HÍPIAS MENOR ou DA MENTIRA

Tradução comentada de trechos de “PLATÓN. Obras Completas (trad. espanhola do grego por Patricio de Azcárate, 1875), Ed. Epicureum (digital)”

 

Além da tradução ao Português, providenciei notas de rodapé, numeradas, onde achei oportuno abordar pontos polêmicos ou obscuros. Quando a nota for de Azcárate (tradutor) ou de Ana Pérez Vega (editora), um (*) antecederá as aspas.

 

(*) MOTE DO DIÁLOGO: “qual dos dois personagens célebres da mitologia, Aquiles ou Ulisses, é superior?” – A.P.V.

(*) “Como sói acontecer nos diálogos desta fase de Platão, a conversa culmina numa aporia: os personagens chegam a um fim sem apresentar soluções ao problema e encerram a obra reconhecendo sua ignorância.” – A.P.V.

“SÓCRATES – Muito bem, Eudico. Com muito prazer é que perguntaria a Hípias sobre algumas das coisas que ele afirmara com respeito a Homero. Ouvi dizer, da parte de teu pai Apemantes, que a Ilíada de Homero era um poema melhor que a Odisséia, sendo aquele mais belo que este, tanto quanto é Aquiles superior a Ulisses. (…) Desejaria, pois, saber de Hípias, se não se aborrece, claro, o que pensa destes heróis e qual dos dois prefere, levando em conta que já discursara sobre tantas matérias e acerca de tantos poetas, particularmente o Pai de todos, Homero.

EUDICO – Esteja certo de que qualquer pergunta que fizeres a Hípias será respondida sem demora. Não é isso mesmo, Hípias?

HÍPIAS – Incorreria eu em grave falta se, acostumado como estou em ir da Élide, minha pátria, a Olímpia, participar das assembleias gerais do povo grego durante os jogos, aberto a todo tipo de questão e debate, me negasse agora a fazer o mesmo com Sócrates!

SÓCRATES – Ó Hípias! Ditoso de ti se a cada Olimpíada te apresentas no templo com a alma tão confiante em tua sabedoria! Muito me espantaria deparar com um atleta que exibisse tua mesma segurança, que confiasse nas próprias forças do corpo tanto quanto tu confias no poder de teu espírito.

HÍPIAS – Se penso bem de mim mesmo, não é em vão, Sócrates; desde que comecei a freqüentar os jogos olímpicos nunca encontrei adversário a minha altura.

SÓCRATES – Decerto, Hípias, teu renome é um monumento reluzente de sabedoria para teus concidadãos da Élide, e ainda mais para os que te geraram!”

“HÍPIAS – (…) Homero fez de Aquiles o mais valente de quantos guerrearam em Tróia; de Nestor, o mais prudente; e de Ulisses o mais astuto.

SÓCRATES – Pelos deuses, Hípias! Concordarias em conceder-me um desejo? Não é difícil: é não troçar de mim, quando verificar que eu compreendo apenas com bastante esforço o que tu dizes, e se me mostro tão importuno ao perguntar aquilo que ignoro. Por favor, te peço que respondas com doçura e complacência a minhas dúvidas!

HÍPIAS – Seria indelicado de minha parte, Sócrates, agir desta maneira, sendo eu um professor. Seria ilícito que eu que recebo a paga por ensinar tantas pessoas e estou acostumado ao ofício e tenho tato para a coisa não te oferecesse a indulgência e a polidez que são de ordem.”

“SÓCRATES – (…) Não é Aquiles representado igualmente como astuto?

HÍPIAS – De jeito nenhum, Sócrates. Ele é representado como o homem mais sincero. Quando o poeta escreve o diálogo de ambas as figuras, assim se expressa Aquiles:

– Ó nobre filho de Laerte, o sagaz Ulisses, é preciso que te diga sem rodeios o que penso e o que estou disposto a fazer, porque me é adverso tanto quanto são as portas do Hades o ver gente que dissimula e esconde suas reais intenções. Por conseguinte, dir-te-ei sem delongas tudo que tenciono fazer.

            Percebeste o quanto este trecho demonstra a sinceridade de Aquiles e o caráter astuto e dissimulador de Ulisses?”

“Por astuto me parece que subentendes <mentiroso>.”

“SÓCRATES – Homero cria que o homem veraz e o mentiroso são dois homens, nunca o mesmo.

HÍPIAS – E como haveria de ser de outra maneira, Sócrates?

SÓCRATES – Logo, tu pensas igual.

HÍPIAS – Decerto que sim, e seria bem estranho discordar neste tocante! Esta era o título, entre os antigos, do nono livro da Ilíada.

SÓCRATES – Procedamos assim: abandonemos por ora a Homero, tanto mais quanto não nos é permitido consultar a opinião oculta de alguém que já morreu. Sem embargo, já que comungas com ele no essencial, responde-me a um só tempo por ele e por ti.”

“SÓCRATES – Crês que os homens mentirosos são homens incapazes de fazer alguma coisa, como por exemplo os doentes, ou consideras que os mentirosos são capazes de fazer algo?

HÍPIAS – Tenho-os por bastante capazes; e dentre suas capacidades está a de enganar os demais.

SÓCRATES – Segundo o que dizes, os astutos são igualmente capazes; não é isso mesmo?

HÍPIAS – Não erras.

SÓCRATES – Os astutos e os mentirosos são tais por imbecilidade e defeito natural, ou por malícia guiada pela inteligência?

HÍPIAS – Por malícia.

SÓCRATES – Logo, são inteligentes, conforme todos os indícios?

HÍPIAS – Por Zeus, Sócrates! E muito!

SÓCRATES – Sendo inteligentes, sabem ou não sabem o que fazem?

HÍPIAS – Sabem-no perfeitamente bem, e porque o sabem fazem mal.

SÓCRATES – Sabendo o que sabem, são ignorantes ou instruídos?

HÍPIAS – Instruídos, na arte de enganar.

(…)

SÓCRATES – Os homens sinceros e os mentirosos diferem entre si, e são ao mesmo tempo o oposto um do outro.

HÍPIAS – Ora, evidente.”

“Portanto, o homem incapaz e ignorante neste gênero não é mentiroso.”

“Se se te perguntasse quanto é 3×700, não responderias querendo, com maior certeza e maior ânsia que qualquer um, a verdade?

HÍPIAS – Com certeza.

SÓCRATES – E isto fá-lo-ias, posto que és sábio e muito competente em matemática.

HÍPIAS – Decerto.”

“Agora responde-me, com firmeza: se te perguntassem quanto é 3×700, não serias tu capaz de mentir como ninguém mais o é, e não serias igualmente capaz de dar uma resposta falsa contanto que fizesse parte de tua intenção mentir e eludir a verdade? Poderia o ignorante em cálculos mentir melhor do que tu, ainda que quisesse mentir?”

“SÓCRATES – O mentiroso é mentiroso em outras coisas e não nos números, e não poderá mentir ao contar?

HÍPIAS – Por Zeus! O mentiroso pode mentir nos números ou em qualquer outra coisa, Sócrates.”

“SÓCRATES – Estou vendo que o mesmo homem é capaz tanto de mentir quanto de ser veraz sobre o cálculo, e este homem é o que é melhor no seu tipo de arte, isto é, o melhor calculador.

HÍPIAS – Concedo-te.”

“SÓCRATES – Ânimo, Hípias! Vê todas as ciências em panorama, e me testifica se em alguma delas ocorre algo diferente do que relatei. És sem paralelo o mais instruído dos homens na maioria das artes, o que já ouvi da tua boca mesmo, numa ocasião em que o afirmaste com jactância. Foi na praça pública onde te ouvi enumerar teus conhecimentos. (…) Relataste saber forjar anéis, alegando seres o fabricador do anel que vestias. O mesmo disseste com referência a um selo, uma esponja de banho e um recipiente de azeite. Tudo era obra tua. Acrescentavas, inclusive, que havias feito tu mesmo o calçado que calçavas e os trajes que trajava. (…) Ademais, contavas que levava contigo poemas, versos heróicos, tragédias, ditirambos e muitos outros gêneros de textos em prosa sobre uma variedade de temas (…) e também és mestre na ciência do ritmo, da harmonia e da gramática, sem contar muitas outras, que me seria penoso lembrar. E no entanto omiti ou só agora me veio à mente tua excelente memória, que é aquilo de que mais te vanglorias. Mas isto seria sem fim, Hípias, porque sempre um ou outro talento seu ficaria de fora de minha lista, nunca exaustiva…”

“HÍPIAS – Sócrates, confesso que não adivinho aonde queres chegar…

SÓCRATES – Se é verdade o que dizes, deve ser porque neste instante não estás empregando tua portentosa memória artificial, crendo que ela não seria necessária para o caso. Pôr-te-ei, portanto, no caminho sem demora: Lembras-te de haver dito que Aquiles era sincero e de que Ulisses era um embusteiro e mentiroso?

HÍPIAS – Claro que sim.

SÓCRATES – (…) Donde se segue que se Ulisses é mentiroso é ao mesmo tempo veraz; e que se Aquiles é veraz é igualmente mentiroso; logo, não são dois homens distintos, nem opostos entre si, mas bastante semelhantes.

HÍPIAS – Sócrates, tu tens sempre o talento de embaraçar uma discussão. Te apoderas do mais espinhoso que há no discurso, e te apegas a ele, perscrutando e examinando parte por parte; qualquer que seja o assunto, jamais em tuas impugnações tu observa o todo, o conjunto. Eu demonstrarei com provas e testemunhas cabais que Homero compôs Aquiles como o protótipo da franqueza e nesse tocante superior a Ulisses, e Ulisses como um embusteiro em mil ocasiões, e neste aspecto inferior a Aquiles. Se continuas a discordar, dá-me tuas razões a fim de provar que Ulisses tem mais valor do que penso que tem. (…)

SÓCRATES – Hípias, mui distante estou de negar que tu sejas mais sábio que eu. Mas quando alguém fala tenho sempre o costume de me pôr atento, crendo eu que quem fala é homem bastante hábil; e como anseio deveras por compreender tudo o que diz o sábio, examino ponto por ponto, e cotejo suas palavras umas com as outras, a fim de aperfeiçoar meu juízo. Já, ao contrário, se converso com um espírito vulgar nada lhe pergunto, pois o que ele dirá não me interessa!

“Com efeito, depois de haver começado pelos versos que tu referiste, …me é adverso tanto quanto são as portas do Hades o ver gente que dissimula e esconde suas reais intenções, acrescenta Aquiles um pouco depois a seu discurso que nem Ulisses nem Agamêmnon fá-lo-ão dobrar nunca os joelhos, e que abandonará com certeza o cerco de Tróia.”

“Depois de ter falado desta maneira, tanto diante do exército como em particular com os de sua confiança, nunca na Ilíada ficamos sabendo de Aquiles reunindo sua bagagem para fazer a viagem, nem que tenha desancorado algum navio do porto. Muito pelo contrário: durante toda a saga nunca dá nenhum passo rumo a sua pátria, e fica patente que ele também é, por isso, um dissimulador.”

“HÍPIAS – Tudo consiste em que não examinas bem as coisas, Sócrates. Nas circunstâncias em que Aquiles mente, não há desígnio premeditado de fazê-lo, senão que a derrota do exército forçou-o a isso, pois a despeito da sua intenção original ele se viu premido a regressar ao campo de batalha para salvar seus companheiros. Mas Ulisses mente desde o início deliberadamente, com insídia.

SÓCRATES – Tu enganas muito bem teus contendores, querido Hípias: imitas perfeitamente a Ulisses!

HÍPIAS – Nada disso, Sócrates. Em que foi que eu te enganei? Que queres dizer?

SÓCRATES – Quando supões que Aquiles não mente com deliberação; um homem tão charlatão, tão insidioso, que além de ser falso em suas palavras, se é que nos ateremos ao que está em Homero, demonstra ainda dominar a arte da dissimulação e do engodo, de uma maneira ainda não pressentida sequer por Ulisses! Mesmo diante do próprio Ulisses atreveu-se ele a listar as vantagens e desvantagens de cada atitude a tomar (continuar ou não a guerra), e nem Ulisses, o maroto, se apercebeu de que estava bancando o joguete do herói. Ou Ulisses cai de propósito, se assim for, e não emite sinais de que tenha compreendido que Aquiles enganava-o.

HÍPIAS – Em que trecho da Ilíada?

SÓCRATES – Não tomarei parte nos combates sangrentos enquanto Heitor, filho de Príamo, não houver chegado às tendas e às naves dos Mirmidões, após empreender uma carnificina entre os Argivos e queimado toda a sua frota! Quando este dia chegar, saiba que porei Heitor em seu devido lugar. Crês tu, Hípias, que o filho de Tétis, o discípulo do sapientíssimo Quíron, tinha memória de peixe, para, assim, depois de despejar terríveis torrentes de palavras sobre seus próprios companheiros de armas, dizer a Ulisses, por um lado, que iria partir, e a Ájax, por outro, que permaneceria no campo de batalha?

HÍPIAS – Não preciso crer que fosse defeito ou limitação de memória, Sócrates. Mas a razão que Aquiles teve para dizer isso a Ájax foi pela bondade inata de seu caráter, que o fez mudar rapidamente de resolução. Quanto a Ulisses, entretanto, pouco importa que ele minta ou seja honesto, pois é sempre frio e calculista.”

“SÓCRATES – Mas Hípias, considera! Não acabamos de concordar que os que mentem voluntariamente são superiores aos que mentem sem querer?!?

HÍPIAS – Como seria possível, Sócrates, que os que cometem uma injustiça, tramam teias e nós cegos, e que causam o mal premeditadamente, justo eles, são melhores que outros, que incorrem em tais faltas contra sua própria vontade, sendo por isso mesmo dignos de compaixão? Porque aquele que comete um crime culposo é absolvido; mas a lei diz outra coisa sobre quem comete um crime com dolo!”

“sempre que dialogo com algum de vós, tão creditados por sua sabedoria e em quem todos os gregos depositam sua fé, descubro que nada sei!”

“sou como sou, para não dizer coisa pior.”

“vejo que quem fere outrem, comete ação injusta, mente, engana e incorre em falta voluntária, mas não involuntária, é melhor que quem age com inocência…”

(A Hípias) Por favor, suplico: não te negues a curar minh’alma! Far-me-ias um grande serviço, livrando-me assim da ignorância, como farias também a meu corpo, livrando-o duma doença. Se tens a intenção de pronunciar um longo discurso, declaro-te desde já que assim não me curarás, porque não poderei acompanhar-te! Mas se desejas me responder como o fizeste até agora, ser-me-ás de enorme auxílio, e creio que disso nenhum mal a ti derivaria.

(A Eudico) Tenho o direito de pedir este socorro a ti, ó filho de Apemantes, posto que tu me comprometeste a ter este diálogo com Hípias! Se este se nega a me responder, faz-me o favor de suplicar-lhe em meu lugar.”

“HÍPIAS – (…) Esse Sócrates tudo engabela, distorce e desvirtua numa discussão! Tudo me leva a crer que ele não almeja outra coisa senão criar discórdia…

SÓCRATES – Meu querido Hípias, se eu o faço, é a despeito meu! Porque se fôra eu capaz de engabelar, distorcer e desvirtuar de propósito, significa que seria eu, segundo tu mesmo, sábio e hábil; coisa que não sou. Faço essas coisas por acidente, podes ter certeza. Escuta: exerce agora teu próprio ditado. Tu me disseste que é preciso ser indulgente com os que fazem o mal sem querer.”

“SÓCRATES – O bom corredor não é o que corre bem e o mau corredor o que corre mal?

HÍPIAS – Correto.

SÓCRATES – E não corre mal aquele que corre lentamente, ao passo que corre bem aquele que corre ligeiro?

(…)

SÓCRATES – (…) A velocidade é um bem e a lentidão um mal?

HÍPIAS – Sem dúvida.

SÓCRATES – De 2 homens que correm lentamente, um com intenção e fingimento e o outro porque é apenas devagar, qual é o melhor corredor?

HÍPIAS – O que corre lentamente porque quer.

SÓCRATES – Correr não é agir?

HÍPIAS – Claro que sim.

SÓCRATES – Se é agir, não é fazer alguma coisa?

HÍPIAS – Concedo.

SÓCRATES – Logo, aquele que corre mal faz uma coisa má e feia quando o assunto é a corrida.

HÍPIAS – Exato, exato.

SÓCRATES – Aquele que corre devagar, não corre mal?

HÍPIAS – Sim.

SÓCRATES – O bom corredor faz esta coisa má e feia porque quer; e o mau fá-la porque é só o que sabe fazer.

HÍPIAS – Assim parece.

SÓCRATES – Na corrida, por conseguinte, o que faz o mal sem querer é mais mau.

HÍPIAS – Sim, Sócrates, é pior na corrida.

SÓCRATES – Na luta: de 2 lutadores que perdem, um deliberadamente, outro porque foi realmente derrotado, qual deles é o melhor?

HÍPIAS – O primeiro, ao que parece.

(…)

SÓCRATES – Destarte, aquele que faz uma coisa má e feia por vontade própria é melhor lutador que o outro.

HÍPIAS – Sim, Sócrates, perfeitamente.”

“HÍPIAS – Seria assaz estranho, Sócrates, se o homem voluntariamente injusto fôra melhor que o que o é involuntariamente.

SÓCRATES – E no entanto parece ser a conclusão de nosso raciocínio. Não acho que seja realmente assim! Pelo menos para mim, fica um sabor amargo ao dizer essas palavras… Mas responde-me de novo: a justiça é exclusivamente uma capacidade ou uma ciência? Ou uma ou outra, sem poder ser ambas ou nenhuma das duas?

HÍPIAS – É uma necessidade que seja apenas uma das duas, Sócrates.”

COMO TRADUZIR A BÍBLIA: THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF TRANSLATION (Vol. VIII) – NIDA, Eugene & TABER, Charles, 1969 (1982)

Os 7 primeiros volumes são devotados a controvérsias bíblicas.

GLOSSÁRIO POLIGLOTA

heap: monte (amontoado)

quiasmo: “(do grego khiasmós, -oû, disposição em cruz, arranjo diagonal) substantivo masculino; (Retórica) Figura composta de um paralelo ou uma dupla antítese cujos termos se cruzam (ex.: é preciso comer para viver e não viver para comer).”

PREFACE

This volume on The Theory and P. of Tr. is the logical outgrowth of the previous book Toward a Science of Translating (1964)” “In this vol. the illustrative data are drawn primarily from the field of Bible translating. (…) Bible transl. has a long tradition (it began in the III BC), involves far more languages (1393, by the end of 1968[!]), is concerned with a greater variety of cultures, and includes a wider range of literary types (from lyric poetry to theological discourse) than any comparable kind of translating.”

1. A NEW CONCEPT OF TRANSLATION

It is estimated that at least 100.000 persons dedicate most or all of their time to such work (translation), and of these at least 3.000 are engaged primarily in the translation of the Bible into 800 languages, representing about 80% of the world’s population.”

One specialist in translating and interpreting for the aviation industry commented that in his work he did not dare to employ the principles often followed by translators of the Bible (…) Unfortunately, translators of religious materials have sometimes not been prompted by the same feeling of urgency to make sense.”

A pequeno-burguesia da rima (nem pobre nem rica!)

On translating Hegel (from his idiom to our idiom!)

A expressão “montes de carvão em brasa em sua cabeça” (que seria a tradução literal de um trecho em Romanos 12) significa, dentro da tradição hebraica, estar profundamente envergonhado de sua conduta. Seria fácil errar ingenuamente ou manipular a informação, removendo seu caráter de metáfora (vd. além).

Não use, no entanto, a língua como prova e testemunha de defesa no seu ofício de Advogado de Deus!

in the American Standard Version (1901), 2 Corinthians 3:10 reads, <For verily that which hath been made glorious hath not been made glorious in this respect, by reason of the glory that surpasseth.> The words are all English, but the sentence structure is essentially Greek. The New English Bible quite rightly restructures this passage to read <Indeed, the splendour that once was is now no splendour at all; it is outshone by a splendour greater still.>”

moniThor guia-para-o-portal-de-mármore

inkissidor do abraço fúnebre

João 1:14

a. “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth”

b. “So the word of God became a human being and lived among us. We saw his splendour (the splendour as of a father’s only son), full of grace and truth”

c. “The Word became a human being and lived among us. We saw his glory, full of grace and truth. This was the glory which he received as the Father’s only Son”

DIS|SECTION

a. “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth” (30 palavras) (2 repetições de ênfase ou para facilitar o entendimento) (1 oclusão – parênteses) (1 sentença) Father

dwell – origem: pelo menos 900, conectado à idéia da loucura (cf. The Thing That Should Not Be), sedução, perdição, prevenção, estorvar, chocar, fumaça, nuvem, vapor, erro…

behold – origem: pelo menos 900, ligado à idéia de conservar no campo de visão, pertencer, amarrar-se a… (cf. Eye of The Beholder)

begotten – origem: pelo menos 1000, ligado à idéia de derivar de, gênesis, criação, pertencimento, advento (inclusive se usa Advento em Português para se referir ao mês de dezembro, antes do Natal)…

significados mais implícitos: valorização da Eleição; mas todos somos irmãos de Jesus e portanto filhos de Deus.

b. “So the word of God became a human being and lived among us. We saw his splendour (the splendour as of a father’s only son), full of grace and truth” (30 palavras) (2 repetições de ênfase ou para facilitar o entendimento) (1 oclusão) (2 sentenças) God-father

A estrutura frasal evita o verbo no particípio no meio do versículo.

significados mais implícitos: valorização da paternidade de um filho homem sem outros co-descendentes, humanização do fato (da Vinda).

c. “_The Word became a human being and lived among us. We saw his glory, full of grace and truth. This was the glory which he received as the Father’s only Son” (31 palavras) (1 repetição de ênfase ou para facilitar o entendimento) (0 oclusões) (3 sentenças) Father

Inversão frasal não verificada nos itens a e b.

Os parênteses são trocados pelo conectivo.

Primeira referência “genérica” a Jesus como “he”.

receive – origem: de 1250 a 1300; ligado à idéia de bênção, dom, recuperação (quem recebe também toma, ou antes poderíamos dizer que neste caso Deus tem o poder de dar ilimitado, é Ele mesmo quem recebe, mas em prol de Suas criaturas, que no fim O São, mesmo quando ainda não O sabem); ao contrário dos demais verbos, a etimologia é francesa.

significados mais implícitos: O “as” já despido de “of” possui menos valor poético, e mais valor “possessivo”: o legítimo herdeiro, deus em carne e osso de fato. Logo, Son precisa ser enaltecido (como nome próprio).

UNIVERSALITIES (a&b&c): and, among us, as, full of grace and truth, only, a idéia da Palavra (sendo necessariamente) Divina. João remete ao primeiro versículo do Antigo Testamento, sem dúvida.

CONTRASTE COM TRADUÇÕES DO PORTUGUÊS:

“E o Verbo se fez carne, e habitou entre nós, e vimos a sua glória, como a glória do unigênito do Pai, cheio de graça e de verdade.”

Aquele que é a Palavra tornou-se carne e viveu entre nós. Vimos a sua glória, glória como do Unigênito vindo do Pai, cheio de graça e de verdade.”

“A Palavra se tornou um ser humano e morou entre nós, cheia de amor e de verdade. E nós vimos a revelação da sua natureza divina, natureza que ele recebeu como Filho único do Pai.”

COMENTÁRIOS:

Verbo no lugar de Palavra: Ação, no lugar de Contrato. Prefiro palavras. Prefiro as escolhas da terceira tradução encontrada, que inclusive também realiza uma inversão frasal, denunciando sua provável origem (c). A supressão do termo “graça” também foi muito feliz, devido ao duplo sentido moderno presente na palavra, ainda mais em minúscula. Unigênito me soa forçado e esquisito. Veja que pouco se entra em concórdia sobre o verbo inicial (Jesus entre nós): morar, viver, habitar. Particularmente, é a única coisa que eu modificaria na 3ª opção. “Aquele” e “carne” para mim subtraem e ocultam sentidos de forma desnecessária. Outro mérito da 3ª: glória se tornou um termo muito secular e degradado. Em sua passagem na terra (enquanto cá morou, habitou, viveu), Jesus Cristo teve uma vida que foi exatamente o avesso da glória temporal.

