Favored English Translations For Comparison In Your Own Translation Work

[JohnABarnett]

I understand that the best way to begin your own English translation of original language Bible texts is to avoid being tainted at the outset by other English translations. That is to say work out your own initial translation "with fear and trembling" using appropriate tools before consulting what others have done.

 

That said, it is certainly useful at a subsequent stage to consult a variety of good English translations to see what you might have missed, or what you might have done in a (cough) less than optimal manner (i.e., you might have not done your best work, indeed you might have screwed something up).

 

I recently found in these forums a tip, vertical orientation, that will help me fit more "consultation" translations in my Accordance workspace. 

 

So with all this in mind,

 

1. What are your favored English translations for comparison to your own translations?

 

2. Why?

 

Feel free to expand on your answers, perhaps describing your approach to assembling a good, balanced set of consultation translations, or why you find a particular translation uniquely helpful.

 

Have at it, people!

Edited September 3, 2017 by JohnABarnett

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Hey John,

 

In some cases it will depend upon your source Greek text as they will not always agree. In my daily reading of the GNT I use the EPT (Ecumenical Patriarchal Text) as the primary reading text. I then use the NA 28 as reference for divergences in the Greek. Then for English reference I use the NASB, the KJV, the ESV and the English Orthodox Bible and the NET Bible.

 

  NASB - has a very literal translation and makes for a good comparison of the handling of words, tenses and so on.

  KJV - because as was once said it casts a long shadow on English translation and I personally like the language.

  ESV - It provides a bit more readable modern translation and handling

  NET - again a good modern translation of the text but here with very extensive notes which help one see where the English diverges from a very literal translation.

  EOB - because it is what the Orthodox Church did in translating the EPT I believe, and thus it helps with any textual variations. This tends to be fairly literal in its translation.

 

  I also use the Greek syntax module because it helps evaluate the handling of the Greek syntax - which clauses are considered adjunct to which and so on. Very useful.

 

  And then I use things like the NIGTC or EGGNT or BHGNT to examine arguments for and against various handlings where there are choices and ambiguity.

 

Thx

D

Edited April 25, 2018 by דָנִיאֶל

[JohnABarnett]

Thanks, Daniel. Exactly the sort of response I was looking for.

 

I have a decent handle on most of the standard English translations, their place on the scales of translation vs. paraphrase, of functional or dynamic equivalence, etc.. But some reading this may not.

 

Since we only have so many "slots" at any one time for our standard, ready view of translations, it's really helpful to read others' approach and choices.

 

Thanks again.

[mgvh]

Perhaps more than you want, but I wrote a blog post describing the English versions I compare and why I chose them. HERE is link.

[JohnABarnett]

Thanks for the link, Mark. I'll check it out.

Edited September 4, 2017 by JohnABarnett

[R. Mansfield]

  And then I use things like the NIGTC or EGGNT or BHGNT to examine arguments for and against various handlings where there are choices and ambiguity.

 

Note that the Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament (EGGNT) is now available in Accordance!

[Unix]

Those three are actually the ones I would assert are the exact ones to be left out and I mean completely, and yes they have alternatives. At least under Verbum You can run the NET notes separately, I've never had the Bible translation itself, this should also be possible with Accordance:

  KJV - because as was once said it casts a long shadow on English translation and I personally like the language.*

  ESV - It provides a bit more readable modern translation and handling

  NET - again a good modern translation of the text but here with very extensive notes which help one see where the English diverges from a very literal translation.

Replacement for KJV: RV from the late 19th century. Complete replacement.
ESV: Any version is better and in higher esteem with me. There are just too many sneaky problems with it and it fills no use.

I would also leave out the NLT and NKJV from consideration, they are not really aiming for any technically demanding work, but this should really be more than obvious to everyone.

• When it comes out, the Complete Jewish Bible 2016 Updated Text Edition can be worthwhile. This Edition is *****. I.e. not the 1st Edition.
• Personally, I use the 1970 Edition of the NAB (New American Bible, not to be confused with the New American Standard Bible which is not related in any way) Old Testament with Deuterocanonicals, without Psalms, as I have it available, but almost no-one has it available (not being sold since a while). Just to mention two aspects: For the most part excellent manuscript base and use, it's all-around close to like a Bible is supposed to be.
• If Accordance could consider that, I would like to see the 2003 Edition of the HCSB be made available again, it has unique features, particularly bracketing. That Edition, not some other Edition. I'm unlikely to be able to hunt for a second-hand Bible Study Software copy.
• Out of readily available, additional ones? For the GKE functionality, the NIV11-GKE is OK. It's not like I'm accustomed to it, actually, to me it reads differently to how I suppose a Bible usually renders style and even vocabulary.