Hebrew / Greek texts to align

[Jonathan Robie]

For a project I am working on, I am looking for Hebrew / Greek texts where both the Hebrew and the Greek are natural and understandable, and where they have the same basic meaning, whether or not word order is similar or they say it in similar ways.

What LXX passages would you look to first for this?

[Brian Gould]

What kind of length do you have in mind? For instance, a passage that would fit into a single page of a textbook, or something much longer than that?

[Jonathan Robie]

What kind of length do you have in mind? For instance, a passage that would fit into a single page of a textbook, or something much longer than that?

Pericope-length or chapter-length would do. Initially, I just need sentences, where of course one sentence may be more than one sentence in the other language.

[S Walch]

I think the book of Jonah LXX is pretty much okay in this regard.

[Jonathan Robie]

I think the book of Jonah LXX is pretty much okay in this regard.

Yes, Jonah works nicely for what I need. Thanks!

[Ken M. Penner]

For a project I am working on, I am looking for Hebrew / Greek texts where both the Hebrew and the Greek are natural and understandable, and where they have the same basic meaning, whether or not word order is similar or they say it in similar ways.

What LXX passages would you look to first for this?

It sounds like you're looking for sense equivalence rather than formal equivalence. If so, the diachronic tendency in translation technique is toward formal equivalence. Later translations are more "literal" than early ones. I suspect this tendency developed because views of scriptural authority were also developing in the same direction: from sense to specific words.
The implication is that you are more likely to find what you're looking for in the portions translated early on (the Pentateuch) rather than in Ecclesiastes.

[Jonathan Robie]

For a project I am working on, I am looking for Hebrew / Greek texts where both the Hebrew and the Greek are natural and understandable, and where they have the same basic meaning, whether or not word order is similar or they say it in similar ways.

What LXX passages would you look to first for this?

It sounds like you're looking for sense equivalence rather than formal equivalence. If so, the diachronic tendency in translation technique is toward formal equivalence. Later translations are more "literal" than early ones. I suspect this tendency developed because views of scriptural authority were also developing in the same direction: from sense to specific words.
The implication is that you are more likely to find what you're looking for in the portions translated early on (the Pentateuch) rather than in Ecclesiastes.

Yes, Ecclesiastes is a good example of what I want to avoid. And there are places where the LXX doesn't say the same thing as the Masoretic text, I want to avoid that too. I would like a range of literalness, but all solidly within translations that are good, natural Greek.

The Pentateuch works well. Jonah works well.

To me, the first few sentences of Ruth seem to follow the Hebrew very literally, and they don't feel natural to me in Greek, but I am not sure I want to trust my feelings that much. Which is why I asked the question in the first place, to at least rely on someone else's subjective feeling ;->

So what do y'all think of these Greek sentences? Do you agree that they feel forced? Why or why not?

וַיְהִ֗י בִּימֵי֙ שְׁפֹ֣ט הַשֹּׁפְטִ֔ים וַיְהִ֥י רָעָ֖ב בָּאָ֑רֶץ וַיֵּ֨לֶךְ אִ֜ישׁ מִבֵּ֧ית לֶ֣חֶם יְהוּדָ֗ה לָגוּר֙ בִּשְׂדֵ֣י מוֹאָ֔ב ה֥וּא וְאִשְׁתּ֖וֹ וּשְׁנֵ֥י בָנָֽיו׃
Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ κρίνειν τοὺς κριτὰς καὶ ἐγένετο λιμὸς ἐν τῇ γῇ, καὶ ἐπορεύθη ἀνὴρ ἀπὸ Βαιθλεεμ τῆς Ιουδα τοῦ παροικῆσαι ἐν ἀγρῷ Μωαβ, αὐτὸς καὶ ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ.

וְשֵׁ֣ם הָאִ֣ישׁ אֱ‍ֽלִימֶ֡לֶךְ וְשֵׁם֩ אִשְׁתּ֨וֹ נָעֳמִ֜י וְשֵׁ֥ם שְׁנֵֽי־בָנָ֣יו ׀ מַחְל֤וֹן וְכִלְיוֹן֙ אֶפְרָתִ֔ים מִבֵּ֥ית לֶ֖חֶם יְהוּדָ֑ה וַיָּבֹ֥אוּ שְׂדֵי־מוֹאָ֖ב וַיִּֽהְיוּ־שָֽׁם׃
καὶ ὄνομα τῷ ἀνδρὶ Αβιμελεχ, καὶ ὄνομα τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ Νωεμιν, καὶ ὄνομα τοῖς δυσὶν υἱοῖς αὐτοῦ Μααλων καὶ Χελαιων, Εφραθαῖοι ἐκ Βαιθλεεμ τῆς Ιουδα· καὶ ἤλθοσαν εἰς ἀγρὸν Μωαβ καὶ ἦσαν ἐκεῖ.

[Jonathan Robie]

Ah, here's one place I can look, NETS includes a section called Translation Profile of the Greek for each book. For Ruth it starts like this:

TRANSLATION PROFILE OF THE GREEK

The book of Routh is a fairly literal translation of the Hebrew, with the Greek text often matching the Hebrew in a word-for-word fashion. At times the translator reflects distinctions in the Hebrew that seem to be of no consequence semantically, as in the consistent representation of ....

I can't copy and paste out of this document without messing up the Hebrew, but these introductions will be helpful. I would like some authority other than me to appeal to - preferably an authority I agree with.

[Ken M. Penner]

Ah, here's one place I can look, NETS includes a section called Translation Profile of the Greek for each book.

Nice find! Those Translation Profiles almost all say this book is characterized by formal equivalence/isomorphism/quantitative equivalence/literalness/interlinearity. Job and Old Greek Daniel are exceptions. These also have textual issues, in that they don't always match the MT. Proverbs and Jeremiah don't quite fit, again for textual reasons.