I was referring specifically to translated books within the Greek Old Testament.RandallButh wrote:Thank you, that is clearer and mostly agreeable. Howver, I wouldn't apply that statement "to just about any translated book."
"Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Re: "Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Mike Aubrey, Linguist
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
SIL International
Koine-Greek.com
Re: "Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Good Greek? The very concept is ambiguous. One must needs ask, what criterion do you use.
In fifth/fourth century Attic Greek you have to distinguish prose historians from the Greek used in tragedy and that in comedy. In Hellenistic Greek the Greek of Chrysippus and that of Epicurus differ from each other and from the Greek of poetry, e.g. Cleathes and hymnic texts. In Roman era Greek how can one define "good" Greek? Should it be based on literary texts? Such as Arius Didymus or Diogenes Laertius?
The concept of biblical Greek is equally problematic. What do you include in Bible? Etc.
One speak of grrammatically correct Greek, perhaps; or of rhetorcally influenced Greek.
Ed Krentz
In fifth/fourth century Attic Greek you have to distinguish prose historians from the Greek used in tragedy and that in comedy. In Hellenistic Greek the Greek of Chrysippus and that of Epicurus differ from each other and from the Greek of poetry, e.g. Cleathes and hymnic texts. In Roman era Greek how can one define "good" Greek? Should it be based on literary texts? Such as Arius Didymus or Diogenes Laertius?
The concept of biblical Greek is equally problematic. What do you include in Bible? Etc.
One speak of grrammatically correct Greek, perhaps; or of rhetorcally influenced Greek.
Ed Krentz
Edgar Krentz
Prof. Emeritus of NT
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
Prof. Emeritus of NT
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
-
- Posts: 1105
- Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am
Re: "Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Yes, one needs a criterion. With the LXX, several interpreted the criterion as 'natural', mother-tongue sounding, vs. translationese sounding.ed krentz wrote:Good Greek? The very concept is ambiguous. One must needs ask, what criterion do you use.
In fifth/fourth century Attic Greek you have to distinguish prose historians from the Greek used in tragedy and that in comedy. In Hellenistic Greek the Greek of Chrysippus and that of Epicurus differ from each other and from the Greek of poetry, e.g. Cleathes and hymnic texts. In Roman era Greek how can one define "good" Greek? Should it be based on literary texts? Such as Arius Didymus or Diogenes Laertius?
The concept of biblical Greek is equally problematic. What do you include in Bible? Etc.
One speak of grrammatically correct Greek, perhaps; or of rhetorcally influenced Greek.
Ed Krentz
-
- Posts: 4165
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: "Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Here's one criterion: can I read the book without thinking about the fact that it was originally written in another language? In Ecclesiastes, for instance, some phrases seem to have unusual grammar that matches the way someone would say the same thing in Hebrew.
Of course, the same might be said of the New American Standard Bible. So here's another criterion: which books of the Septuagint are less translationese than the New American Standard?
Of course, the same might be said of the New American Standard Bible. So here's another criterion: which books of the Septuagint are less translationese than the New American Standard?
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
-
- Posts: 881
- Joined: May 12th, 2011, 7:50 am
- Location: Antigonish, NS, Canada
- Contact:
Re: "Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Ecclesiastes is the worst of the books I edited for the Lexham English Septuagint. Note especially some uses of συν. See the comments of Peter Gentry on the translation profile, at http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/ ... s-nets.pdfJonathan Robie wrote:In Ecclesiastes, for instance, some phrases seem to have unusual grammar that matches the way someone would say the same thing in Hebrew.
Ken M. Penner
Professor and Chair of Religious Studies, St. Francis Xavier University
Co-Editor, Digital Biblical Studies
General Editor, Lexham English Septuagint
Co-Editor, Online Critical Pseudepigrapha pseudepigrapha.org
Professor and Chair of Religious Studies, St. Francis Xavier University
Co-Editor, Digital Biblical Studies
General Editor, Lexham English Septuagint
Co-Editor, Online Critical Pseudepigrapha pseudepigrapha.org
-
- Posts: 4165
- Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:34 pm
- Location: Durham, NC
- Contact:
Re: "Good Greek" in the Septuagint
Ah, so reading the NETS translation profiles is a good way to get a feel for what to expect for a given book?Ken M. Penner wrote:Ecclesiastes is the worst of the books I edited for the Lexham English Septuagint. Note especially some uses of συν. See the comments of Peter Gentry on the translation profile, at http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/ ... s-nets.pdfJonathan Robie wrote:In Ecclesiastes, for instance, some phrases seem to have unusual grammar that matches the way someone would say the same thing in Hebrew.
And yes, that's precisely how I felt while reading Ecclesiastes ...
ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες καὶ διηποροῦντο, ἄλλος πρὸς ἄλλον λέγοντες, τί θέλει τοῦτο εἶναι;
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/
http://jonathanrobie.biblicalhumanities.org/