"Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Posted: May 15th, 2013, 7:55 am
What parts of the Septuagint have the best Greek, i.e. are not heavily "translation Greek"?
ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/
https://www.ibiblio.org:443/bgreek/forum/
https://www.ibiblio.org:443/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1852
That's pretty good. Odes is a mixed bag in that it consists of various songs from both the Old and New Testaments, a blend of translated and native Greek. 4 Maccabees in native Greek on par with (if not beyond) Hebrews in terms of style.Jonathan Robie wrote:Are these the bits not in the Tanak?
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon, additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151.
Is the Greek in 1 Maccabees significantly different from the Greek in 2 Maccabees?
Yes. 1 Macc. is decent Greek, but it still feels like a translation. 2 Macc. doesn't.Jonathan Robie wrote:
Is the Greek in 1 Maccabees significantly different from the Greek in 2 Maccabees?
Before too much confusion gets into the thread, it needs to back off from that first answer that "good Greek" is primiarily found in the "bits not in the Tanak". Much of that non-Tanak material is translationese, only a few select pieces can be called natural or good Greek, of which 2-4 Mac and Wisdom qualify. And the statement the "Exodus is natural, too" baffles me. It is translation Greek, even if different from the translator of Judges.MAubrey wrote:That's pretty good. Odes is a mixed bag in that it consists of various songs from both the Old and New Testaments, a blend of translated and native Greek. 4 Maccabees in native Greek on par with (if not beyond) Hebrews in terms of style.Jonathan Robie wrote:Are these the bits not in the Tanak?
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon, additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151.
Is the Greek in 1 Maccabees significantly different from the Greek in 2 Maccabees?
Also, Exodus is quite natural, too.
Your two cents are just as baffling. The NLT is translation English, but its also fairly naturally and generally good. Exodus has (generally) natural prosodic structure and, for the most part, natural use of the verbal system. Beyond that, there's really no reason (aside from your assertion) why LXX-styled all necessitates "not good Greek." I've read plenty of a world literature translated into English, much of it styled in a certain manner, while still being excellent English.RandallButh wrote:Before too much confusion gets into the thread, it needs to back off from that first answer that "good Greek" is primiarily found in the "bits not in the Tanak". Much of that non-Tanak material is translationese, only a few select pieces can be called natural or good Greek, of which 2-4 Mac and Wisdom qualify. And the statement the "Exodus is natural, too" baffles me. It is translation Greek, even if different from the translator of Judges.MAubrey wrote:That's pretty good. Odes is a mixed bag in that it consists of various songs from both the Old and New Testaments, a blend of translated and native Greek. 4 Maccabees in native Greek on par with (if not beyond) Hebrews in terms of style.Jonathan Robie wrote:Are these the bits not in the Tanak?
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon, additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151.
Is the Greek in 1 Maccabees significantly different from the Greek in 2 Maccabees?
Also, Exodus is quite natural, too.
Tobit is translation Greek and both Hebrew and Aramaic copies have been found at Qumran. Debate exists over whether the Hebrew or Aramaic is the original, but no one is proposing Greek as the original.
Judith is very Semitically styled
BenSira is an admitted translation
Baruch and letter of Jeremiah basically Semitic
Suzanna
Bel and Dragon
I would suggest Hebraic influence:
1 Maccabees,
Susanna,
Bel and the Dragon,
Joseph and Aseneth,
Tobit, and
Judith (a friend of mine argues that Judith is "LXX-styled Jewish Greek", which would still leave it in the unnatural, or 'not good Greek' camp).
Aramaic background:
1 Esd 3:1–5:6,
the Testament of Job, and
The Life of Adam and Eve.
My two cents.
I don't know what "lacing the characteristics of a translation" means. Does that include or exclude blatant source-language characteristics in the target language? If it includes them, then the definition is not useful. By definition, a "good style" in a translation is natural to the target language and no longer highlights features of the source language.Ken Penner wrote: The original query defined good Greek as lacing the characteristics of a translation.
Michael, my definition of "good Greek" is a work that falls within the ranges of features of natural Greek, of Greek written by a mother-tongue Greek. If a production consistently falls outside of natural ranges and uses of Greek, then it is not "good Greek", nor should it be used by someone to decide what Greek style should look like. Clean morphology, general concord, and "correct" verbal syntax do not make something natural or "good." Greek likes lots of 'texture' with narrative participles, more variety of connectors and particles than Hebrew, more variety in tense use. LXX Exodus does not qualify as "good Greek" on this basis even though it has occasionally added Greek features to the target translation.MAubrey wrote:Your two cents are just as baffling. The NLT is translation English, but its also fairly naturally and generally good. Exodus has (generally) natural prosodic structure and, for the most part, natural use of the verbal system. Beyond that, there's really no reason (aside from your assertion) why LXX-styled all necessitates "not good Greek." I've read plenty of a world literature translated into English, much of it styled in a certain manner, while still being excellent English.RandallButh wrote:Before too much confusion gets into the thread, it needs to back off from that first answer that "good Greek" is primiarily found in the "bits not in the Tanak". Much of that non-Tanak material is translationese, only a few select pieces can be called natural or good Greek, of which 2-4 Mac and Wisdom qualify. And the statement the "Exodus is natural, too" baffles me. It is translation Greek, even if different from the translator of Judges.MAubrey wrote: That's pretty good. Odes is a mixed bag in that it consists of various songs from both the Old and New Testaments, a blend of translated and native Greek. 4 Maccabees in native Greek on par with (if not beyond) Hebrews in terms of style.
Also, Exodus is quite natural, too.
Tobit is translation Greek and both Hebrew and Aramaic copies have been found at Qumran. Debate exists over whether the Hebrew or Aramaic is the original, but no one is proposing Greek as the original.
Judith is very Semitically styled
BenSira is an admitted translation
Baruch and letter of Jeremiah basically Semitic
Suzanna
Bel and Dragon
I would suggest Hebraic influence:
1 Maccabees,
Susanna,
Bel and the Dragon,
Joseph and Aseneth,
Tobit, and
Judith (a friend of mine argues that Judith is "LXX-styled Jewish Greek", which would still leave it in the unnatural, or 'not good Greek' camp).
Aramaic background:
1 Esd 3:1–5:6,
the Testament of Job, and
The Life of Adam and Eve.
My two cents.