Dynamic Equivalence vs. Essentially Literal

A friendly debate has taken place recently on the Out of Our Minds Too blog. The issue is whether dynamic equivalence or essentially literal translation is the better approach to Bible translation. The two friends, Chris and Michael, wrestle with questions like: “What do you do when a translation language doesn’t have a word for a word found in the biblical text?”

Often the debate between advocates of DE and Essentially Literal translation becomes rather rancorous. This one does not and is actually informative. Be sure to read the comments to the post. That’s where the substance of the debate takes place.

2 thoughts on “Dynamic Equivalence vs. Essentially Literal

  1. Suzanne McCarthy says:

    Wayne,

    I wasn’t quite sure which thread you were refering to but I came upon this comment,

    “If it isn’t Everett Fox’s translation of the pentateuch, its dynamic equivalence.

    oh and Man, like other mammals, breast-feeds his young.”

  2. Wayne Leman says:

    Suzanne commented:

    I wasn’t quite sure which thread you were refering to but I came upon this comment

    You found the thread, Suzanne. It’s linked from the title to my post as well as the first link in the post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s