* * *

A promessa se materializou. Bíblia para crianças superdotadas e adultos retardados. Para o rico, para o pobre e para o preto (RPP). LGBT your neighbour.

Ele esteve Aqui. Foi um ser-aí. Mas não há provas dessa discreta e efêmera luz, seja você um leigo ou um perito. Padre no tiene hijo. Que trágico! E a Mãe nisso tudo, recebeu P.A.?

E se descobríssemos, aliás, que tudo não passou duma grande pegadinha (uma pegada ou pegadona) de José mais 12 amigos (um quis caguetar no final e quase levou outro junto) para não pagar P.A. à Maria, com a ciência e colaboração do filho do casal, Jesus O (C)anastr(ão)?

Tem gente que adora um flash, mas não conseguimos mesmo é viver sem flesh, sejamos francos. Mesmo que sejamos até saxões ou bárbaros… Visigodo. Vizinho gordo. À refeição grátis não se olha os pentelhos nem dentes de alho, muito menos caroço ou alface no dente após o arroto consagrador da missão.

Jesus precisou comer, cagar e pagar aluguel. Não foi fácil pra NINGUÉM, nem pro filho do dono!

Quem não vê com os Olhos do Coração, o que é que faz, hein?!

Mas no final, vocês sabem, né: é tudo Verdade!

vivencivivi.alexandre.cesar.gloriatemporal.ig.pt/estantismo

Clicai e sê feliz!

No sofá? Not so far… so bad. So war!

3 Romanos em 1 Bar

Paulo 1:71: “No dia do Juízo Final eu pago a Conta! Enquanto isso, pendura aí, que ninguém é de ferro!”

Pra que serviram os profetas do Antigo Testamento? Não houve raça mais imunda e inútil sobre a terra! Um bando de farisaicos!

Now,

com o passar dos milênios, se transforma em

in these days (tá chegando, você não tá sentindo? Hm, talvez você tenha perdido seus poderes espirituais ou seu nen)

all them that believe

//

upon everybody without distinction, if…

Descartes, me diz aí: Ser é Acreditar?

Todo ser humano é realmente humano?

Mentir e rezar, é só começar…

God’s ways

at last

Oh, but that is always a <but>!

Secular butts

Só sei que não sei de ná-digas

Raul Seixas esqueceu de dizer que é tudo da Fé também!

* * *

Finalmente voltamos ao livro de Nida. Toda essa excursão? Não foi NADA!

Eu acho que pirei, meus pés saíram do chão, Pai!

Each language is rich in vocabulary for the areas of cultural focus, the specialities of the people, e.g., cattle (Anuaks in the Sudan), yams [batata doce] (Ponapeans in Micronesia), hunting and fishing (Piros in Peru), or technology (the western world).”

one missionary in Latin America insisted on trying to introduce the passive voice of the verb into a language which had no such form. Of course, this was not successful. One must simply accept the fact that there are many languages which do not have a passive voice. They merely choose to report actions only as active.” “we do not have such a match even in translating from Hebrew or Greek into English, with all its wealth of vocabulary (more than a million words if one includes all the technical terminology).” “Similarly, when the Gospel of John uses the Greek word logos, <Word>, in the prologue, there simply is no English word (and certainly not Word itself) which can do justice to the variety and richness of meaning of the Greek term.”

loving-kindness” “covenant love” partículas literais hebraicas

A ALMA EXISTE: “in the 3rd chapter of John, Jesus speaks of the <wind> and of the <Spirit>. In Greek a single word, pneuma, is used with both meanings. This results in a very significant play on words, but it cannot be reproduced in English. The best we can do under such circumstances is to use a marginal note to call the attention of the reader to the fact that in the source language one and the same word has both meanings.”

sacrifice the form or the meaning? Here it seems obvious and evident that the preservation of rhymes in poems is a dull and fool thing to do. some people would imply the exact opposite.”

Às vezes é importante converter substantivos (mais escassos) de uma língua em verbos na TL (mais profusos).

Quite naturally the easiest transitions (those with the least amount of formal change), occur when one translates from a language such as English into German, or Fante into Ashanti, closely related languages. Moreover, English and German represent the same general cultural setting, Western technological, and Fante and Ashanti represent the same cultural setting, West African.”

EXPRESSÕES INTERESSANTES PARA ANÁLISE:

a. “if she pass the flower of her age” I Cor. 7:36b

b. “Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance” Mat. 3:8

c. “which devour widows’ houses” Lucas 20:47

d. “our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us” Atos 7:38b

a.

“quando ela já for avançada em idade”

“se ela já estiver na idade da sabedoria”

“Se já contar mais verões que ovos em três caixas”

b.

“Só é digno de mim aquele capaz do arrependimento”

“Sede humilde; não sejais presunçoso”

c.

“destruidor de órfãos, pregador hipócrita (sentido contextual)” // “Afasta-te da gentalha e do oportunista” // “Cuidado com os demagogos” // “Evite os falsos professores de moral” // “Certa vez conheci um crente chamado Davi…” – tradução pessoal

d.

“nossos pais (os contemporâneos de Moisés, os judeus, os primeiros crentes, etc.) foram encarregados de nos dar as boas-novas”

Hebrew is regarded as a special esoteric tongue for the theologians, and Greek is a <mystery>, or <the finest instrument of human thought ever devised by man>. On the contrary, Greek and Hebrew are just <languages>, with all the excellencies and liabilities that every language tends to have. They are neither the languages of heaven nor the speech of the Holy Spirit.”

A IMANÊNCIA DA PALAVRA: “in the Greek Gospels there are some 700 grammatical and lexical ambiguities, but of course, as in most languages, a high percentage of these are resolved by the linguistic context.” “the words of the Bible were all current terms. Our problem today is that many of the cultural contexts of Bible times which provided meanings for those words no longer exist and therefore we often cannot determine just what a word means.”

Writing to be understood might seem to be a truism, but for some persons it is a startling revelation, for many individuals have assumed that the Bible is not a book to be understood [só sentida!]. One person, for example, who began to read Today’s English Version remarked, <This must not be the Bible; I can understand it.>1

some persons insist that in translating the Greek of the New Testament one must go back to the Aramaic and understand Jesus’ words in terms of what he must have said in Aramaic. But the translator is bound to ask himself: What was it that Luke, writing in his day, understood by the Greek that he used? If we are to make a faithful translation of Luke’s Gospel, this is what must be our viewpoint. Otherwise, we will not only be involved in interminable controversy, but we will inevitably tend toward unwarranted harmonization. For example, in the Lucan form of the Beatitudes it is the <poor> who are blessed, but in Matthew they are the <poor in spirit> (or <those who recognize their spiritual poverty> [which is, indeed, a richness!]). Luke employs an expression which is a direct reference to poor people, but Matthew puts it into a more <spiritual context>. To try to reconstruct the Aramaic, and to reinterpret both Luke and Matthew on the basis of this reconstruction of the Psalms have important Ugaritic parallels,¹ and much can be understood in the Psalms as the result of such studies, but one does not translate these Psalms as though they were Ugaritic ritual songs, but as hymns used in the temple of worship of Yahweh.”

¹ Ugarítico: idioma hebreu extinto oralmente; redescoberto em escritos apenas no século XX.

A TARA PELA GENEALOGIA CEGA A ANÁLISE: “the Greek term pistis, <faith>, came to have the meaning <content of faith>, or <creed>, in the later parts of the New Testament and especially in the writings of the early Christian Fathers. But it would be quite wrong to read this meaning back into the Gospels, e.g., in Luke 18:8. Similarly, we must not read back into the Genesis account of creation our own <world view> and translate the days as <geological ages>, or the <dome of the sky> (wrongly translated in English as <firmament>) as <the ionosphere>.”

ARMADILHAS COMUNS DA EVOLUÇÃO DO INGLÊS: the case of “event nouns”: “baptism of repentance” é um arcaísmo; traduzi-lo por “repent and be baptized” // “obedience of faith” é nonsense: no lugar, “be obedient and have faith (or be faithful, embora o verbo, seja no passivo ou ativo, seja sempre uma alternativa mais segura)”. Mais simplesmente ainda, “believe and obey”.

Deus atravessa como uma adaga. Ele é pungente e efetivo.

FILOSOFANDO E TECENDO TEIAS D’ARANHA

mestre trágico do existir

vi, vivi, venci

o profeta vitorioso da vivência

dominei, sofri, logo sou

penso, logo excito

materializo minhas luxúrias

a solitária existência

Você cumpriu os requerimentos e requisitos formais estatuídos pelo regimento da fé!

3 Gal. 2:6: linguagem moderna: não importa se puta ou ladrão ou tratante ou patife, ou gay ou sodomita, se eles entenderam a Mensagem, como foi enunciada pelos que conviveram com Jesus Cristo, acredite no que eles dizem. Não confie em togas e cargos. Investiduras não são consideradas pelo Espírito e no dia do Juízo.

2. THE NATURE OF TRANSLATING

In trying to reproduce the style of the original one must beware, however, of producing something which is not functionally equivalent. F.e., Mark employs typical Semitic Greek in the use of the conjunction kai, <and>, to begin many sentences. This is perfectly appropriate Semitized Koine Greek, in that it accurately reflects the corresponding use of the Hebrew conjunction waw. In the RSV, however, most of these conjunctions are reproduced literally, with the result that 26 sentences in Mark 1 begin with <And>, producing a kind of style completely contrary to good English usage. In fact, it gives the impression of being <childish>. This is, of course, not the case with the original Greek text of Mark. This means that reproducing style, even on a formal level, may not result in an equivalence, and it is functional equivalence which is required, whether on the level of content or on the level of style.”

In the Greek translation of the Old Testament, made a couple of centuries before Christ, Jewish scholars used the Greek term kurios to render both Adonai and YHWH. This use was carried over into the Greek New Testament, with the result that there is a kind of divine ambiguity in the use of the same term to apply both to God and to Jesus Christ.

It is interesting that in the English tradition, the term <LORD> has consistently been preferred to <Jehovah> (the use of <Jehovah> in the Revised Version and the American Standard Version never proved especially popular), and the RSV has returned to the King James use of <LORD>.

Some persons assume that a translation which is well done in the aspect of its printed form will be quite easily read aloud, but this is by no means always true. In fact, if one is to anticipate the problems of the hearer, it is necessary to bear in mind a number of very essential matters”

in I Chronicles 25:1, the RSV reads, <prophesy with lyres,>, but people will almost inevitably think of liars and not lyres, since the latter is such an uncommon term. The problem of the written form of language is very acute in the case of Chinese, in which a written text may be quite clear, but a spoken text of the same passage can be very ambiguous.

Lyres used to be liars instruments for lying chants in people’s ears and minds.

in American English the word ass does not seem so vulgar in a printed text, but in pronunciation the term carries strongly unfavorable connotations.”

In some languages, e.g., Portuguese, it is quite common for people to listen for combinations of sounds (usually the endings of words combined with the initial portions of following words) which have vulgar or obscene meanings. This means that one must carefully read all translations of the Bible so as to avoid any combinations of sounds which can be reinterpreted as a different and unacceptable word.”

In order to preserve some of the special phonological contrasts in Hebrew and Greek, some languages have employed artificial sound distinctions and combinations of sounds, which are very misleading to the average reader. As a result, many persons hesitate, or even refuse, to read the Scriptures in public, for they do not know how to pronounce these unusual letters of combinations of letters.

One could always caution the reader that the meaning of the verse is uncertain. But as a principle it is best at least to make sense in the text and put the scholarly caution in the margin, rather than to make nonsense in the text and offer the excuse in the margin.”

it is not only legitimate, but also necessary, to see that the rate at which new information is communicated in the translation will not be too fast for the average listener.”

P. 31 (in-book): os 3 tipos de tradução da Bíblia:

  • eclesiástica ou litúrgica (formal clerical);

  • contemporânea literária (formal laica);

  • contemporânea popular (no limite do informal publicável – formal/informal).

the Scriptures must be intelligible to non-Christians, and if they are, they will also be intelligible to Christians.” They aren’t up to today.

