English speaking people are blessed with a variety of versions
of the sacred scriptures that are designed to fulfill various needs.
I shall evaluate some of the versions by discussing some of their
strengths and weaknesses, and I will mention some of the qualities
that I like and dislike about them. For a more detailed analysis of
a few prominent versions see my book, A Perspective on Bible
Translations, published in 2010 by Erhardt Publications,
Louisville, Ky.
American Standard Version-1901. Among the older versions,
the ASV is the crown jewel. It was the last of the truly modified-
literal versions before a more "dynamic" translation theory came to
the forefront. The ASV is the American edition of the Revised
Version which was in turn a revision of the KJV. The ASV N.T.
was basically, though not entirely, translated from what is known
as the Westcott-Hort Greek text. The translators had access to
many more manuscripts than the KJV translators had during their
lifetime. Westcott-Hort and the revisers gave more weight to
the older Greek manuscripts. Serious scholars do not count
manuscripts, they evaluate them.
The intent of the translators was not merely to revise the KJV,
but to bring over as much from the ancient Hebrew and Greek as
the English language can accommodate. Therefore, they attempted
near word for word transfer. The ASV rarely deviates from the
Masoretic text of the O.T., and it is slavishly true to the Greek
text that formed its foundation. The precision with which the revisers
generally did their work is remarkable! The ASV is so close to the
Hebrew and Greek texts that Charles Spurgeon once said "It is
good Greek and poor English," by which he meant that it gives more
attention to Hebrew and Greek usage than it does to being idiomatic
English. The ASV is not easy reading, especially for the person who
has no background in very old, archaic, stilted, Elizabethan English.
The ASV is a good study Bible to this day because it is so close
to the original texts. It can be referred to as a concordant version,
meaning the translators tried to render the same Hebrew and Greek
word by using the same English word in all places. This makes it great
for word study, but it can be misleading because word meaning is
determined to a large degree by how words are used in their contexts.
Consider a few examples to illustrate the accuracy level of
the ASV. In Mat. 28:19 the KJV says that the apostles were to
go and "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name..." The ASV
says they were to go "and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them into the name..." (Cf. Acts 8:16; 19:3,5; 1 Cor.
1:13,15) The KJV reads "such as should be saved" for the Greek
phrase tous sozomenous in Acts 2:47. The ASV reads, "those that
were saved." The Greek literally says, "to the ones being saved." The
ASV footnote indicates this fact. The KJV reads "if they shall fall
away" for the Greek words kai parapesontas in Heb. 6:6. The ASV
says, "and then fell away." The Greek literally says, "and having fallen
away." Instances like these could be multiplied many times over. The
pedantic accuracy of the ASV is legendary. The ASV is not perfect.
The translators missed the distributive use of the preposition kata in the
phrase kata mian sabbatou in 1 Cor. 16:2. The ASV says, "Upon the
first day of the week." The Greek says "Every first (day) of a week" =
"the first day of every week." In Mat. 28:1 the ASV says the women
visited the sepulchre "late on the Sabbath." The Greek says "after the
Sabbath." (Opse de sabbaton)
The ASV is a good Bible for comparative study. It is highly reliable
and continues to be a point of reference in many technical commentaries
of the Hebrew and Greek texts. Its major weaknesses are the archaic
language it uses and it is so literal that it is hard for the average person
to read it. It frequently retains the word order of the original languages.
It is translation English, not the spoken English of this day or any other.
How do I rate the ASV on a scale of 1 to 10. I give it a 4 or 5
for readability. I give it an 8 for its modified literal accuracy. If the
translators had been able to access the Dead Sea Scrolls and other
documents for O. T. study discovered since their day, some of their
textual choices would likely be more accurate. If such were the case,
the ASV would possibly be close to a 9 with regard to its modified
literal accuracy.
RD
Copyright 2011
of the sacred scriptures that are designed to fulfill various needs.
I shall evaluate some of the versions by discussing some of their
strengths and weaknesses, and I will mention some of the qualities
that I like and dislike about them. For a more detailed analysis of
a few prominent versions see my book, A Perspective on Bible
Translations, published in 2010 by Erhardt Publications,
Louisville, Ky.
American Standard Version-1901. Among the older versions,
the ASV is the crown jewel. It was the last of the truly modified-
literal versions before a more "dynamic" translation theory came to
the forefront. The ASV is the American edition of the Revised
Version which was in turn a revision of the KJV. The ASV N.T.
was basically, though not entirely, translated from what is known
as the Westcott-Hort Greek text. The translators had access to
many more manuscripts than the KJV translators had during their
lifetime. Westcott-Hort and the revisers gave more weight to
the older Greek manuscripts. Serious scholars do not count
manuscripts, they evaluate them.
The intent of the translators was not merely to revise the KJV,
but to bring over as much from the ancient Hebrew and Greek as
the English language can accommodate. Therefore, they attempted
near word for word transfer. The ASV rarely deviates from the
Masoretic text of the O.T., and it is slavishly true to the Greek
text that formed its foundation. The precision with which the revisers
generally did their work is remarkable! The ASV is so close to the
Hebrew and Greek texts that Charles Spurgeon once said "It is
good Greek and poor English," by which he meant that it gives more
attention to Hebrew and Greek usage than it does to being idiomatic
English. The ASV is not easy reading, especially for the person who
has no background in very old, archaic, stilted, Elizabethan English.
The ASV is a good study Bible to this day because it is so close
to the original texts. It can be referred to as a concordant version,
meaning the translators tried to render the same Hebrew and Greek
word by using the same English word in all places. This makes it great
for word study, but it can be misleading because word meaning is
determined to a large degree by how words are used in their contexts.
Consider a few examples to illustrate the accuracy level of
the ASV. In Mat. 28:19 the KJV says that the apostles were to
go and "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name..." The ASV
says they were to go "and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them into the name..." (Cf. Acts 8:16; 19:3,5; 1 Cor.
1:13,15) The KJV reads "such as should be saved" for the Greek
phrase tous sozomenous in Acts 2:47. The ASV reads, "those that
were saved." The Greek literally says, "to the ones being saved." The
ASV footnote indicates this fact. The KJV reads "if they shall fall
away" for the Greek words kai parapesontas in Heb. 6:6. The ASV
says, "and then fell away." The Greek literally says, "and having fallen
away." Instances like these could be multiplied many times over. The
pedantic accuracy of the ASV is legendary. The ASV is not perfect.
The translators missed the distributive use of the preposition kata in the
phrase kata mian sabbatou in 1 Cor. 16:2. The ASV says, "Upon the
first day of the week." The Greek says "Every first (day) of a week" =
"the first day of every week." In Mat. 28:1 the ASV says the women
visited the sepulchre "late on the Sabbath." The Greek says "after the
Sabbath." (Opse de sabbaton)
The ASV is a good Bible for comparative study. It is highly reliable
and continues to be a point of reference in many technical commentaries
of the Hebrew and Greek texts. Its major weaknesses are the archaic
language it uses and it is so literal that it is hard for the average person
to read it. It frequently retains the word order of the original languages.
It is translation English, not the spoken English of this day or any other.
How do I rate the ASV on a scale of 1 to 10. I give it a 4 or 5
for readability. I give it an 8 for its modified literal accuracy. If the
translators had been able to access the Dead Sea Scrolls and other
documents for O. T. study discovered since their day, some of their
textual choices would likely be more accurate. If such were the case,
the ASV would possibly be close to a 9 with regard to its modified
literal accuracy.
RD
Copyright 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment