Re: 9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom

On 7 mai, 09:00, Suzanne <leila...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 6, 7:37 am, Arkalen <skiz...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:> On 06/05/11 05:49, Suzanne wrote:

On May 5, 4:39 am, Arkalen <skiz...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 05/05/11 09:55, Suzanne wrote:

On May 2, 3:03 am, Arkalen <skiz...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
(2011/05/02 9:10), Suzanne wrote:
On Apr 28, 7:20 pm, Randy C<randyec...@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:
On Apr 28, 6:45 pm, Garamond Lethe<cartographi...@xxxxxxxxx>  wrote:

snip

None of those interpretations say "Fruitbats are cool".

A translation might, rather than an "interpretation." Translations put
the
meaning into your language.

Suzanne, stop spouting off on things you don't understand. People here
have repeatedly explained to you what interpretation is and how
translation works, and you have done nothing but repeat your assertions
without addressing the objections. Do you even speak a foreign language
? Have you studied linguistics at all ? Have you looked up
"interpretation" in the dictionary yet ?

snip

I do understand translating, and yes I do speak some other
languages. I have a background of teaching English as a
Second Language and also Accent Reduction Classes in
a couple of colleges, through Continuing Education
programs. My studies include learning characteristics of
languages, in order to help adult students to learn English.
I learned Spanish, German, French, and took classes in
Koine Greek and Biblical Hebrew, taught by seminary
professors. I only spoke French in the classes that I took
and have never conversed with someone in that language
away from the classroom, but have used Spanish and also
German speaking to people from those countries quite a
lot.

Then how can you talk about translating, especially translating
often-poetic texts in a dead language we have limited written records
of, from a time when writing wasn't as complete a system as we have now
at that, as if it were an obvious thing that can always be done with
perfect fidelity ?

On the contrary, we have very good texts that verify what quite a bit
of
Old Testament says from other texts the Bible was translated into.

That's not contrary to what I said. I didn't mean the texts were bad, I
meant we have a limited number of them. Besides I wasn't talking about
what copies of various books of the Bible remain, I was talking about
the texts in Biblical Hebrew and Koine Greek that tell us what those
languages were like.

OK.

But
you have to know what they are, and where to look, and that is what
you need to know about. For example, the Greek Septuagint was
translated by the ancient Jews, themselves, into Greek, much of which
is still present in the Greek language today. The Samaritan Pentateuch
is also available, and it is not a copy, it is an original. At a time
in the
not so long ago past, it was believed that the book of Isaiah (by
some)
was a much later book, than when Isaiah would have lived. But when
the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, in them they discovered some
ancient copies of the book of Isaiah. So that ended that suspicion
because those books of Isaiah were almost word for word exactly
what we have in our Bibles today.

Also, the Jews, themselves have preserved the Old Testament in
great accuracy. If they make just one mistake with the copies that
they make, they dispose of that copy completely, and start all over
again. Yes, we can make accurate copies now because of the
great technology that we have with computers, spell checkers, and
ways of being accurate, but these people that make torah scroll
copies by hand are a testimony of the accurate way in which the
ancient copy work was done.

Why do I think I can translate a couple of Bible verses? I don't
know that I can translate every Bible verse, but these two, the one
about Jesus saying hate your mother and father, etc.  if you would
be my disciple, and the one that says that Jacob loved Rachel
and Leah, but hated Leah, which doesn't make sense until you
research why it is written that way, I knew about and had studied
it.  Some of you challenged my reply and asked for me to provide
a reference, and I did just that. I could predict that someone would
say that the information that I had provided was false. It's not
false,
and the website is source for teaching biblical Hebrew online. It
has links to online classes from Hebrew University in Jerusalem,
Israel. So all of you can believe what you want to believe. But I
have accomodated and answered your requests, provided you
with a reference, and backed up what I have presented to you.
If you reject this, I've done my best to help you to understand
what the verses say.

You need to understand the difference between interpretation and
translation.

No. YOU need to understand what interpretation is and how translations
work. Have you looked "interpretation" up in the dictionary yet ? Have
you ever tried translating a text between two languages you know ? Do
you even know two languages ?

I understand very well the differences, and have posted it
in here already.

 > > Listen to this, please. Words are like vehicles that
carry thought (the meaning of something). If you can come up with
the equivalent that was conveyed in the original language, then the
meaning can be conveyed accurately. That becomes a translation.

Right. So translation first requires interpretation on the part of the
translator to understand the meaning that was conveyed in the original
language.

Not according to people who do biblical translations.

Then how come different biblical translations sometimes have different
meanings or implications ?

I don't know all the answers, but my guess is because there are many
people with different experiences that present things from their
angles
of understanding. You can see them all present in the New Testament,
too. If people would just read the New Testament, they would see the
various denominations there, and learn how they were dealt with by
the teachings of the Apostles, and the leaders of the churches. The
churches of the Revelation were actual churches that are located in
Turkey. The church that was greatest of them all was the one at
Philadelphia.

I also posted something explaining their positions on the
subjects.

If you study how he Wycliffe translators go into a tribe in Africa
(or where ever) where there is no translation of the Bible, and they
live among the people and learn their language, they have a way
of communicating to that tribe what the Bible says by putting the
Bible meaning into their specific way of talking. If you understood
how they do that, then you will get what true translation is. It is
the
conveying of the true meaning of the original.

How simple. Say Suzanne, are there any difficulties in translating, and
if so could you explain what they are ?

Why are you speaking to me this way?
In this thread we've spoken a lot about the difficulties involved in
translations.