The use of language by persons 25 to 30 years of age has priority over the language of the older people or of children. (…) At the same time, one should not accept the language of children or teenagers as a norm, for this does not have sufficient status to be fully acceptable. Such forms often including slang and fad words are generally rejected by the young people themselves, who may be offended by being adressed in a style which seems substandard or paternalistic.

Vamos fazer um teste com Gên. 1 (tradução do Português mais formal encontrado para um Português que eu considere “jovial” nesta faixa):

KITSCH(GAY): EVANGELIZE

A pedagogia do Tudo para os retardados.

No começo de tudo, Deus criou todas as coisas.

Nosso mundo não tinha forma nem matéria nem substância, tudo era o Breu e as Águas do Oceano Primordial.¹

Deus disse: Luz!²

E fez-se luz. [segundo Eugene Nida, ênclises estão proibidas porque causam confusão na leitura para uma audiência!]

Fizeram luz, pronto! Fizeram um abajur sem forma. Antes da língua francesa sequer existir.

A luz era o bem; as trevas primordiais ficaram sendo o mal. Quem pode, pode.

Este foi o primeiro dia do universo.

Deus disse: Agora divida-se o Oceano em dois, e acima fique o Céu e abaixo fiquem as Águas (H2O)!

Este foi o dia 2.

Deus disse: Agora é hora de haver continentes e oceanos!

A parte seca Deus chamou de terra; a úmida são os mares. Deus era um artesão e tanto e gostou do que fez.

Deus disse: Brote vegetação da terra, e cada fruto se multiplique na superfície!

A flora era o bem.

Este foi o dia 3.

Deus disse: Não está bem que o Céu fique indiferenciado. Criarei as estrelas, o Sol, e a Lua, e que bem e mal se alternem no Céu!³

Este foi o dia 4, quando Deus criou “o dia”.

E a Deus, muito admirado da própria inteligência, agradou esse arranjo (tanto que depois desmembraria em duas coisas esta palavra, criando o “ar” e criando o “anjo”).

Deus disse: Nasçam bichos na água e aves no ar!

Deus criou as espécies animais, que eram também o bem.

Deus comandou: Procriai-vos!

Deus achou o panorama muito bonito. Melhor do que antes.

Deus disse: Mas falta alguma coisa! Que tal um clone meu, mortal? Como num espelho (mas antes Deus também teve de pensar um pouco e criar o primeiro espelho)…

Deus decretou: O homem será o rei dos peixes, o rei das aves, o Antônio Fagundes (charada), e independente de gênero ou ideologia ou identidade, até o rei das cobras!

Deus se masturbou e desse germe indiferenciado (o sêmen auto-fecundado) pulularam, formadinhos, Adão e Eva.

Deus pediu: ‘Bença!

– ‘Bença, nhô!

– ‘Bença, nhôzinho!

Deus disse: Agora que sois meus animais prediletos, sejam meus primeiros atores pornôs. Comam este afrodisíaco e tenham um filho (ainda não inventei a impotência, a camisinha nem essas viadagens que-tais…)!

Deus era muito tagarela e antes de Adão e Eva poderem realizar qualquer gesto, continuou (falar, até Papagaio fala):

– O destino de vocês é serem os Senhores deste planetinha. Com mãos de ferro e de pelica, tanto faz, por isso na verdade criei dois diferentes de vocês, e não uma bola perfeita, com pinto e boceta!

Peixes são pra pescar; aves pra adestrar e engaiolar; cavalos são pra cavalgar!

Ainda não inventei isso que chamarão um dia de “dosar”! (malditos epicureus, por que vou criar esses troços?!)

Maldito Seja Eu!

Retomando a compostura:

– Cof, cof! (Inventando a aspirina)

Fauna e flora são serventia da casa, “rapaziada”… (inventou a gíria)

Vou ter que inventar um relógio, puta merda, falei tanto que já tá terminando o sexto dia.

As pálpebras foram baixando…

Tirou um ronco e enquanto isso (enquanto SEXTAVA) nem os gemidos de Eva acordaram o Patrão…

¹ Aristóteles fotografou este momento e depois analisou-o com retidão em sua “Metafísica”.

² Aí nasceu a expressão arrogante dos diretores de Cinema: Luz, Câmera, Ação!

³ GÊNESE do materialismo histórico.

* * *

3. GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS

P. 21 (PDF): Alice Através do Espelho

Jabberwocky

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves,

Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;

All mimsy were the borogoves,

And the mome raths outgrabe.

The syntactical meanings here indicated are subsequently confirmed in Through the Looking Glass by Humpty Dumpty, who, in answer to Alice’s enquiry, also assigns a lexical meaning to each of the items concerned.”

THE BOOK OF MOSES: “If one employs the normal possessive construction, Moses’ book, then it is the book that Moses had in his possession, rather than the one he was regarded as having written.”

Verbos tocam mais o Espírito

Pronomes pessoais também

P. 24 (PDF): Problem 9: resolução:

I.

John I

Colossians I

Hebrews II

KJV (King James), RSV (Revised Standard) (old translations)(a) X NEB, Phillips, TEV (modern translations)(b)

John I

James

1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.

[—]

5 This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin [once and for all?].

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.”

substantivos com significados (relevância) (18):

beginning (of time)

eyes

Word of life

(manifested) life

eternal life

the Father

fellowship

his Son Jesus Christ

your joy

the message

light

darkness

the truth

the blood of Jesus Christ

all sin, our sins, all unrighteousness

a liar

his word

in us

dividir em (substantivos) concretos e abstratos:

C / A

eyes, Jesus / almost all!

No começo kantiano dos tempos alguém proferiu discursos verdadeiros, dos quais só nos restam escombros e indícios de indícios. Muito se fala duma tal vida, mas ninguém a “experimenta”, nem sabe o quanto dura. Na verdade, nunca se a provou, se é que me entende, detetive! Uma irmandade de estranhos fala em sentimentos de terceiros, como alegria, contentamento… O que eles sabem? Luzes, trevas, confusão… Alegorias sem sentido para perpetuamente cegos… Cafonas que acham que o sangue de alguém purifica alguma coisa! O que é pecado? Não preste ouvido aos mentirosos. Menina-dos-olhos do pastor é a ovelha, cuide bem das suas.

Phillips

1 1-4 We are writing to you about something which has always existed yet which we ourselves actually saw and heard: something which we had an opportunity to observe closely and even to hold in our hands, and yet, as we know now, was something of the very Word of life himself! For it was life which appeared before us: we saw it, we are eye-witnesses of it, and are now writing to you about it. It was the very life of all ages, the life that has always existed with the Father, which actually became visible in person to us mortal men. We repeat, we really saw and heard what we are now writing to you about. [!!!] We want you to be with us in this—in this fellowship with the Father, and Jesus Christ his Son. We must write and tell you [thrice!] about it, because the more that fellowship extends the greater the joy it brings to us who are already in it.

Experience of living <in the light>

5-10 Here, then, is the message which we heard from him, and now proclaim to you: GOD IS LIGHT [SHOUT!!! I CAN’T HEAR YOU!!! LOUDER!!! ONE MORE TIME, MOTHERFUCKERS!] and no shadow of darkness can exist in him. Consequently, if we were to say that we enjoyed fellowship with him and still went on living in darkness, we should be both telling and living a lie. But if we really are living in the same light in which he eternally exists, then we have true fellowship with each other, and the blood which his Son shed for us keeps us clean from all sin. If we refuse to admit that we are sinners, then we live in a world of illusion and truth becomes a stranger to us. But if we freely admit that we have sinned, we find God utterly reliable and straight-forward—he forgives our sins and makes us thoroughly clean from all that is evil. For if we take up the attitude <we have not sinned>, we flatly deny God’s diagnosis of our condition and cut ourselves off from what he has to say to us.”

verbos vicários (29):

to write

to exist

to see and hear

to have

to observe

… hold

know

be

appear

become

REPEAT

want

must

tell

extend

bring

LIVE (“invented”)

proclaim

enjoy

go

SHARE

keep

refuse to admit

forgive

make

take up

DENY

cut

GIROS ALÉM!

Colossians I

Revised

Salutation

1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ at Colos′sae:

Grace to you and peace from God our Father.

Paul Thanks God for the Colossians

3 We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you, 4 because we have heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of the love which you have for all the saints, 5 because of the hope laid up for you in heaven. Of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel 6 which has come to you, as indeed in the whole world it is bearing fruit and growing—so among yourselves, from the day you heard and understood the grace of God in truth, 7 as you learned it from Ep′aphras our beloved fellow servant. He is a faithful minister of Christ on our behalf and has made known to us your love in the Spirit.

9 And so, from the day we heard of it, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, 10 to lead a life worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God. 11 May you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy, 12 giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified us to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. 13 He has delivered us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

The Supremacy of Christ

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; 16 for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. [Then why Caesar?] 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in everything he might be pre-eminent. 19 For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

21 And you, who once were estranged and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, 22 he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and irreproachable before him, 23 provided that you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which has been preached to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister.

Paul’s Interest in the Colossians

24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the divine office which was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26 the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now made manifest to his saints. 27 To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. 28 Him we proclaim, warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man mature in Christ. 29 For this I toil, striving with all the energy which he mightily inspires within me.”

substantivos concretos:

apóstolo

Timóteo

santos

irmãos

Epafras

tronos (dúbio)

autoridades

toda criatura mortal

São Paulo

meus sofrimentos

minha carne

os pagãos

Nada mais abstrato do que “a imagem do deus invisível”.

Phillips

1-2 Paul, messenger of Jesus Christ by God’s will, and brother Timothy send this greeting to all faithful Christians at Colossae: grace and peace be to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ!

We thank God for you and pray constantly for you

3-6 I want you to know by this letter that we here are constantly praying for you, and whenever we do we thank God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ because you believe in Christ Jesus and because you are showing true Christian love towards other Christians. We know that you are showing these qualities because you have grasped the hope reserved for you in Heaven—that hope which first became yours when the truth was brought to you. It is, of course, part of the Gospel itself, which has reached you as it spreads all over the world. Wherever that Gospel goes, it produces Christian character, and develops it, as it had done in your own case from the time you first heard and realised the amazing fact of God’s grace.

7-10 You learned these things, we understand, from Epaphras who is in the same service as we are. He is a most well-loved minister of Christ, and has your well-being very much at heart. As a matter of fact, it was from him that we heard about your growth in Christian love, so you will understand that since we heard about you we have never missed you in our prayers. We are asking God [terrível telemarketing!] that you may see things, as it were, from his point of view by being given spiritual insight and understanding. We also pray that your outward lives, which men see, may bring credit to your master’s name, and that you may bring joy to his heart by bearing genuine Christian fruit, and that your knowledge of God may grow yet deeper.

We pray for you to have real Christian experience

11-14 As you live this new life, we pray that you will be strengthened from God’s boundless resources, so that you will find yourselves able to pass through [zzz] any experience and endure it with courage. You will even be able to thank God in the midst of pain and distress because you are privileged to share the lot of those who are living in the light. For we must never forget that he rescued us from the power of darkness, and re-established us in the kingdom of his beloved Son, that is, in the kingdom of light. For it is by his Son alone that we have been redeemed and have had our sins forgiven.

Who Christ is, and what he has done

15-20 Now Christ is the visible expression of the invisible God. He existed before creation began, for it was through him that every thing was made, whether spiritual or material, seen or unseen. Through him, and for him, also, were created power and dominion, ownership and authority. In fact, every single thing was created through, and for him. He is both the first principle and the upholding principle of the whole scheme of creation. And now he is the head of the body which is composed of all Christian people [Mega Zord da Paixão]. Life from nothing began through him, and life from the dead began through him, and he is, therefore, justly called the Lord of all. It was in him that the full nature of God chose to live, and through him God planned to reconcile in his own person, as it were, everything on earth and everything in Heaven by virtue of the sacrifice of the cross.

