When implication hijacks meaning
In “When implication hijacks meaning” Jefferson Vann shares a pet peeve about modern Bible translation.
First, a progress report.
As of this day, January 31st, 2024, I have completed the initial translation of the following Bible books. The number at the end of the filename is the date of the last edit:
01 - Genesis (JDV) 20201026
02 - Exodus (JDV) 20210622
03 - Leviticus (JDV) 20201127
04 - Numbers (JDV) 20191002
05 - Deuteronomy (JDV) 20200428
06 - Joshua (JDV) 20210108
07 - Judges (JDV) 20210517
08 - Ruth (JDV) 20210906
09 - 1 Samuel (JDV) 20230213
10 - 2 Samuel (JDV) 20230323
11 - 1 Kings (JDV) 20230929
12 - 2 Kings (JDV) 20231026
13 - 1 Chronicles (JDV) 20240110
14 - 2 Chronicles (JDV) 20240124
18 - Job (JDV) 20231004
19a - Psalms (Book 1) (JDV) 20210513
19b - Psalms (Book 2) (JDV) 20210629
19c - Psalms (Book 3) (JDV) 20210629
19d - Psalms (Book 4) (JDV) 20210627
19e - Psalms (Book 5) (JDV) 20221022
20 - Proverbs (JDV) 20231204
21 - Ecclesiastes (JDV) 20210117
23 - Isaiah (JDV) 20201127
24 - Jeremiah (JDV) 20210120
25 - Lamentations (JDV) 20210210
26 - Ezekiel (JDV) 20220530
27 - Daniel (JDV) 20211028
27 - Daniel (JDV) 20221009
28 - Hosea (JDV) 20190514
29 - Joel (JDV) 20190419
30 - Amos (JDV) 20221119
31 - Obadiah (JDV) 20191002
32 - Jonah (JDV) 20231214
40 - Matthew (JDV) 20210630
41 - Mark (JDV) 20210607
42 - Luke (JDV) 20210607
43 - John (JDV) 20200910
44 - Acts (JDV) 20210120
45 - Romans (JDV) 20201121
46 - 1 Corinthians (JDV) 20210114
47 - 2 Corinthians (JDV) 20190509
48 - Galatians (JDV) 20190422
49 - Ephesians (JDV) 20190615
50 - Philippians (JDV) 20210603
51 - Colossians (JDV) 20210603
52 - 1 Thessalonians (JDV) 20210603
53 - 2 Thessalonians (JDV) 20210226
54 - 1 Timothy (JDV) 20210217
55 - 2 Timothy (JDV) 20210920
56 - Titus (JDV) 20201130
57 - Philemon (JDV) 20210627
58 - Hebrews (JDV) 20220214
59 - James (JDV) 20221111
60 - 1 Peter (JDV) 20231004
61 - 2 Peter (JDV) 20231213
Praise the LORD. When I first began this project, I was not sure I would live to complete it. I have now completed the first draft of 55 out of 66 books!
Now, for my rant.
When implication hijacks meaning
Ortony roughly defines a metaphor as “an instrument for drawing implications grounded in perceived analogies of structure between two subjects belonging to different domains.”[1] If, for example, I describe myself as a night owl with cold feet who likes beating dead horses, readers will understand that I am not actually a nocturnal bird with circulation problems who abuses deceased animals. I have lapsed into metaphor. Every metaphor I use is immediately recognized as such, and instead of fostering misunderstanding, the metaphors I use are quickly translated into their implied meanings. It happens practically automatically.
But the process gets a bit more complicated when we are translating from one language to another. This is true especially when what we are translating is separated from present time and culture by thousands of years and multiple worldviews.
One problem is when metaphors are not immediately recognized as metaphors. The reader may attempt to envision the literal meaning of the statement and wonder at the sanity of the original writer. I can imagine a first-time reader of the Gospels who struggles with how Jesus can be bread, a vine, a road (way) and a door all at the same time.
But that’s not the problem I am ranting about today. I’m speaking about the tendency our modern translators of the Bible have of “helping” us readers by removing all trace of metaphor from metaphorical statements in the text.
One example I have noted in my translation is that the generic words for sky (שָׁמַיִם in Hebrew and οὐρανός in Greek) are commonly rendered “heaven” when the generic meaning is perfectly understandable in context. Is “our Father in the sky” a wrong translation? No, it is not. But translators consistently choose the traditional reading instead. By so doing, they are choosing to express an implied meaning and to avoid the generic meaning of the text.
I have also noted that the words commonly translated as “spirit” (רוּחַ in Hebrew and πνεῦμα in Greek) are the generic terms for breath. The words commonly translated as “soul” (נֶפֶשׁ in Hebrew and ψυχή in Greek) are terms originally denoting a person’s throat or neck. But our translators are quick to hide these generic meanings as well. They seem to be biased in favor of anthropological dualism. As such, their translations suggest that the real person is this invisible being inside the shell of the body.
My translations reject that premise. I treat both these terms (breath and throat) as metonyms. I use the generic terms in my translation because they convey the actual usage of the biblical authors. To use the terms “spirit” or “soul” would be to suggest the legitimacy of the anthropological dualism that has attached itself to these terms.
Words can have more than one meaning. But what is happening in both ancient and modern translations is not simply the choice of one meaning over others in the word’s semantic range. Our translators have chosen the approved meaning which they believe is implied by the metaphor, and systematically translate accordingly. As such, their translations hide the fact that the words are used metonymically.
Many translations have corrected this error to a certain extent, particularly with the word נֶפֶשׁ. Often the term is translated as a pronoun. I suppose I should be happy when a text that reads “my throat” is translated as “me.” But I am not. Although the translation recognizes that the term is being used as a metaphor, it eliminates the metaphor with the translation. It substitutes the implication for the intended meaning. The implication hijacks the meaning.
In most of my translation work, I am discovering that the current translations available are systemically accurate. But so far as their treatment of the terms mentioned above, my judgment is that that they all need improvement.
[1] Ortony Andrew. Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge University Press 1979. P. 32.