In book I’ve been reading, this guy’s work translating the bible (really he oversaw the work) is discussed. Pretty interesting the interpretations we accept as legitimate.
The problem with Thought for Thought translation is are you translating the text means or what you think the text means.
The problem with word for word translation is that not all language has the same vocabulary (eg. multiple words for “love”), and it has the potential to not read as easily as it should–like the original writings probably did.
Let me demonstrate the problem with thought for thought. Imagine translating the 2nd amendment of the US Constitution into a foreign language. Imagine how the NRA might do it and compare to how gun control advocates might do it. Imagine how different the 1st part of the amendment “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” would apply to the 2nd part of the amendment “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In each of their translations.
Neither would say what the amendment says, they would say what they think it means. Gun Control advocates would write their thought for thought translation as saying that only those in a state militia have the right to keep and bear arms and the NRA would write their thought for thought translation as if the 1st part of the amendment has no bearing on who has the right to keep and bear arms and that everyone has the right to keep and bear arms.
A word for word translation would more likely keep the meaning open and those reading the translation can debate the meaning like we do.
To some degree, there is an advantage to not have to stop and say “So, in other words, what it’s saying is…”. I’m pretty sure the churches Paul wrote letters to didn’t have to do that.
the churches that Paul wrote the letters to spoke the same language Paul did. We don’t. They were also contemporaries of Paul. We are not.
Just to be clear, I am not saying thought for thought translation doesn’t have its place, it does. I just think it would be a mistake to use only a thought for thought translation. I think it is best to compare multiple word for word translations and multiple thought for thought translations. However, I were going to be marooned on a deserted island and could only have one, I would chose a word for word translation.