3:23PM - Formal Equivalence vs. Dynamic Equivalence
On the issue of how to translate the Bible, modern versions tend to gravitate to one of two poles. Formal Equivalence suggests that we translate what the Bible says, and consequently follows the "form" of the original Hebrew and Greek, while Dynamic Equivalence suggests that we translate what the Bible means, and consequently follows the "form" of the reader's language.
Among modern English versions, the NASB, ESV and NKJV all tend to the FE pole, while the Good News, the Message, and (to a lesser extent) the NIV all tend to the DE pole. Some examples might help:
Matthew 10:22 – "for my name's sake" (ESV) vs. "because of me" (NIV)
Luke 1:42 – "the fruit of your womb" (ESV) vs. "the child you will bear" (NIV)
Ephesians 5:16 – "redeeming the time" (NKJV) vs. "making the most of every opportunity" (NIV)
1 Peter 1:13 – "gird up the loins of your mind" (NKJV) vs. "prepare your minds for action" (NIV)
1 John 1:1 – "we have an advocate with the Father" (ESV) vs. "we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense" (NIV)
A couple of days ago, Richard Rhodes at Better Bibles Blog posted this cartoon:
Literally, this means, "I can't see oil", but that would be an bad translation. Incorrect, because it would cause joke to fall flat. Rather, Rhodes translates the caption as "I can't stand the sight of oil!" This, he says, is what we mean by "Dynamic Equivalence".
I'm still wondering, though, the extent to which this applies to Scripture. Do jokes constitute a special case? How many jokes are in the Bible? And how many times would we have a situation where we can translate a joke, but only with a paraphrase?