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

Re: post.prepared for anglican (reversible translation)

Brian E. Wilson wrote:
> 
> I am absolutely fascinated that no-one else has yet come up with an
> alternative definition of the distinction between a translation and a
> paraphrase.  

Well, I suppose I may as well add my two-cents-worth.

Comparing "paraphrase" to "translation" is like comparing apples to
oranges.  They do not belong in the same discussion.  Paraphrase is the
attempt to restate a meaning in different words.  This principle applies
only within the same language.  A translation _always_   states meaning
in different words, because the words come from a different language. 
Translation does not move on a continuum of paraphrastic ->
less-paraphrastic, rather it moves on a continuum of equivalence base,
with "word" being on one end and "discourse unit" being at the other
end. Word->phrase->sentence->paragraph->unit.

Even the most "word-based" translation cannot be reverse translated with
accuracy, because of possible synonyms, figures of speech, choices of
syntactical structures.

-- 
Lee R. Martin
Adjunct Faculty in Old Testament and Hebrew
Church of God School of Theology
Cleveland, TN 37311
Pastor, Prospect Church of God
Follow-Ups: References: