| Line 13: |
Line 13: |
| | Experts in ancient languages are helpful in reducing the first type of error above, which is a vanishing source of error as scholarship advances understanding. English language linguists are helpful in reducing the second type of error, which also decreases due to an increasing vocabulary. '''But the third -- and largest -- source of translation error requires conservative principles to reduce and eliminate'''.<ref>The committee in charge of updating the bestselling version, the [[NIV]], is dominated by professors and higher-educated participants who can be expected to be [[liberal]] and [[feminist]] in outlook. As a result, the revision and replacement of the [[NIV]] will be influenced more by [[political correctness]] and other [[liberal]] distortions than by genuine examination of the oldest manuscripts. As a result of these political influences, it becomes desirable to develop a [[conservative]] translation that can serve, at a minimum, as a bulwark against the liberal manipulation of meaning in future versions.</ref> | | Experts in ancient languages are helpful in reducing the first type of error above, which is a vanishing source of error as scholarship advances understanding. English language linguists are helpful in reducing the second type of error, which also decreases due to an increasing vocabulary. '''But the third -- and largest -- source of translation error requires conservative principles to reduce and eliminate'''.<ref>The committee in charge of updating the bestselling version, the [[NIV]], is dominated by professors and higher-educated participants who can be expected to be [[liberal]] and [[feminist]] in outlook. As a result, the revision and replacement of the [[NIV]] will be influenced more by [[political correctness]] and other [[liberal]] distortions than by genuine examination of the oldest manuscripts. As a result of these political influences, it becomes desirable to develop a [[conservative]] translation that can serve, at a minimum, as a bulwark against the liberal manipulation of meaning in future versions.</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | As of 2009, there is no fully conservative translation of the [[Bible]] which satisfies the following ten guidelines:<ref>Additional less important guidelines include (1) adherence to a concise and dignifying style, such as use of "who" rather than "that" when referring to people and also use glorifying language for the remarkable achievements and (2) recognizing that Christianity introduced powerful new concepts that even the Greek and Hebrew were inadequate to express, but modern conservative language can express well.</ref> | + | As of 2009, there was no fully conservative translation of the [[Bible]] which satisfies the following ten guidelines:<ref>Additional less important guidelines include (1) adherence to a concise and dignifying style, such as use of "who" rather than "that" when referring to people and also use glorifying language for the remarkable achievements and (2) recognizing that Christianity introduced powerful new concepts that even the Greek and Hebrew were inadequate to express, but modern conservative language can express well.</ref> |
| | | | |
| | :# '''Framework against Liberal Bias''': providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias. For example, the ''Living Bible'' translation has liberal [[evolution|evolutionary]] bias;<ref>http://www.cai.org/bible-studies/evolutions-influence-modern-bible-translations</ref> the widely used ''NIV'' translation has a pro-[[abortion]] bias.<ref>''See'' [[Feminist Bible]]</ref> | | :# '''Framework against Liberal Bias''': providing a strong framework that enables a thought-for-thought translation without corruption by liberal bias. For example, the ''Living Bible'' translation has liberal [[evolution|evolutionary]] bias;<ref>http://www.cai.org/bible-studies/evolutions-influence-modern-bible-translations</ref> the widely used ''NIV'' translation has a pro-[[abortion]] bias.<ref>''See'' [[Feminist Bible]]</ref> |
| Line 26: |
Line 26: |
| | :# '''Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness''': preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God." | | :# '''Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness''': preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God." |
| | | | |
| − | Thus, a project has begun among editors at [[Conservapedia]] to translate the Bible in accordance with these principles. The translated Bible can be found [[Conservative Bible|here]]. | + | Thus, a project began among editors at [[Conservapedia]] to translate the Bible in accordance with these principles. The translated Bible can be found [[Conservative Bible|here]]. |
| | | | |
| | Benefits include: | | Benefits include: |
| Line 51: |
Line 51: |
| | In the [[United States]] and much of the world, the immensely popular and respected [[King James Version]] (KJV) is freely available and in the [[public domain]]. It could be used as the baseline for developing a conservative translation without requiring a license or any fees. Where the KJV is known to be deficient due to discovery of more authentic sources, exceptions can be made that use either more modern [[public domain]] translations as a baseline, or by using the original Greek or Hebrew. | | In the [[United States]] and much of the world, the immensely popular and respected [[King James Version]] (KJV) is freely available and in the [[public domain]]. It could be used as the baseline for developing a conservative translation without requiring a license or any fees. Where the KJV is known to be deficient due to discovery of more authentic sources, exceptions can be made that use either more modern [[public domain]] translations as a baseline, or by using the original Greek or Hebrew. |
| | | | |
| − | There are 66 books in the [[KJV]], comprised of 1,189 chapters, 31,102 verses, and 788,280 words.<ref>http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.html</ref> The project could begin with translation of the [[New Testament]], which is only 27 books, 260 chapters, 7,957 verses, and | + | There are 66 books in the [[KJV]], comprised of 1,189 chapters, 31,102 verses, and 788,280 words.<ref>http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/kjv-stats.html</ref> The project began with translation of the [[New Testament]], which is only 27 books, 260 chapters, 7,957 verses, and less than 200,000 words. |
| − | less than 200,000 words. | |
| | | | |
| | Retranslation at rate of 20 verses a day would complete the entire [[New Testament]] in about a year. With 5 good retranslators, that would be an average of only 4 verses a day per translator. At a faster rate of 20 verses per day by 5 good translators, the entire [[New Testament]] could be retranslated in less than 3 months. | | Retranslation at rate of 20 verses a day would complete the entire [[New Testament]] in about a year. With 5 good retranslators, that would be an average of only 4 verses a day per translator. At a faster rate of 20 verses per day by 5 good translators, the entire [[New Testament]] could be retranslated in less than 3 months. |