Abstract
Before the introduction of the dynamic-equivalent translation method by Eugene Nida, most Bible translations, in terms of translation type, were literal and formal correspondence translations. With the expansion of Bible translation globally over the past 60 years, alternative translation types started to appear – sometimes claiming uniqueness and even superiority. That, in turn, led to a reverse situation where ‘literal only’ or ‘literal-superiority’ claims were made. This has been a cause for significant debate and controversy. The purpose of this comparison of translation types is to indicate how translations differ from each other on a continuum and to determine if some versions in Afrikaans align with translation typology. The method followed in this article is to classify translation types in two main groupings: more literal and more dynamic; and four subtypes: corresponding translations, resembling translations, clarifying translations, and simplifying translations. In light of this classification, five publications of the Bible in Afrikaans are compared to Bible publications in English and Dutch. This study has found that each of the five Afrikaans translations does fit under one of the four types for which the criteria were laid out. The finding was that the typology applied to Bible versions in English, Dutch and Afrikaans. This typology implies that translations from different types are not necessarily in competition with each other, but that they complement each other. Each version in Afrikaans has then been compared to each other in terms of an end-user market niche and, based on that, there seems to be a continuing need for versions in all the different types. Translations do improve over time as translation theory and source-language scholarship evolve, but the validity of each type and publications in each type argue for versions of several types to endure.Contribution: This article is not the first attempt to describe translation types. Several translators, as well as some functionalist translation studies did important scientific work in this regard. However, this article’s principal contribution to translation studies is to propose a simplified yet adequate model of four translation types with new terminology, terms which do not overlap but are descriptive of function. And then secondly, to align each type with scripture engagement and the translation niche.
Highlights
Introduction and problem statementOn 29 November 2020, the new Afrikaanse translation, Die Bybel, 2020-Vertaling, was launched in Bloemfontein
With the significant growth of Bible translation theory and practice over the past 60 to 70 years, new theories led to new approaches and new styles of translation, initially accompanied with an assertion that the new method is superior, and the new translation could and should replace previous publications
As Bible-translation theory became more sophisticated and translation studies in general expanded, more nuanced perspectives prevailed that different styles or different types of translation might meet different requirements of Bible users
Summary
On 29 November 2020, the new Afrikaanse translation, Die Bybel, 2020-Vertaling, was launched in Bloemfontein (hereafter referred to as the 2020 Afrikaanse Vertaling). The Bible Society of South Africa, whose publications in Afrikaans will be compared in this article, distinguishes between formal translation, translation in contemporary language, and easy-to-read versions The question must be asked, why four types instead of only the original two (literal vs dynamic or idiomatic [Nida & Taber 1969; Beekman & Callow 1974:19-32]; documentation versus instrumentation [Nord 2018], etc.), as still maintained in general translation studies. The function of type 4 translations is presenting biblical content in familiar language and thought without adding, deleting or changing the perceived original meaning Sometimes such a version is more explicit in meaning for maximum clarity and accessibility for certain target groups, and sometimes parallel thoughts in the original are combined into comprehended sentences. Type 4: Simplifying Minimal concordance: mostly by senses and context-driven Generally not maintained
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
