Most literal translation?

[ChristusVincit]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

 

[tobinatorstark]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

In English that would be the original Douay OT and original Rheims NT. As far as other language Latin would obviously be the Vulgate that Jerome put out first. Other language. I don’t know.

 

[mccorm45]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

Then buy a Greek-English Interlinear. Perhaps one like this: amazon.com/Word-Study-Greek-English-New-Testament/dp/0842382909/ref=pd_sim_b_3

I own this edition, which includes a complete concordance to the NT as well as the NRSV translation.

If you would prefer a something a little more compact, then go with this one: amazon.com/New-Greek-English-Interlinear-Personal-Size/dp/0842345647/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243047213&sr=8-3

 

[Cashue]

scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

 

[Mintaka]

St. Jerome would like you to know that he’s insulted by your suggestion that the Vulgate is an excruciatingly literal translation. Seriously, there’s at least one of his letters where he explains that this was not his goal, and therefore defends himself from people who are complaining that his translation isn’t literal enough.

His idea was to work from the original sources, but then to translate meaning more than the literal words. He stuck as close as he could to the literal words, within that constraint; but he put the meaning first.

Btw, I had no idea that there were so many Latin translations of the Bible before Jerome. St. Augustine says, in On Christian Doctrine, that anybody who knows a little Greek sits down and starts translating, and then circulating his translation.

 

[Ron_Conte]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

Literal is not necessarily closer to the ‘original language’. It would be better for you to make use of numerous different translations, some more literal and some looser, so as to seek and obtain the meaning of the text, and not merely the letter of the text.

 

[jayk15]

The Douay Rheims, Jerusalem Bible and the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition are quite good

 

[NoelFitz]

There are many suggestions here.

I would not consider the Jerusalem Bible close to the original.

You might like to consider also the New American Bible (in spite of recent criticism here), the New American Standard Bible and the New Revised Standard Version (Catholic Edition).

 

[JJ59]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

Hi, ChristusVincit.

“Young’s Literal Translation” is the one I’d reccomend for a “painfully literal” translation. (The translator stuck to the exact word order and such) Here are some samples:

“Jehovah [is] my shepherd, I do not lack,
In pastures of tender grass He causeth me to lie down, By quiet waters He doth lead me.”
(Psalm 23:1-2)

“…for God did so love the world, that His Son – the only begotten – He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.”
(John 3:16)

It’s available freely from www.biblegateway.com The only problem is that it’s a protestant translation, so no deutero-canonical books.

 

[Omyo12]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

I would first recommend an interlinear. It has the Hebrew or Greek then the literal English meaning of each word right under it

Green’s Hebrew/Greek/English Interlinear
or
The online Interlinear on Scripture4all.org

Also, though it’s not an interlinear, Young’s is extremely literal. You can download it for free HERE, you can also buy it there

Also, i might also recommend…
New American Standard Bible

^ These are considered the “most literal.” However they are all Protestant in nature so no Deutercanonical…

for the Deutercanon , I suppose I would suggest the Revised Standard Version- 1st or 2nd Catholic Edition or MAYBE the New American Bible…
However no true literal translation from the Hebrew/Greek exists

I do NOT recommend the Jerusalem Bible (translated from French), New Jerusalem Bible, New Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition, and DEFINITELY not the Good News Bible

the Douay Rheims is literal to the Latin Vulgate though somewhat different than the modern Hebrew Bible

 

[Bible_Reader]

I am sorry, but I cannot agree that the NAB is even remotely literal in the OT.

If you wish to read a very literal translation of the Vulgate, I can highly recommend the 1582-1610 Rheims-Douay (which is a closer translation of the Vulgate than the later Challoner revision.)

You can purchase them here (facsimile) or here (modernized spelling).

I very much appreciate these.

Among contemporary Bibles with an imprimatur, the RSV is perhaps the most literal.

 

[Bible_Reader]

I think that the original 1582-1610 Rheims and Douay Bibles are far closer to the Vulgate than the more popular Challoner edition. While some criticize their writing on stylistic grounds (it follows the Latin quite closely), I find it is highly readable.

You can find those volumes here (facsimile) or here (modern spelling). I have both and am particularly fond of the facsimile edition, which I own in both printed and electronic form.

If you are concerned about imprimatur, you may be interested to know that the original D-R actually never received an imprimatur. Quoting from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

…The “Rheims Testament” … contained no episcopal imprimatur, but a recommendation was appended signed by four divines of the University of Reims. The Old Testament was delayed by want of means, until the whole Bible was eventually published in two quarto volumes, in 1609 and 1610, by which time the college had returned to Douai, and the recommendation was signed by three doctors of that university.