I don't know who "we" is. You've been saying that translation is putting
the meaning of things into another language, that the meaning is obvious
and that none of this involves interpretation. That makes it sound like
you think translating is an obvious process, with no particular difficulty.

By "we," I was talking about all of us that have been participating in
this thread. And no, I've said often that some of these passages are
very difficult. And no, I don't think at all that these two were
obvious.
But I said something about it being obvious that one CAN'T
"hate love" Leah.

Also, I provided in this thread a website written by translators that
explains the difference between interpretation and translation. When
someone uses the term "interpretation," they usually are conveying
something much broader in meaning than translation. I'll speak your
language to explain that. : )

Right, and most disagreed with your website too. Interpretation is much
broader than translation, but translation requires interpretation.
Because translation requires knowing what the meaning of the original
text is, and interpretation is the process of understanding that
meaning. It's the word's dictionary definition.

I understand what you are saying, but the translators are adamant
about making people understand that when someone uses the word
"interpretation," it can be misunderstood because of it's alternative
definitions, and so they prefer the term "interpretation" because it
does not allow the broader idea.

Did you mean "translation instead of that second "interpretation" ?
The only people who see "making stuff up" as an alternative definition
of "interpretation" are Biblical literalists. It's certainly not an
alternative definition one can find in a dictionary. And if it were it
wouldn't change the fact that the primary definition is "finding out
the meaning of something". And "translation" is NOT a word that can be
used to replace "interpretation". Translation requires interpretation
to be accurate beyond a certain point but the two words mean different
things.

Also, if people in here didn't agree
with the website, they probably did so because it was me that
suggested it. : )

Wow, that smiley totally takes the sting off that nasty accusation.
Actually, the people who disagreed with the website probably did so
because the website said the same ridiculous things about translation
that you're saying. I don't recall specifics, but if they think that
"translation" can be used instead of "interpretation", semantically
speaking, well that's an example of how ridiculous they are.


And now...speaking in your language......
Saying that people who "translate" are "interpreting," is like someone
saying, "Evolution is just a theory." But, "translating" is like when
an evolutionist says "I use the scientific method." In other words,
"translation" is not broad. It ignores  convention in order to
produce
the most accurate original meaning of the earliest texts, if they can
be determined.

"if they can be determined". The determining part is interpretation.- Hide quoted text -

One definition of interpretation means the same thing as translation.

Do you mean the definition that means "oral translation" ? True, but
nobody's using that meaning here. We're not doing oral translations.

One does not mean the same thing. That's why I made the distinction.
For example, I guarantee you that if I (or any) translated something,
there would be someone that would come along and say something
like "that's just your interpretation." They would not have looked at
what the originals said. You see?

I see that you still think "interpretation" means "making stuff up".
You also don't seem to understand that translation requires
interpretation. They're not the same; the meanings of those two words
don't even overlap; you can't use one instead of the other and keep
the same meaning in a sentence. But to do a good translation, you need
to interpret the original text first. "Interpret" means "determine the
meaning of". It says so in the dictionary. Look it up. It's like
omelets and breaking eggs : they are two very different activities. I
can't just plug in "make an omelet" instead of "break eggs" in a
sentence or vice-versa. However, it is true that making an omelet
requires breaking eggs.

How many times in this very thread
have we read someone saying "You can make the Bible say anything
that you want it to say." You can't make the Bible say anything that
you want it to say. That's the point. A few ambiguous verses could
exist, but the basic core verses of the Bible are not ambiguous.

There is a lot of conceptual space between "You can make the Bible say
anything you want" and "The Bible is not ambiguous (except for "a few"
ambiguous verses that "could" exist)".
And none of it changes the meaning of the word "interpretation".

"For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting
life." This is an example of something very clear.

Not really. A "clear" reading of this sentence says that anyone who
believes in God (or is it God's son ? Could be either, good thing most
Christian doctrine says they're the same person. There, I've already
had to refer to outside knowledge to determine what that sentence
means) won't die (or is that "shouldn't" die ? That's a hard
commandment to obey, no wonder we're all going to Hell) but will be
immortal.

Given even Christians die, that verse is rarely understood literally.
And no, "spiritual death" or "death after judgement day" or whatever
aren't "clear" meanings of the word "perish".


Thanks for your post.

Suzanne


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom Car Owners
    ... arrogantly deny is an interpretation) trumps what you are supposed to ... that "determining the meaning of something" is one meaning of ... translation" meaning of "interpretation", WHICH IS NOT THE ONE WE'RE ... as is meant by the original language. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: 9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom Car Owners Manual
    ... when he and the disciples got corn on the Sabbath day to eat from ... literal interpretation of the rule for a teleological" or "purposive" ... rather than on their dictionary meaning. ... interpretation and translation. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: 9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom
    ... have repeatedly explained to you what interpretation is and how ... Do you even speak a foreign language ... The English equivalent meaning is "they lived happily ever after." ... No it was to show that translation isn't perfect. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: 9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom
    ... have repeatedly explained to you what interpretation is and how ... translation works, and you have done nothing but repeat your assertions ... Do you even speak a foreign language ... meaning can be conveyed accurately. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: 9 Bills That Would Put Creationism in the Classroom Car Owners
    ... arrogantly deny is an interpretation) trumps what you are supposed to ... that "determining the meaning of something" is one meaning of ... translation" meaning of "interpretation", WHICH IS NOT THE ONE WE'RE ... as is meant by the original language. ...
    (talk.origins)