If Latin is so stable and unifying how can there be incorrect translations?

[Eilish_Maura]

The point is that it doesn’t really matter if the foreign language draft can be perfectly translated into Latin or if the Latin document is a complete re-write.

The ideas expressed in a foreign language draft are just ideas. There is no partial credit for them. A draft in any language is just a draft.

If the Latin document is a complete rewrite then it would seem those doing the first language draft wasted a lot of time for nothing.

If the Latin document is a complete rewrite then why bother drafting in another language?

 

[benedictgal]

If the Latin document is a complete rewrite then it would seem those doing the first language draft wasted a lot of time for nothing.

If the Latin document is a complete rewrite then why bother drafting in another language?

Elisha, when I worked in the Texas House of Representatives, I wrote speeches, drafted legislation and composed bill analyses.

Often times, I was skillful to get things right on the first draft, with very little changes to the original text. However, when it came to drafting legislation, often, what I originally wrote was not what finally passed the Legislature. At every step of the way, the bill got amended and, sometimes, completely substituted. However, the general idea remained. Once the bill was finally passed and signed into law, and, inserted into the code, it looked rather different from its original form. Once legislation is codified, it looks very different in the law books. That is to be expected.

I suspect that this is what happens, especially when the Church is formulating dogma, rubrics and norms. Often you will get an initial idea and commit it to writing; howver, once several pairs of eyes look at the document as it is being formulated, changes will naturally occur.

Did I think that my efforts were a waste of time? No. A lot of times, the original version will not look like what finally comes out, regardless of the language. The Church is very careful as to what she releases and goes through great lengths to ensure that everything is done correctly.

My question to you is this: does your querie in some way involve an aversion to Latin? I don’t ask this to be rude; however, that seems to be the signal that your posts are sending out. As many have pointed out, Latin is the official language of the Church. All of the important and official documents from the Holy See are issued in Latin. The problem is not with Latin; it is with those who are translating the documents. You cannot blame Latin. Latin, because it is a dead language, remains unchanging, static. It’s folks like ICEL who, unfortunately, manage to botch things up. It does not matter what the draft language is; what matters is the final version.

 

[VociMike]

If the Latin document is a complete rewrite then it would seem those doing the first language draft wasted a lot of time for nothing.

If the Latin document is a complete rewrite then why bother drafting in another language?

You seem determined to get an admission that errors can creep into the Latin documents. So, for sake of argument, let’s say this is possible. Where do you go from there? What conclusions do you draw? How would you do it better?

 

[Eilish_Maura]

You seem determined to get an admission that errors can creep into the Latin documents. So, for sake of argument, let’s say this is possible. Where do you go from there? What conclusions do you draw? How would you do it better?

I am only determined to keep this on track - but some flip it to coming FROM Latin.

 

[VociMike]

I am only determined to keep this on track - but some flip it to coming FROM Latin.

Ont track to what? As I asked, what conclusion do you draw if there are errors introduced? And how would you do it better?

 

[benedictgal]

Seems there is some efforts to check and recheck things - how can these errors get through at all?

EM, this was your original question, was it not? You didn’t mention translating to Latin from the vernacular. Furthermore, the title of your thread “If Latin is so stable and unifying how can there be incorrect translations” infers that there is concern regarding the translation from Latin as opposed to “to Latin”.

Many of us have tried to answer your question. However, you seem to keep changing the focus and the original intent of your initial post. Ultimately, it’s not the draft that matters, it’s what the official document, originally in Latin, has to say.

Furthermore, the folks at the Holy See will run everything through a fine-tooth comb several times. Whatever will become an official document is thoroughly vetted so as to preserve it from error. The errors, unfortunately, come from groups like ICEL that keep botching things.

 

[CradleCath]

It has already been pointed out that not all documents are originally **composed **in Latin. For those NOT originally composed in Latin (how many times do I have to restate this?) what guarantee is there that those translating to Latin won’t introduce errors?

And how many times must we ask you to tell us the particular document (or documents) that you are so concerned about.
The Church seldom translates TO Latin. For instance, when the Novus Ordo Mass was translated FROM Latin INTO English,
the agendas were obvious.

POST COMMUNIONEM (ad Missam in Vigilia):
Sacris dapibus satiatos,
beati Ioannis Baptistae nos, Domine,
praeclara comitetur oratio,
et, quem Agnum nostra ablaturum crimina nuntiavit,
ipsum Filium tuum poscat nobis fore placatum.

LITERAL VERSION:
O Lord, may the excellent prayer of blessed John the Baptist
accompany us, filled to satiety with the sacred sacrificial meal,
and may it urge that Your Son Himself,
whom it declared was the Lamb about to take away our offenses,
will be appeased in our regard.

THE ICEL TRANSLATION:
Father,
may the prayers of John the Baptist
lead us to the Lamb of God.
May this eucharist bring us the mercy of Christ.

WHOOPS!! What happened to the mention of Offenses &
Why is their no mention of appeasment??

Could it be that the translators did not want to give a picture of a God who must be “appeased” because of the wrath present within His heart. The wrath caused by wholesale murder of the unborn, sexual promiscuity, the lack of caring for the poor, etc., etc.

 

[CradleCath]

So…

Pointing to the Latin translation - which may or may not be the original language for the document - is not necessarily the best thing to get at what was actually meant?

Since Latin is the
language of the Church, all Church DOCUMENTS are written in Latin. If you are speaking of DRAFTS of documents, say drafts.

 

[japhy]

Since Latin is the language of the Church, all Church DOCUMENTS are written in Latin. If you are speaking of DRAFTS of documents, say drafts.

E.M. is NOT talking about DRAFTS! As I said in an earlier post:

There are a fair number of recent-ish documents whose “official” versions, if I understand correctly, are not in Latin. Examples are Pope Pius XI’s Mit Brennender Sorge to the Church in Germany, Pope Pius X’s Tra le sollecitudini, and Pope Leo XIII’s Vi è Ben Noto.

Now, if it turns out I’m wrong, and the official version (the one published in the AAS) is in Latin, then disregard. But E.M. is talking about documents that were promulgated in a language OTHER than Latin.

 

[CradleCath]

E.M. is NOT talking about DRAFTS! As I said in an earlier post:
Now, if it turns out I’m wrong, and the official version (the one published in the AAS) is in Latin, then disregard. But E.M. is talking about documents that were promulgated in a language OTHER than Latin.

I’m glad that you seem to understand what she’s talking about, because I don’t. Since the title of this thread is:

If Latin is so stable and unifying how can there be incorrect translations?

So are you saying that the documents you mentioned…once promulgated in a language** other than Latin**, were translated INTO Latin? If they weren’t then what is her point re Latin translations. If they were, though I doubt it, what have they to do with incorrect translations?

I still believe she is speaking of drafts. though I don’t **know **& I somehow doubt that she knows, herself.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.