21-23 And you yourselves, who were strangers to God, and, in fact, through the evil things you had done, his spiritual enemies, he has now reconciled through the death of his body on the cross, so that he might welcome you to his presence clean and pure, without blame or reproach. This reconciliation assumes, of course, that you maintain a firm position in the faith, and do not allow yourselves to be shifted away from the hope of the Gospel, which you have heard, and which, indeed, the whole world is now having an opportunity of hearing. [AGUARDE NA LINHA ENQUANTO RESOLVEMOS O SEU PROBLEMA, SR.!]

My divine commission [$$$]

24-27 I myself have been made a minister of this same Gospel, and though it is true at this moment that I am suffering on behalf of you who have heard the Gospel, yet I am far from sorry about it. Indeed, I am glad, because it gives me a chance to complete in my own sufferings something of the untold pains for which Christ suffers on behalf of his body, the Church. For I am a minister of the Church by divine commission, a commission granted to me for your benefit and for a special purpose: that I might fully declare God’s word—that sacred mystery which up to now has been hidden in every age and every generation, but which is now as clear as daylight to those who love God. They are those to whom God has planned to give a vision of the full wonder and splendour of his secret plan for the sons of men. And the secret is simply this: Christ in you! Yes, Christ in you bringing with him the hope of all glorious things to come.

To preach and teach Christ is everything to us

28-29 So, naturally, we proclaim Christ! We warn everyone we meet, and we teach everyone we can, all that we know about him, so that, if possible, we may bring every man up to his full maturity in Christ. This is what I am working at all the time, with all the strength that God gives me.”

Hebrews II

James

1 Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip.

2 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward;

3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.

6 But one in a certain place [ouvi dizer, um dragonight me contou…] testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him [pra que te importas com isso]? or the son of man that thou visitest him? [SON OF A BITCH MAN]

7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:

8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,

12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.

13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.”

substantivos concretos:

tempo (?)

contratantes

a descendência de Abraão

rid of arid rides

Phillips

The angels had authority in past ages: today the Son is the authority

1-4 We ought, therefore, to pay the greatest attention to the truth that we have heard and not allow ourselves to drift away from it. For if the message given through angels proved authentic, so that defiance of it and disobedience to it received appropriate retribution, how shall we escape if we refuse to pay proper attention to the salvation that is offered us today? For this salvation came first through the words of the Lord himself: it was confirmed for our hearing by men who had heard him speak, and God moreover has plainly endorsed their witness by signs and miracles, by all kinds of spiritual power, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, all working to the divine plan.

5 For though in past ages God did grant authority to angels, yet he did not put the future world of men under their control, and it is this world that we are now talking about.

6-7 But someone has said: ‘What is man that you are mindful of him, or the son of man that you take care of him? You made him a little lower than the angels; you crowned him with glory and honour, and set him over the works of your hands. You have put all things in subjection under his feet’.

8 Notice that the writer [?] puts ‘all things’ under the sovereignty of man: he left nothing outside his control. But we do not yet see ‘all things’ under his control.

Christ became man, not angel, to save mankind

9-12 What we actually see is Jesus, after being made temporarily inferior to the angels (and so subject to pain and death), in order that he should, in God’s grace, taste death for every man, now crowned with glory and honour. It was right and proper that in bringing many sons to glory, God (from whom and by whom everything exists) should make the leader of their salvation a perfect leader through the fact that he suffered. For the one who makes men holy and the men who are made holy share a common humanity. So that he is not ashamed to call them his brothers, for he says: ‘I will declare your name to my brethren; in the midst of the congregation I will sing praise to you’.

13 And again, speaking as a man, he says: ‘I will put my trust in him’. And, one more instance, in these words: ‘Here am I and the children whom God has given me’.

14-18 Since, then, ‘the children’ have a common physical nature as human beings, he also became a human being, so that by going through death as a man he might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil; and might also set free those who lived their whole lives a prey to the fear of death. It is plain that for this purpose he did not become an angel; he became a man, in actual fact a descendant of Abraham. It was imperative that he should be made like his brothers in nature, if he were to become a High Priest both compassionate and faithful in the things of God, and at the same time able to make atonement for the sins of the people. For by virtue of his own suffering under temptation he is able to help those who are exposed to temptation.”

A diferença entre Velho Testamento e Novo Testamento (antigas e novas traduções) é nítida: No VT há um grande contraste; mas os capítulos do NT são praticamente idênticos ao longo dos séculos.

III (última parte da tarefa da P. 24).

double expressions kernel (cerne mais simples possível)ver a definição lingüística de kernel na p. 105 do PDF

hardness of heart: incredulity, skepticism

flow of blood: ilness, tumour

the prophets of old: Hebrew heralds, Yaweh priests, yester oracles, soothsayers, blessed

the washing of cups: washing-up, do the dishes, domestic ablution

precepts of men: vain knowledge, mundane wisdom

the commandment of God: Law

the eye of a needle: the straightest path, the smallest hole

Mount of Olives: altar, sacred site

the master of the house: the Judgement Day, the hour appointed

the King of the Jews: Messiah, last prophet

the day of Preparation: fast, eve, mourning day

men of little faith: incredulous, blasphemers, unbelievers

men of violence: sinners

fishers of men: preachers, teachers

Now with verbalizations (except the first two terms)…

1 who prophecized/prophesied before/used to prophecize/prognosticate

2 the cups are washed

3 the given precepts / laws once told / lessons they taught / doctrines they taught

4 the things God commanded

5 crossing through the inside of a needle

6 the mount where olives flourished / the place where they prayed

7 he who commands and owns

8 he who leads, who reigns over

9 preparing for the Sabbath

10 who trusts not / believes not

11 those that search for power, those who dominate, those who do wrong

12 fish(es) men / talk to the laymen

* * *

What makes Today’s English Version, published by the American Bible Society, so popular and helpful to translators is that it is frequently restructured in the direction of kernel expressions, and is thus more readily understandable and provides a useful basis for transfer to other languages.”

Da tradução mais erudita e elusiva à mais simplificada, popular e moderna, vai muita labuta:

Efésios 1:7

in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace” “God redeemed us through Christ’s shedding of blood, and God forgave our sins. All this indicates how richly God showed his grace.”

Efésios 2:8

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.” “For it is by his grace you are saved through trusting him. It is not your own doing. It is God’s gift, not a reward for work done. There is nothing for anyone to boast of.” “God showed his grace to you, and in this way he saved you through your trusting in him. You yourselves did not save yourselves. Rather, God gave you this salvation. You did not earn it by what you did. Therefore no one can boast about what he has done.”

Em breve teremos umas gordas 500 páginas a mais, se continuarmos nesse ritmo…

Analfabetismo funcional transcendental

Fé dispensa

trabalho

compensa

dispensa férias

diz e pensa aquilo

que crê

recompensa

a falta de crença

e energia

descompensado

atabalhoado

disperso

nada temente

às Doze Tábuas

gravadas

com sucesso

no disco rígido

do coração

fé desacreditada

despida de energia

ritmo truncado

coro desafinado

missa fúnebre

informal

sem carteira assinada

para o defunto

da ocasião

intemporal

P. 31: Problema 15

By his great mercy we have been born anew to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and to an inheritance which is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you…”

1. God pardons abundantly

2. God can change our lives

3. Only they who believe are changed by God

4. We are heirs to God’s indestructible gifts

5. God is able to turn mortals into immortals, fix, heal and create ex nihilo

6. Our prizes are waiting for us (the believers) in the Heavens

7. You have free will to persecute these prizes or not

8. God is watching

Go(o)d e(no)ugh?

And because God forgives us, we are as purified individuals, because we believe that Jesus Christ resurrected from the dead that day. And as a gift he, in the name of God, gave us a seat in the Heavens, the only eternal realm, after this corrupted life.

So as God resurrected Jesus Christ His Son, God resurrects our bodies, our souls and our hearts, because we do believe in Them…

MISISON BRIEF: Diga o que os versículos a seguir querem dizer:

King James diz:

Mateus 7

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

Podemos considerá-lo um fragmento de existencialismo de século XX, com conclusões tão óbvias quanto duras. Talvez sejam sutis e reconfortantes, afinal.

DEONTOLOGIA EM MATEUS, PROTÁGORAS E NA FENOMENOLOGIA

Você pode julgar, com certeza. Todo homem pode ser juiz. Porém, isto não sai de graça: serão, decerto, juízes contigo. E o juiz severo irá se deparar com juízes igualmente severos. Mas eis que alguém que enxerga o mundo como um poço de maldade só terá olhos para a maldade dos outros. Mesmo que se imagine a única fonte a emanar benignidade. E eis que a ovelha não saberá reconhecer os lobos, e pensa que mesmo os piores arbítrios direcionados contra si sejam apenas a devida paga por ser um pecador impuro. Assim talvez seja simples viver, pensa o fraco. Ou pensou o primeiro fraco pelas próximas gerações de fracos. E nisso o fraco ainda tinha muitos resíduos do forte. Protágoras certamente se poria de acordo com os versos. Porque o homem é a medida de todas as coisas. Porque a coisa que somos nós é o parâmetro para todos os homens; e todos os homens nos julgam como nós os julgamos. Portanto é o prêmio (a colheita) do poeta ser tratado com a mais sobeja das indiferenças. É a recompensa por seu talento anômalo. Incompreensão de berço gera desprezo no jovem adulto em relação aos pais, e saudades de todos os lados. Nada mais pragmático que Mateus neste início. Apenas agüenta as conseqüências de ser, ou dissimula quem tu és para teu próprio bem-estar. Maldiga o vizinho sim, ora! só esteja com pedras na mão para quando o assalto alheio começar… Porque não há nada mais certo que o apedrejamento dos vizinhos que pensam diferente. O problema do ansioso e severo demais: não é que ele o seja conscientemente consigo próprio. É que os outros, na medida em que o tempo passa, de vidro passarão a espelhos. E tudo quebrará, revelando novas essências. Quem se pensa lixo e frágil, e que não persistiu o bastante, é teu próprio pai. Mas ele não o é; ou não o seria se se convencesse menos disso. É verdade que eu gostaria de ser mais reconhecido, mas não bajulado nem lisonjeado feiamente. Tenho um tamanho, e não é do monte Rushmore. É menor. Posso engolir certa medida de despeito multidirecional. Certa medida. Preciso de pausas em que enxergo futuros brilhantes nos outros. Mas como eu poderia mentir para mim mesmo que este mundo ocidental não está condenado, quando sei que vou morrer?! Pelo menos eu posso escolher que juízes terei em cada recinto em que adentrarei, e não esperar como numa antessala de consultório que dure a vida inteira… Paradoxalmente, este aforismo nos diz que não há quem interceda por nós, sejamos arrogantes ou humildes, mas que todas as relações pessoais são imanentes. Todo repolho gera peido, diria o escatológico gourmet. Se te dissessem: Não respires e não tomarás o oxigênio dos outros, far-te-ia este conselho mudar de postura? Pois bem. Por isso, quem exige demais de si mesmo não consegue ter amigos. Porque ninguém parece ter valor, e não o contrário. Talvez seja por isso que todo velho que fez um balanço de sua existência é indulgente acima da média com a juventude de seus tempos idosos.

4. REFERENTIAL MEANING

Marcador sintático e marcador semotático do significado semântico-contextual do termo. (mais simples do que parece)

os “etic” e os “emic” pseudodomains.

Folk classifications are often relatively unsystematic, without the neat classifications employed by the specialists (compare, f.ex., the average English-speaker’s classification of plants and animals with those the technically trained botanist or zoologist employs). (…) most English-speaking people can name various kinds of dogs without being able to describe systematically what the distinguishing features are.”

VENERAÇÃO PELO SÁBIO DA MONTANHA

Sujeito meditabundo não é fervoroso

vagabundo não é rancoroso

decoroso não é ser deste mundo

louvar é comungar dum leito

conspurcado com o fluido

da pureza da eminência

divina

venero o Nero que há em

você

nunca a bajulação

nos custou um só

tostão

psicanálise não é devoção mística mas

canônica

verbal

diga-se a palavra tabu e a maldição

será arrancada.