The same article comments on the English of the D-R:

Then, also, in the translation, many technical words were retained bodily, such as pasch, parasceve, azymes, etc. In some instances, also where it was found difficult or impossible to find a suitable English equivalent for a Latin word, the latter was retained in an anglicized form. Thus in Phil., ii, 8, we get “He exinanited himself”, and in Hebrews 9:28, “Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many”. It was considered that an ordinary reader, finding the word unintelligible, would pause and inquire its meaning and that this was preferable to satisfying him with an inadequate rendering. In other cases latinisms seem to have crept in unawares, as in Luke 10:1, “Our Lord designed also other seventy-two” or in Phil., ii, 10, “In the name of Jesus, every knee bow of the celestials, terrestrials and infernals”. The proper names are usually (though not always) taken from the Vulgate; but the word Dominus is rendered throughout Our Lord. The general result was a version in cumbersome English, so full of latinisms as to be in places hardly readable, but withal scholarly and accurate.

 

[NoelFitz]

Omyo12

I agree with you. I think I would have to as your views are very close to mine.

I also want to congratrulate you on all your posts, as they are very sound.

I have a slight criticism. In your smiley the sign of the cross is done in the Orthodox rather than in the Catholic way.

 

[Omyo12]

I also want to congratrulate you on all your posts, as they are very sound.

Thank you NoelFitz, I really appreciate that

I have a slight criticism. In your smiley the sign of the cross is done in the Orthodox rather than in the Catholic way.

Oh wow, you’re right! being a smiley, I never really noticed it! lol

God Bless,
Omyo12

 

[ChristusVincit]

The NASB is a protestant one?
Is there not a Catholic edition?
I do have a job lot of translations -

KJV
RSV:CE
RSV:SCE
NRSV:CE
JB
NJB
NIV
The Message (LOL)
And in the post: DRCV

But I shall investigate some of those mentioned above!

 

[tobinatorstark]

The NASB is a protestant one?
Is there not a Catholic edition?
I do have a job lot of translations -

KJV
RSV:CE
RSV:SCE
NRSV:CE
JB
NJB
NIV
The Message (LOL)
And in the post: DRCV

But I shall investigate some of those mentioned above!

I would stay away from all the Protestant translations. NSAB, KJV, NIV, The Message. If you want a strong literal translation the Douay-Rheims is it, followed by the RSV-CE

 

[ChristusVincit]

But where can one get a DRV as opposed to a DRCV? And is there much difference?

 

[Omyo12]

But where can one get a DRV as opposed to a DRCV? And is there much difference?

You can find the original Douay Rheims HERE
However, it can get pricey…

the DRC is a complete revision and heavily influenced by the KJV in wording

“To call it any longer the Doway or Rhemis version is an abuse of terms. It has been altered and modified till scarce any verse remains as it was originally published.”

• Cardinal Nicholas Wiseman

Rheims, 1582
1 Diversely and many ways in times past God speaking to the fathers in the prophets,
2 last of all in these days hath spoken to us in his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all, by whom he made also the worlds.
3 Who, being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and carrying all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the Majesty in the high places;
4 being made so much better than angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name above them.

Authorised Version, 1611
1 God, who at sundry times and in diverse manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds,
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high,
4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Rheims-- Challoner revision, 1752
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets,
2 last of all, in these days hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world.
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high,
4 being made so much better than the Angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they.

The NASB is a protestant one?
Is there not a Catholic edition?

well, the New American Standard Bible (NASB) is Protestant
and the New American Bible (NAB) is Catholic

these are two different translations independent from each other
There is no Catholic edition of the NASB

You have a pretty good collection so far, I suggest your main Bibles be:
For reflection and meaning:
Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition
New American Bible (with the Revised NT of 1986)
Jerusalem Bible
Douay Rheims Challoner Edition (the official English Catholic Bible between 1752-1940)
and if you can cough up the dough- an original Douay Rheims

For literal word study but with a RSV2CE, DR or NAB at hand
Young’s Literal Translation (but no Deuterocanon )
Scripture4all.org (but no Deuterocanon )

DISCLAIMER: a literal translation DOESN’T always contain the original meaning clearly
For Example:
literal:
Ps 23:6ff- “… and I-dwell in [the] house-of JHVH for [the] length-of days”
meaning:
Ps 23:6ff- “… and I will dwell in the house of the LORD as long as I live!”

Avoid paraphrases like the Good News Bible (Catholic) or the Message (Protestant)
Also, while the majority of the NAB footnotes are nice, some go against Catholic teachings!!
I strongly suggest you purchase a Catechism of the Catholic Church or read it on the Vatican website HERE

And finally, try to avoid Protestant translations. Catholics have a good amount of Bibles!

 

[ChristusVincit]

Oh my word.
Those DRV are VERY expensive. Why is there only one source? Why haven’t people done anything about it?

And why the TCE rather than the first CE?

 

[David_Zampino]

I’m prepared for the most painfully literal version possible. I want the closest thing next to reading the original language, even if it makes little sense. Any suggestions?

I agree with some of the other posters who have suggested an interlinear Bible.

The problem with ANY translation of texts between languages (as anyone who is fluent in more than one language can tell you) is that painfully literal “word-for-word” is virtually impossible to achieve. In some languages, nouns have gender. In English, nouns do not. In some languages, nouns have declensions as well. Not in English. Not all languages use the same verb tenses. Sometimes, not even the same verbs! (For example, there is no verb in ancient Hebrew which corresponds with the modern English verb “to be”! One can easily see how this might pose a problem!)

Hope this helps . . .