Philippians, 3, 8 in Romanian language: a case of primacy of norm

Adina Chirilă

doi:10.17684/i11a159en

Abstract

In the present paper, the study of the variants given by the translators of the bible text into the Romanian language during the old age and contemporary to the verse under Philippians, 3, 8, which contains in the Greek version a rare word in the Bible (σκῠ́βᾰλον), highlights the fact that the act of translation places the text on the path of a language, subjecting it to the state of the language at a given moment and to its evolution. At any moment, there is a formal adjustment, which follows what is considered to be correct or at least linguistically possible: first, it is that of the foreign text to the new language—Romanian; then, it is that of the Romanian text to the renewals of the Romanian language—adjustment that may ignore the original requirements, from a given moment in the history of producing and receiving that text in the Romanian language and culture; thus, the correctness of the text is controlled by the norm of the language and by the appearance of its semantic accuracy. In the last sequence of Phil, 3. 8, the history of rendering the element of comparison in the Romanian language constitutes a very good case of primacy of the norm of the language over the originary content (in relation to the direct source text)—recoverable, but exclusively by metalinguistic means.

Highlights

This paper is a study of the variants given by the translators of the bible text into the Romanian language during the old age and contemporary to a verse of the New Testament, which contains in the Greek version, a rare word in the Bible1 The term is σκῠβᾰλον, τό, present in Philippians, 3, 8: “ἀλλὰ μενοῦνγε καὶ ἡγοῦμαι πάντα ζημίαν εἶναι διὰ τὸ ὑπερέχον τῆς γνώσεως Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου μου, δι’ ὃν τὰ πάντα ἐζημιώθην, καὶ ἡγοῦμαι σκύβαλα ἵνα Χριστὸν κερδήσω” [“Mai mult însă, eu pe toate le socotesc pagubă față de neprețuitul preț al cunoașterii lui Hristos Iisus, Domnul meu, de dragul Căruia m’am lăsat păgubit de toate și le socotesc drept gunoaie pentru ca să-L cîștig pe Hristos”, Anania 2001]
There is a formal adjustment, which follows what is considered to be correct or at least linguistically possible: first, it is that of the foreign text to the new language—Romanian; it is that of the Romanian text to the renewals of the Romanian language—adjustment that may ignore the original requirements, from a given moment in the history of producing and receiving that text in the Romanian language and culture; the correctness of the text is controlled by the norm of the language and by the appearance of its semantic accuracy
Translation that declares that it follows the principle of formal equivalence and that it has as sources the Masoretic Text and the “Greek family of the Receptus Text for NT”, but which is quite powerfully influenced by Occidental vernacular traditions

Summary

A rare word in the Bible

This paper is a study of the variants given by the translators of the bible text into the Romanian language during the old age and contemporary to a verse of the New Testament, which contains in the Greek version, a rare word in the Bible The term is σκῠβᾰλον, τό, present in Philippians, 3, 8: “ἀλλὰ μενοῦνγε καὶ ἡγοῦμαι πάντα ζημίαν εἶναι διὰ τὸ ὑπερέχον τῆς γνώσεως Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου μου, δι’ ὃν τὰ πάντα ἐζημιώθην, καὶ ἡγοῦμαι σκύβαλα ἵνα Χριστὸν κερδήσω” (bnt) [“Mai mult însă, eu pe toate le socotesc pagubă față de neprețuitul preț al cunoașterii lui Hristos Iisus, Domnul meu, de dragul Căruia m’am lăsat păgubit de toate și le socotesc drept gunoaie pentru ca să-L cîștig pe Hristos”, Anania 2001]. 445–447) suggests that σκῠβᾰλον was specific to the colloquial use, to the colloquial speech ; the Greek authors “hesitated” to use it Tlg database—only 178 occurrences out of 65 million words, at 3165 authors, almost absent at the postpatristic generations!), using synonyms instead, in specific contexts: κόπρος, ἡ (with 1736 occurrences) and περίσσωμα (περίττωμα), ατος, τό (as medical term, with 2858 occurrences). The observation is general in nature, and the question: To what extent is this vision justified on the term itself in a given text, such as the Pauline one, taking into account the historical and temporal context of its use? is completely relevant

Pragmatic motivation

The impossible emendation

Conclusions