revision in line with the KJV, in contrast to<br />

the New English Bible [NEB], which is a completely new translation.<br />

<strong>In</strong> the Preface to the RSV: “The RSV is not a new translation<br />

in the language of today… It is a revision which seeks<br />

to preserve all that is best in the English Bible as it has been<br />

known and used through the years.” <strong>In</strong> committee, a ⅔ vote<br />

was needed to change the American Standard Version. The<br />

RSV, then, aims to be a formal equivalent translation without<br />

being wooden.<br />

Principles and Representative Examples. The RSV and<br />

NRSV translations are more radical than the slight alterations<br />

in the New American Standard Bible [= NASB] or the New<br />

King James Bible [=NKJV (1982)], which are both revisions<br />

of the KJV. This does not make the RSV a radical translation.<br />

Although the RSV is still more often a formal correspondent<br />

translation, the guiding maxim seems to be “as literal as possible,”<br />

and “as free as necessary.”<br />

Many examples of modernizing the language of the<br />

American Standard Version could be cited. At Gen. 31:36:<br />

“Jacob was wroth, and chode with Laban,” became in RSV (and<br />

NRSV): “Then Jacob became angry, and upbraided Laban.”<br />

New forays into modern scholarship show something<br />

more than a conservative attitude. Of 13 emendations of Isaiah<br />

from the Dead Sea Scrolls, M. Burrows has changed his<br />

opinion, “A brief review will show that even in these 13 places<br />

the superiority of the manuscript’s reading is not always certain.<br />

For myself I must confess that in some cases where I<br />

probably voted for the emendation I am now convinced that<br />

our decision was a mistake, and the Masoretic reading should<br />

have been retained.”<br />

<strong>In</strong> the NRSV (1989) there is a new concern for the use of<br />

more inclusive language. The NRSV has been even more aggressive<br />

than the NEB concerning this point. Ps. 54:3: where<br />

the RSV had “insolent men” and “ruthless men” and the word<br />

“men” was not actually in the original, the NRSV has rendered<br />

“the insolent” and “the ruthless.” Ps. 1:1: “Blessed is the man<br />

who walks not in the counsel of the wicked,” has become in<br />

the NRSV: “Happy are those who do not follow the advice of<br />

the wicked.” The “Fathers” of Israel are now “ancestors.” The<br />

expression “son of man” in Ezekiel is now rendered in NRSV<br />

as “mortal.” Yet, masculine metaphors, such as referring to<br />

God as “Father,” were left intact. There is another type of inclusive<br />

language that refers to “people of color” that was also<br />

considered in NRSV. RSV had in Cant. 1:5: “I am very dark, but<br />

comely,” while NRSV has: “I am black and beautiful.”<br />

RSV retained “thou” in prayer and praise addressed to the<br />

Deity. NRSV drops these remaining occurrences of “thou” and<br />

“thy” from the RSV. Another interesting update in language<br />

includes Prov. 6:6 in the RSV: “Go to the ant, O sluggard; consider<br />

her ways, and be wise.” while the NRSV has: “Go to the<br />

ant, you lazybones; consider its ways, and be wise.”<br />

<strong>In</strong> NRSV there are many textual changes, especially in<br />

Deuteronomy and Jeremiah. The books of Samuel are most<br />

affected by text-critical considerations. The sheer number of<br />

ENCYCLOPAEDIA <strong>JUDAICA</strong>, Second Edition, Volume 3 615

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!