[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lojban] Re: Question re: Bible translation



On 10/28/05, Benjamin Cook <selylacbes@gmail.com> wrote:
Personally, I
don't agree with the philosophy that every word in the Bible is inspired
by God and is without error, so even a second-hand
original->English->Lojban translation is acceptable for my own studies.
Faith isn't really the issue here. It's just a matter of translation philosophy. One wishes to stick as close to the original (or in this case, originals) as one can. More true for scripture than for, say, a Reuters dispatch.

On 10/28/05, Mark E. Shoulson <mark@kli.org> wrote:
I'm not "a bunch," but there is me.  Not much help with Greek, but my
Biblical Hebrew is pretty damn good, and I can read the various
commentaries pretty well also.  And I think Nick worked from the Greek
when he did his Bible work; he's an expert on Koine Greek and a fluent
(Modern) Greek speaker.

It's also fun to see what happens with other readings... I've been
working with the Samaritan version of the Pentateuch a lot lately.
There are fascinating differences in the consonantal text, but there are
even more interesting ones when you consider the vocalization and
different views on the grammar and which roots are used where...

Mark, are you working on the Bible translation project at all?

A distant goal of mine is to translate some of the non-canonical scriptures (e.g., Mary, Thomas, &c.). I have some Latin & Greek & Hebrew (no Coptic). That'll be some fun.

mu'o mi'e komfo,amonan