{"id":7485,"date":"2011-08-05T07:07:48","date_gmt":"2011-08-05T12:07:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/?p=7485"},"modified":"2011-08-05T07:07:48","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T12:07:48","slug":"form-or-function-choosing-a-bible-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/2011\/20110805-7485.htm","title":{"rendered":"Form or function? (Choosing a Bible, Part 2)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>When discussing philosophies of Biblical translations, there are two main classifications: formal equivalence and functional equivalence.<\/p>\n<p>Formal equivalence attempts to maintain the &#8220;form&#8221; of the original language inasmuch as possible. This can also be described as a word-for-word translation (although that descriptor isn&#8217;t always technically accurate.)<\/p>\n<p>Functional equivalence attempts to maintain the &#8220;function&#8221; of the original language inasmuch as possible. This can be described as a thought-for-thought translation. Functional equivalence is also sometimes termed &#8220;dynamic equivalence.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The following chart summarizes a few of the differences between formal and functional equivalence in translation:<\/p>\n<table border=\"1\" cellpadding=\"2\">\n<tr>\n<th>Formal Equivalence<\/th>\n<th>Functional Equivalence<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Word-for-word<\/td>\n<td>Thought-for-thought<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Words more &#8220;true to original&#8221;<\/td>\n<td>Tone more &#8220;true to original&#8221;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Syntax often more awkward<\/td>\n<td>Syntax often more natural<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Generally higher reading level<\/td>\n<td>Generally lower reading level<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Examples: NKJV, NASB, ESV<\/td>\n<td>Examples: NIV, TNIV, NLT<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p><b>Why you should choose to use formal equivalence:<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Lends itself well to deep personal study and rich word studies<\/li>\n<li>Less opportunity for interpretation in translation<\/li>\n<li>Generally uses more traditional terminology<\/li>\n<li>May be more &#8220;poetic&#8221; (&#8220;Grace of God&#8221; rather than &#8220;God&#8217;s grace&#8221;)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Why you should <i>not<\/i> choose to use formal equivalence:<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>We&#8217;re not all scholars (especially not of Greek and Hebrew)<\/li>\n<li>We&#8217;re not all readers (and formal equivalence does require more work to read and understand)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Why you should choose to use functional equivalence:<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Easily read and understood<\/li>\n<li>Lends itself well to devotional and evangelistic reading<\/li>\n<li>Better captures tone of the original (which, since we aren&#8217;t all scholars, we might not be able to understand from a formal equivalence translation)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Why you should <i>not<\/i> choose to use functional equivalence:<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>It&#8217;s worthwhile to stretch our minds in the study of the Bible<\/li>\n<li>The text is more likely to contain interpretation by the translator<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Ultimately, both formal and functional equivalence can be useful modes for Bible translation&#8211;and are acceptable for use. I think it would benefit most believers to have at least one translation from each camp. Which type any given individual uses routinely and which type one uses as a reference probably varies a great deal based on one&#8217;s personal inclination towards cerebral or psychosocial expression. (Whether one is a &#8220;thinker&#8221; or a &#8220;feeler&#8221;, to use Myers-Briggs typology.)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>When discussing philosophies of Biblical translations, there are two main classifications: formal equivalence and functional equivalence. Formal equivalence attempts to maintain the &#8220;form&#8221; of the original language inasmuch as possible. This can also be described as a word-for-word translation (although that descriptor isn&#8217;t always technically accurate.) Functional equivalence attempts to maintain the &#8220;function&#8221; of the &#8230; <a title=\"Form or function? (Choosing a Bible, Part 2)\" class=\"read-more\" href=\"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/2011\/20110805-7485.htm\">Read more <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Form or function? (Choosing a Bible, Part 2)<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[5],"tags":[159,160,239,454,467,1171],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7485"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7485"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7485\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7485"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7485"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/bekahcubed.menterz.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7485"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}