SEM MALDADE SAFADEZA

verso branco

cintura dura

sem malemolência

frente rosa

cadeira cheirosa

da negra que se

esfrega

no carnaval

comunhão

de todos

righteous, as found in Matthew, turns to be hierarchically subordinate to good, that is to say, it is a special subclass of good, namely, the goodness which is in conformance to the standard established by God. At the same time, righteous as used by Paul is quite distinct from righteous as used by Matthew, for rather than being ethical behavior, it is essentially a right relationship made possible by God, and thus characteristic of the man who has been <justified>, i.e., put into a right relationship with God (cf. Today’s English Version).”

figure 10

Diagrama-síntese da interrelação entre sinônimos

mother and father share all essential components except that of sex, but on that one the contrast is polar, and the 2 terms are antonyms.”

Compreendendo um pouco da carga negativa dos cristãos ortodoxos (ou misticistas!) associada à palavra “desgraça”. Fora de alcance mesmo da fé…

The two Greek terms agapao and phileo, both translated <love> in most contexts, have been extensively discussed by exegetes as instances of near synonyms, which are supposed to have certain important distinctions of meaning.” “phileo is never used in the imperative.” “one can <love> (agapao) without <liking> (phileo), but this is likewise too strong a contrast.”

Amor ao primeiro cogito

Certainly there is no clear-cut contextual contrast in John 21:15-17

Though agapao and phileo do occur in similar semotactic frames [contextos semânticos], the great preponderance of uses of agapao in certain types of contexts does point to the divine element of love.”

assoma um corpo somático

SESSÃO CATEQUESE

It should be noted that in the Bible the <holiness> of God differs from holy as applied to the gods, in that God possesses a moral quality, for he is expected to act justly quite apart from any propitiation. Note the exclamation of Abraham in Gen. 18:25: <Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?>”

Henotheism means that there is one supreme god over other gods (a belief which is reflected in some passages of Old Testament), while monotheism means that there is only one God and that other gods simply do not exist.”

the word Elohim is plural in form but is used of God as well as of gods; a typical case is Psalm 138:1, in which different versions interpret the word differently. But such cases are relatively rare.”

this contrast between the meanings of a single word becomes even more startling when one compares the <meanings> of Jesus and Isa, the Christian and Muslim name for the same historical personage. In a number of translations employed in the Muslim world some persons have insisted that Isa must be used because this is the historical person referred to both in the New Testament and in the Koran. On the other hand, other persons have insisted that some adaptation of Jesus must be used since Isa is entirely inappropriate.”

To overcome the perennial problem of people’s twisting and changing the meaning of words (e.g. Communist use of terms such as peace, democracy, and republic), some persons want to set up some all-powerful language academy which would rule on all terms once and for all. But this will never work, for words are always subject to reshaping as circumstances and conditions change. In fact, such capacity for growth and change in language is essential to the very nature of language. Therefore, to enjoy the advantage of a living language we must also take the risks of its being perverted. Furthermore, even if it were desirable, so-called language engineering would still be in almost all cases a futile effort, simply because there is no effective authority which can impose its will on the way people speak. Cases as diverse as those of the French Academy and the efforts to impose Hindi in India are ample proof of this. Apparent exceptions, as in Israel or Turkey, result from the fact that official efforts happened to coincide with a powerful trend in the social history of the peoples involved, which would no doubt have come to fruition without any official pronouncements.”

BATIZO MINHA OBRA!

Mark 10:38: “Are you able… to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?”

the essential components of Christian baptism are normally regarded to be: (1) the use of liquid (though as to the exact amount there is considerable disagreement), (2) the religious nature of the rite (this is not a secular act of dipping or washing), (3) the name in which the act of baptism is done, and (4) the function of the rite as a symbol of initiation into the Christian community. These are the same essential components of meaning which have continued to be generally recognized by most Christians through the ages. There are, however, some supplementary components of the rite which have in some instances competed for priority. For example, some churches have insisted that baptism cannot be valid unless one is actually totally immersed under the surface of the water, though even in the Didache, coming from the 2nd century, the possibility of pouring is allowed in cases of necessity. For other persons, baptism must not only be immersion, but immersion 3 times in order to be in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For some Christians the precise form of the verbal formula employed in the rite of baptism is also an essential part, without which the baptism is not efficacious or valid; while for other persons the real issue is whether the individual is a <believer>, that is, a person of accountable age (not an infant) who accepts baptism as a believer. In the case of certain churches the giving of a name is such an important part of baptism that the name for the rite has become <to give a name to>. (…) the most extreme form of restructuring of the meaning of baptism takes place among groups such as the Quakers and Salvation Army churches, who in reaction against ritual formalism have <spiritualized> the meaning of baptism and rejected the use of water entirely. The event of baptism among Quakers is, however, an important religious experience, and it marks initiation into the community, but not as a rite conducted by man but as an act of the Spirit of God. Quakers do not hesitate, however, to say that in a passage such as Acts 2:41 water was employed.”

fox is assigned the component <deceptively clever> only in Western European culture (note the Reynard stories); in other cultures the same trait is, just as arbitrarily, assigned to the rabbit, or to the spider, or to some other animal.”

The figurative sense of any term rests on the fact that it has an almost entirely distinct set of components, but that it also has a link to the primary sense through some one component, usually a supplementary one. This supplementary component can be actually relevant to the referent of the primary sense, or only conventionally assigned, but in either case it is not one of the essential, distinctive features by which the primary sense is distinguished from others.”

The terms circumcised and uncircumcised in Galatians 2, though literally object-event words, actually function primarily as object-words, and can more correctly be translated <Jews> and <Gentiles>. Their reference is to ethnic groups rather than to the physical operation (or its lack) which typically characterized these groups.” Particularmente discordo.

In some instances, one must deal with special Semitic usages, which may pose certain difficulties. F.ex., the common phrases children of… and sons of… frequently identify persons who are characterized by the term which follows the of: thus sons of disobedience (Ephesians 2:2) means simply <people who disobey (God)>, and children of wrath (Ephesians 2:3) refers to <persons who will experience the wrath of God> or, better, <those whom God will judge>.”

<horn of salvation> must be restructured semantically as <a great savior>”

5. CONNOTATIVE MEANING

the phrase thus saith the Lord is not merely equivalent to the Lord says, but carries with it the connotations of King James language and ecclesiastical intonations. Certainly once upon a time no longer means literally <once upon a time>.”

the Toity-toid and Toid Avenue dialect of New York, with its special pronunciation of bird as boid, girl as goil and third as toid is quite understandable and after a little practice one can readily <restructure> the sounds. However, these forms do carry certain associative meaning of being substandard.”

<Living forever> is in the Buddhist view one of the greatest of tragedies, for this means being trapped in the physical world of delusion and thus never permitted to escape into the eternal bliss of Nirvana, which is the logical and metaphysical opposite to the physical world.”

the Guaica Indians of southern Venezuela were entirely unmoved by the story of Jesus’ trial and death, for they regarded him as a complete coward for not having put up a fight in the Garden of Gethsemane. Anyone who would not fight or attempt to escape was regarded by the Guaica as deserving death.”

6. TRANSFER

Um problema comum entre os tradutores é que eles distorcem a mensagem não por saberem de menos, mas por saberem DEMAIS da matéria, algo que contraria a noção vulgar. Com efeito, eles tendem a se equiparar ao público-alvo, quando na realidade quase sempre são um técnicos-especialistas que superestimam o nível de compreensão do leitor típico. Creio que tomei a escolha correta nas minhas traduções de Platão ao me alongar em trechos que pareceriam inteligíveis tão-somente a estudantes de Filosofia; sempre penso nos meus amigos mais íntimos nestes momentos-chave: “Como será que eles processarão a informação ‘x’? Não fará qualquer sentido para eles se eu não adaptar dessa e daquela maneira!”.

translationese”

But if all the laymen can understand the Bible, what will the preachers have to do?” Por isso é altamente benéfico se especializar em Heidegger ou Shakespeare: sempre teremos algo a ensinar a alguém!

One of the particularly unfortunate ways of translating the Bible is to proceed verse by verse, for the verse divisions are often quite arbitrary units.”

Of course there are some situations in which one individual, unusually gifted in a knowledge of the original languages and skilled in the style of the receptor language, can undertake the task of Bible translating alone. But such one-man translations are increasingly less possible.”

expressões como ‘heap coals of fire on his head’ (Rom 12:20) [pilhas de carvão deixam sua cabeça em brasa] se transformam, na tradução, em <o envergonharão>.” CONTRA-EXEMPLO DE TRADUÇÃO, PORTANTO: “Portanto, se o teu inimigo tiver fome, dá-lhe de comer; se tiver sede, dá-lhe de beber; porque, fazendo isto, amontoarás brasas de fogo sobre a sua cabeça.

In some languages, Holy Spirit means little more than a white ghost, for holy has been equated with cleanness or whiteness, and Spirit is more readily understood in such a context as ghost rather than as the Spirit of God. An even worse situation was encountered in a language in which holy was rendered as that which makes taboo and spirit meant primarily an evil or malicious spirit.”

the phrase Son of man in discourses by Jesus must be modified to read I who am the Son of man, since in some languages such a 3rd person reference could not be to Jesus. § Some persons have argued that Jesus did not actually speak of himself as <the Son of man>, but that this is a wrong attribution made to him by his disciples. Regardless of what position one might take with respect to such a reinterpretation of the data, it is evident that the Gospel writers themselves made this identification, and it is their text which we are translating rather than any presumed underlying original.”

Whenever a language has an obligatory order, the situation is somewhat easier than when there are a number of optional patterns, for though the different choices may appear to be substantially identical, there are usually certain subtle distinctions which are only mastered by long association with and close study of a language.”

In Quechua, a term may occur in the plural form at the beginning of a paragraph but any later references to the same term normally do not have the plural suffix. To keep attaching plural suffixes regularly to every occurrence of a plural word seems awkward and childish in Quechua.”

SABER TRANSCENDENTAL E SABER MUNDANO: “Judge not so that God will not judge you.” Intenção judaica original: “Não julgue outros homens para que Deus não o julgue desfavoravelmente.”; Provérbio que se tornou popular e uma referência como conselho para a vida: “Não julgue-os para que eles (os homens) não o julguem também.” Porém, sabemos que é-se julgado independentemente de querer ou divulgar seus julgamentos, seja numa instância fenomênica, seja na Prestação de Contas Derradeira (C://Memorando nº 666-PCD/PURG/Post-Morten/DEUS)!

Ah, que isso, os humilhados estão descontrolados (exaltados)!

cuscuz levantará os shinobi afogados.

He is greater than I must be rendered in some languages as He is greater than I am great, while in other languages the equivalent is He is great, I am not.”

O Black Sabbath foi feito para o homem, não o homem para o Black Sabbath.

beheaded fool

sejacabeceado tologordo

descabeçado

descabaçado

circuncidado

pelas circunstâncias

In some languages, one cannot say Jesus arose from the dead, but rather Jesus got up and left the dead, for such a language simply does not employ a preposition from but rather a verb indicating an event of movement.”

In the Guaica language of Venezuela, each complete sentence must end with one of the aspectual particles which indicates whether the described was seen by the speaker, was heard from reliable persons, or is purely legendary or imaginary.”

PAULO, O MAU ESCRITOR: “in Colossians 1:1-12 the we forms are essentially exclusive, but at verse 13 Paul evidently shifts viewpoints and includes his audience, and in verse 21 there is another shift back to the I-you or the we-you distinction. In Ephesians the problem is somewhat more acute.”

CRISTO, O 1º ZUMBI (d.C.?): “Some languages mark continually the differences between persons who are dead (or have died) and those who are still alive.”

In the recasting of borrowed words, including proper names especially, one normally attempts to follow the phonological structure of the receptor language. This may mean, for example, that Mark may become Maliko and Peter may become Petelo. There are, however, two principles which tend to alter a systematic adjustment to the phonological patterns of the receptor language: (1) the prestige of the orthography of a dominant language and (2) the problems of accidental correspondences.” “in many of the Indian languages of Latin America the people insist that the forms of common proper names must be like Spanish or Portuguese. (…) The same is true in many situations in Africa where French, English and Portuguese tend to dominate.”

Messiah in one language of West Africa turned out to be identical with an indigenous expression meaning death’s hand.”

7. RESTRUCTURING

figure 12

The solid lines in each instance represent the producer language, that is to say, the type of language which the person X or Y is able to produce, whether in speaking or writing. The broken lines represent the corresponding <consumer> language, that is to say, the range of language which these same persona are able to understand. It should be noted that in each instance, the spread or range of the consumer language is greater than that of the producer language. In other words, one is generally able to hear or read more than he can say or write.” “It is important to realize, however, that speaker X does not usually understand the total range of Y. That is to say, there are certain substandard forms which he probably can neither understand nor use correctly.”

In fact, if persons in class X employ substandard forms in writing to or for persons of class Y, the latter are quite understandably offended, and usually refuse to accept such communications”

The diagram employed in Figure 12 is not, however, adequate, since it does not reveal the historical perspective, and in all languages with a literary heritage there are many documents which reflect earlier stages of language. This is specially true of the Bible, which so often reflects long-established literary associations and well-entrenched stylistic usages.”

REDUBLAGEM & ESQUECIMENTO: “It is altogether possible that with the advent of recording we shall experience quite a different role for the oral language, but anything which is likely to be preserved over any long period of time is also likely to be relatively close to acceptable written style.”

figure 13

Ovelha não pode ler a Bíblia

The King James Version is listed at the extreme of the historical dimension, even though, of course, it was preceded by others. However, it is the only translation from the early period that exerts a significant continuing influence. § The RSV represents a somewhat middle position between the KJV and contemporary usage. As far as vocabulary usage is concerned, however, it is not on such a high literary level as the NEB. On the other hand, the NEB is stylistically much simpler in sentence structure, so that in some measure these 2 factors produce an average which makes the RSV and the NEB somewhat parallel. It is, of course, quite impossible to represent all the finer grades of contrast in a diagram of this type. § Phillips’ translation may be said to dip a little further than the NEB into the language of overlap between the upper and lower languages.”

In languages without literary traditions, one should attempt to produce a translation in the <popular> form of language, which represents the usage between the technical levels at the top and the vulgar speech at the bottom. The artificial forms of translationese should certainly be rejected as not representing the true genius of the language, and speech which is only used by the older generation should be largely rejected. However, in these situations one is generally able to employ a relatively wider range of the total resources of the language than in the case of <common language translations>, in which usage must be restricted primarily to the specific area of overlap [sobreposição – formal ou informal, tabuísmos, tecnicismos, etc.].”

whereas in case of languages with long literary traditions one is faced with the problems of socioeconomic and educational <dialects>, in the case of languages only now being reduced to writing, the problems are not those of vertical (sociological) dialects but of horizontal, or geographical, ones. Without the normalizing influence of a national educational program, local geographical dialects quite naturally proliferate, and one is confronted with certain very serious difficulties.”

in some instances the written language may almost be a <foreign language>, as in the case of written Arabic, which differs so markedly from the colloquial form of speech that a child must go to school for several years before being able to read standard written Arabic with ease.”

One well-known linguist has compared this relationship [between oral and written languages] to that between a person and a dog being walked on a long elastic leash. The dog (written language) can get quite far from the man (oral language), but the leash imposes limits, and the elasticity of the leash forces the dog to return to the man from time to time.” Alguns homens parecem cães (Kikuchi).

Lyric poetry should sound like poetry and not like an essay; letters should read like letters and not like some technical treatise on theology.”

<To hell with you and your money>, which is really an excellent equivalent of the Greek term apollumi. In Bible translating perhaps the greatest distortion in style comes in the rendering of the Epistles, for so often instead of producing letters the translator becomes so hopelessly entangled in technical theological language that the results sound more like a legal document than a letter.”

The first part of Romans appears in some languages to sound something like the following: <I, Paul, a slave of said master Jesus Christ, have been specifically called and summoned by God to be sent for a particular purpose and have been commissioned to that end, appointed to serve as a preacher of what is commonly known as the Good News, a message disclosed and published prior to final pronouncement in the Scriptures, widely known as the Old Testament.> Of course, no one translates quite so badly as this, but the heavy, involved, and ponderous style of some translations is equally out of place and poorly designed to represent something of the <spontaneous fullness> with which Paul speaks.”

If, for example, languages differ by more than 15% in their basic vocabulary (the central core of vocabulary which tends to be the most conservative), it is almost impossible to bring such dialects together, for they represent a linguistic separation, in glottochronological terms, of more than 700 years.”

Unfortunately, it often happens that translators have attempted to solve the problems of geographical dialects by a kind of <democratic method>, by which they select certain words and forms from one dialect, other words and forms from a 2nd dialect, and so on, until presumably all the dialects have been democratically represented. Such a procedure results in a hopeless mélange, a kind of language that no one speaks and all persona unanimously reject.”

some languages have a 4th person, but it is a specialized kind of 3rd person, not a really distinct one.”

The essential differences between languages are thus not in what can be said, but in what are permissible and/or probable combinations, and especially in what categories are marked obligatorily and what are purely optional.”

The most effective translations of Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey are now in prose, not in poetry, for poetic translations seem rather unnatural and even, at times, <silly>, but as prose, translations of Homer can be full of life, vigor and punch (e.g., Rieu’s). On the other hand, in India the poetic form is still much appreciated in many of the languages, and one of the very popular accounts of the life of Christ has been done in Malayalam verse by a skilled poet.”

phillips

Evitar a tradução Phillips

It is the job of a pastor and teacher, not of the translator, to make the cultural adaptation. This is also one of the major differences between an exegetical commentary and a homiletical or devotional commentary.”

RSV X NEB em Lucas 15:

1. The Greek text reads literally <and he said>, but this expression is used frequently by Luke as a marker of discourse transition, that is, to signal the shifts from one story or account to another. Accordingly, the NEB is thoroughly justified in introducing an equivalent marker in English. Stylistic feature: Discourse-transition marker.

2. The use of <once> in the NEB suggests the discourse type, i.e., the fact that this is a parable, rather than the account of a particular person and his two sons. In Greek this is clearly marked by the indefinite pronoun tis, <some>, <any>, <a>. Stylistic feature: Discourse-type marker.

(…)

4. Though the phrase <that falls to me> is a literal rendering of the original, the NEB has avoided a phrase which is semotactically unnatural. Stylistic feature: Semotactic appropriateness.

5. The use of <so> in place of the literal translation <and> is used to mark the intra-discourse transition. This is a perfectly legitimate translation of the Greek conjunction kai. Stylistic feature: Intradiscourse transition.

6. Though <living> is a literal rendering of Greek bios, it is misleading in present-day English, for <living> would refer to <income> and not to one’s entire estate. The NEB rendering is basically not a matter of style but of correctness in rendering, based on the principle of dynamic equivalence and not on the principle of formal correspondence.

(…)

8. The NEB is a more idiomatic rendering and is fully justified by Koine usage. Moreover, it results in a much more understandable account.”

Para mim foi o contrário (facilidade maior da RSV).

13. The phrase <loose living> implies immorality, but this element in the story does not come out until one hears the accusation of the elder brother. The NEB <reckless> seems a much better rendering of the Greek asotos. This is essentially a matter of interpretation.

14. The RSV construction, <when he … spent …, a great famine arose…>, suggests that the first action took place with anticipation of what was to follow. The NEB, however, makes the second clause the dependent clause to emphasize the unexpectedness of the famine. The Greek sentence would normally be translated as in the RSV, since the <spending> is a dependent participle. However, it is by no means necessary to treat all Greek participles in this rather mechanical fashion. Therefore, the NEB rendering can be justified as a much more effective and semantically appropriate means of showing relationships between clauses. Stylistic feature: Interclause markers.” Mas quem em santa consciência creria que um só hedonista, por mais rico que fosse, produziria um estado de penúria e fome geral num país? E que o jovem hedonista tinha fins suicidas em suas ações destemperadas? Não vejo qualquer desvantagem na primeira tradução; para se ler a Bíblia, é preciso ter algum raciocínio lógico – e não é uma tradução mais “exata” ou didática que o fará pelo leitor! Não pensei que a situação de falta de comida fosse um só instante condicionada pela dilapidação da fortuna do jovem…

16. The adjective <great> normally suggests something valuable or important, and is not so semotactically appropriate with <famine>. Stylistic feature: Semotactic appropriateness.

17. Normally so-called natural calamities are said to <fall>; they do not <arise>. Stylistic feature: Semotactic appropriateness.” Ok, já está quase me convencendo…

FINALMENTE UM GANHO DE CAUSA PARA A RSV (no décimo oitavo ponto, i.e.!): “The phrase <to be in want> is obsolescent, but <to feel the pinch> is rather weak. This suggests to many Britishers rising income taxes rather than being completely out of money. Stylistic feature: Contemporary usage (but misleading).

19. The expression <joined to> suggests a meeting of equals or an association, while <attached to> shows dependency relationship. Perhaps a better rendering would be <went to work for>. Stylistic feature: Semotactic appropriateness.

27. The phrase <bread enough and to spare> is obsolescent.” A Bíblia é obsoleta! O mal do homem é prolongar algo fadado ao fim há milênios…

36. The verb <embraced> seems not only somewhat stilted, but to many people it carries a rather heavy sexual connotation.” HAHAHA!

RSV X NEB X TEV em Hebreus 1:

3. The usage of <fathers> is obsolescent (and translationese), while <forefathers> is rather technical. <Ancestors> is more normal (at least for American English). Stylistic features: Contemporary usage and level of language.

The use of a term such as <effulgence> is likewise typical of the lexical high level of academic or technical style.”

12. The term <purification> is very seldom used with <sins>, except in certain traditional religious contexts. The word <purgation> is even less used in such a context and is understood, if it is known at all, by most persons as applying to <purgation of gastrointestinal wastes>.”

Some modern writers have introduced calculated formal confusion in order to suggest by the style something of the confusion and <absurdity> of the action or the responses of the participants.”

One might assume that well-known words would automatically all be high-frequency words. That is not, however, always the case. For example, headache and knee are not high-frequency words, but they are quite well known by any user of English. On the other hand, words such as matter and object are relatively frequent, but they are not always easy to comprehend.”

For special effects obsolescent or archaic words may be useful”

New and striking combinations of words make a writing fresh and give the impression that the ideas are also new and important.”

Some exegetes insist that en with <Christ>, <Son> or any other designation of the 2nd person of the Trinity can only mean <in Christ> in a very special Pauline sense. The principal difficulty with such a rendering is that it simply does not make much sense, if any, in English. (…) Even in the more than 400 years that this expression has been used in the English language, Christian preachers and scholars have been quite incapable of making it really meaningful. (…) It is precisely for this reason that even in this passage various translators have translated en as <by means of> or <by>.”

O novo testamento só quer saber de agência: ele é imensamente espírita.

If a stylist is to be employed either for the initial work or for later revision of the manuscript, it is important that he have certain very essential qualifications: (1) he must be a good writer, (2) he should not have too much acquaintance with the traditional forms of the Scriptures, (3) he should be sympathetic with the message of the Scriptures (though not necessarily a <believer>), and (4) in general he should work as a special consultant or assessor, and not as a member of a committee.

Being a good writer must mean much more than his having turned in a couple of publishable articles for a church paper. If at all possible a stylist should be a professional writer. It is not even enough that he be an editor or a corrector of other people’s writing. He should have creative writing abilities himself, for in the process of providing stylistic help for a translation he must do more than spot awkward sentences; he must be able to provide the creative assistance which is so essential.”

The really 1st-rate stylist usually does not survive as a member of a committee, for his job is an aesthetic type of contribution, and aesthetics is something many theologically trained persons simply do not understand. (…) he is usually ill equipped to defend his suggestions against the onslaught of those who claim to know just what the original means. The fact that what the committee is rendering may not make sense to the common man or that, if it is intelligible, it is painfully awkward, seems not to be too important to many theologically trained people translating the Bible. Accordingly, it is probably better for the stylist to do his work alone, in circumstances in which he can be far more creative.”

ETNOGRAFANDO: “To understand something about the style of oral literature in a language, it is essential to make thorough studies of the literary forms of legends, myths and stories from candidly recorded texts. That is to say, recordings should be made when the speaker is unaware of the fact that a recording is being made. Otherwise he will almost inevitably introduce a number of artificialities into the material. The translator who comes to the receptor language as a foreign language must alto <soak up> the language by saturating himself in hearing and speaking the language. And to do this he will need a number of years. (…) The average person can quite well master the syntactic structure of a language in 4 or 5 years, but it is the rare individual who masters the semotactic structure of a foreign language in less than 20 years, especially if he begins this process after he has become an adult.”

TRAINING STYLISTS FOR LANGUAGES LACKING A LITERARY TRADITION

Many persons have insisted that stylists, like any other artists, are born, not made, and in very large measure this is true. However, even persons with artistic talent need to have their capacities developed, and even those persons who seemingly have limited abilities can improve their output immensely through careful and consistent practice under guidance.”

For the most part such persons should have (1) good oral ability in the language, (2) creative imagination, i.e., the capacity to put words together, (3) some evidence of ability to write their own language reasonably well, (4) pride in their own language, (5) knowledge of the oral literature, i.e., of the legends, myths, etc., or a keen desire to study them, and (6) willingness to listen to and carefully consider suggestions made by others. Without these minimal qualifications [!] it is unlikely that a person will really succeed in doing quality work as a stylist, regardless of how much help he may be given in trying to learn how to write and to edit.”

The selection of potentially qualified persons is, however, only the beginning. They must also be carefully guided through a relatively long and carefully [QUANTOS CAREFULLY!] worked-out series of steps [não basta passos, tem de ser SÉRIES DE PASSOS!] in learning how to write [contradição em termos]. (…) writing for different levels of audience, writing for different degrees of impact, writing for differences of response, adaptation of articles and stories, learning to respond to orally given alternatives (…)”

Perhaps one of the most serious problems to overcome in the completely new writer is his tendency to be unbearably brief.” Nunca – N-U-N-C-A – tive esse problema!!

Nunca vou entender o pressuposto de que oralidade e escrita são absolutamente dependentes entre si. Realmente os autores nunca conheceram alguém como eu em toda sua longa vida!

* * *

8. TESTING THE TRANSLATION

As has already been intimated at several points in the preceding chapters, there is a tendency for all good translations to be somewhat longer than the originals.” “This tendency to greater length is due essentially to the fact that one wishes to state everything that is in the original communication but is also obliged to make explicit in the receptor language what could very well remain implicit in the source-language text, since the original receivers of this communication presumably had all the necessary background to understand the contents of the message. Moreover, there seems to be a relatively fixed tendency for languages to be approximately 50% redundant, not only in the sounds which are used but also in the flow of lexical information. From all evidence we have it is also assumed that most languages have approximately the same rate of flow of information for corresponding types of style and levels of usage.” Será que uma tradução que volte um texto traduzido da própria língua (3ª versão) [ex: LIVRO ALEMÃO LIVRO INGLÊS (2ª versão) LIVRO ALEMÃO], traduzido por uma terceira pessoa, por esporte, ou por desconhecimento da fonte original, seria necessariamente maior que a 1ª versão? (Parece que a resposta é não, a julgar pelo estudo realizado e descrito em VINAY & DARBELNET no tocante ao backtranslating; vd. próximas publicações.)

Some expressions, however, are so semantically condensed in the source-language text that they often require considerable expansion in the receptor language. For example, <I am a jealous God> (Exod. 20:5) can be badly misunderstood if translated literally, for it may only suggest that God acts like some jilted lover or that he has a mean, possessive disposition. More often than not, a literal rendering introduces quite unwarranted sexual connotations. Accordingly, in some languages this sentence must be semantically restructured by expansion to read <I am a God who demands that my people love no one else other than me>.

among some of the tribes in South America gambling is not known nor are there any devices for <selecting by lot>. Accordingly, in order for readers to comprehend the significance of certain accounts in the Scriptures, some supplementary information must be given in marginal notes.”

simplification of highly repetitious style, often associated with stateliness of form and importance of the theme, e.g., the first chapter of Genesis. While in Hebrew such repetitions and pleonasms may have a valued liturgical significance, a close formal parallel in another language may seem awkwardly heavy.”

it is just as important to employ the proper reductions as it is to introduce the proper expansions”

Actually the only linguistically sound [confiável] test of ease of comprehension is the Cloze Technique, which is based on the principle of transitional probabilities. That is to say, the easier it is for the reader to guess the next word, the easier it is to comprehend the word in such a context. This matter of <degree of predictability> (being able to guess the right word is only another way of talking about predictability) is essentially a concept derived from Information Theory. In its written application the Cloze Technique provides the reader with a text in which every 5th word is deleted and a blank space is left in its place. The reader is then asked to fill in those words which seem to fit the context best. (…) In general, one only needs about 50 such blanks in any text to provide a very satisfactory guide as to the relative comprehensibility of the text.”

As the text is read, the translator should note carefully those places at which the reader stumbles, hesitates, makes some substitution of another grammatical form, puts in another word, or in any way has difficulty in reading the text fluently. Of course, some of the problems in reading may be due to inexperience in public reading”

Despite all the tests that one might wish to make of a translation it seems that only the actual publication of sample materials can provide the kind of test necessary to judge the acceptability of a translation. But even the analysis of reactions to a published text is not a simple matter. The popularity may be for a number of different reasons: price, illustrations, format, marketing, and even quality of paper. (…) This is especially true of the Bible, which is so often bought as a prestige symbol or as a kind of <fetish of the faith>. The fact that a Bible with particularly small types sells well may not mean that it is greatly read (in fact, some small-type Bibles are practically illegible)”

Does his face show real interest and understanding (or is he only going through a devotional practice)?”

APPENDIX

AUTHORIZED CANONICAL BABEL GOSPEL: “In an earlier day, it was commonly supposed in Christian circles that translations of the Scriptures would be required for all the languages of the world. The most recent guesses, based on reliable though fragmentary data, suggest that there are somewhere between 4,000 and 5,000 languages and significantly different dialects now spoken in the world. The Bible has already been translated into some 1,500 languages, and these represent fully 97% of the world’s population.”

In many constituencies the very word <revision> often troubles people, for revision of the Bible means changing it, and this seems to call into question its inspiration and authority. (…) A new translation is so different from the old that it more or less disarms the attacks of the traditionalists.”

TATUAGEM RECURSAL INFINITA: “Revising an unsatisfactory translation has been compared to painting over the dirty spots on a wall.”

Testemunhas do Bem-Estar, um grupo de democratas fanáticos loucos que bate de porta em porta perguntando se os moradores não gostariam de ouvir a palavra da Constituição Federal de 1988, disseminando a Lei para Todos, convertendo almas degeneradas para o vade mecum da salvação.

enormormon

Increasingly, Roman Catholics and Protestants are working together on joint Bible translation projects. In order to facilitate such cooperation, a document has been prepared entitled Guiding Principles for Interconfessional Cooperation in Translating the Bible. This document issued jointly by the United Bible Societies and the Vatican’s Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity, spells out in considerable detail the way in which such cooperation can be made to work harmoniously.”

assess their asses.

Experience has indicated that the ideal number of translators is between 3 and 5. When the group is larger, its procedures become excessively cumbersome.” “In case after case it has proved virtually impossible to make satisfactory progress when translators are working only part time.” Realmente a tradução não irá cair do céu!

Most of their work is done individually, each working in his own manner. From time to time they meet together as a group to compare and evaluate their work and to decide the final form of the translation.

The reviewers usually number 8 to 10 and are especially chosen either because of their competence in the original languages and in Biblical studies, or because of their ability as writers in the receptor language. They are often persons who have the technical capability to translate but who, because of other responsibilities or because they do not work well in a team, cannot serve effectively as translators.”

In order for the project to proceed efficiently, it is necessary that one person be designated as secretary or coordinator of the project.”

Livros com as passagens mais difíceis: Gênesis 1, Salmos 1, Isaías 53, Mateus 5 a 7, Marcos 1, João 1, Romanos 1 e Efésios 1.

Uma seleção de princípios de tradução para línguas denominadas <Bantu meridionais>

(…)

Para o Antigo Testamento o comitê deve basear seu trabalho no texto Masorético [Tanakh, a bíblia considerada original e mais completa] conforme fornecido pela terceira edição de Kittel, com a previsão formal de que em trechos particularmente problemáticos dever-se-á empreender uma releitura comparada de versões reputadas, recorrendo-se excepcionalmente, na persistência de divergências, a tradições hebraicas alternativas e, em último caso, a emendas [trechos que as autoridades reconhecem como ilegítimos conquanto válidos do ponto de vista da facilitação proporcionada pelo escriba e intérprete ao leitor comum].

Para o Novo Testamento o texto publicado pela United Bible Societies (Sociedades Bíblicas Unidas) é o recomendável. Para as passagens carentes de autoridade, recomenda-se a inserção de palavras entre parênteses ou colchetes, com o acréscimo de observação introdutória indicando que tais passagens não se encontram nos primeiros manuscritos canônicos e foram acrescidas depois.

(…) Ajudas de exegese: The Revised Standard Version (RSV), The New English Bible (NEB), Today’s English Version (TEV) e The Translators’ Translation (TT). (…)

Answers to rhetorical questions should be introduced unless the following expressions clearly imply the proper answer.

(…)

The basic unit of translation should be the paragraph

(…)

1st-person plural references to the 1st-person singular should be changed to 1st-person singular.

(…)

In case of genuine ambiguity, either in the source or receptor texts, one alternative should be given in the text and the other in the margin.

(…)

Proper names should in general be transcribed on the basis of receptor-language phonological structures, taking into consideration syllabic patterns, sequences of vowels and length of words.

(…)

Todos os termos para pesos e medidas que não forem familiares deverão ser explicados numa Tábua de Pesos e Medidas à parte.

Deverão ser incluídos mapas com as principais localizações apresentadas. [!!]”

Translating in committee is not only highly inefficient and wasteful of time, but it rarely produces an acceptable style.”

It is important not to break up books of the Bible and assign parts of them to different people, for the resulting will be too uneven.”

when a serious issue strongly divides the group, it is often advisable to set the problem aside until it can be discussed with a translations consultant. (…) The reason is that in the heat of argument the issues seem much more important than they do several days or weeks later when more experience has been gained and the problems are seen in a wider perspective.”

In some projects the reviewers have insisted on meeting together as a committee and going over the whole draft verse by verse. This is rarely a desirable approach. Not only can such a committee spend endless hours debating over details, but the end results are rarely as good as the work of the translators which was the basis of the discussion. The reviewers and the consultative group should remember that it is not their work to be censors.” Irônico… Um CHEFE DE TRADUÇÃO INQUISITIVO, he-he…

Versões para comparação instrutiva:

(*) American Bible Society

ASV – American Standard Version, 1901

ANT – The Amplified New Testament, 1958

TEV, 1966 (*)

KJV I, 1611

NEB, 1961

Livros/artigos de ajuda em técnicas de tradução, tópicos bíblicos, lingüística geral e antropologia:

Ackroyd & Knibb, Translating the Psalms, 1966

Benveniste, Problèmes de Linguistique Générale, 1966

Bratcher, Review of the 20th Century New Testament, 1962 (artigo)

______, Review of New American Standard Gospel of John, 1960 (artigo)

Chao, Yuen Ren. How Chinese logic operates, 1959 (artigo)

Clements, Divine Titles as a problem of Old Testament Translation, 1966 (artigo)

Garvin, L’analyse linguistique automatique: un problème heuristique, 1964 (artigo)

Hall, Pidgin and Creole Languages, 1966

Hess, A study of glossa in the New Testament, 1964 (artigo)

Hjelmslev, La stratification du langage, 1954 (artigo)

Hockett, Ethno-linguistic implications of studies in linguistics and psychiatry, 1960 (artigo)

Lamb, Ervin & Horowitz, Navaho color categories, 1960 (artigo)

Meek, Translating the Hebrew Bible, 1965 (artigo)

Newman, The Meaning of the New Testament, 1966

Pickett, Those problem pronouns: we, us and our in the New Testament, 1964 (artigo)

Smalley, La Version Populaire: a new version in simplified French, 1961 (artigo)

______, Phillips and NEB: some comments on style, 1965 (artigo)

Swellengrebel, Puzzles in Luke, 1966 (artigo)

Wonderly, La Versión Popular: a new version in simplified Spanish, 1961 (artigo)

1 Nunca esqueça do valor da nota de rodapé!