Questions from a Translator

[Baudolina]

Hello all!

I am a non-Catholic translator currently working on translating a work of theology from Czech into English. If you don’t mind, I’d like to pop in from time to time and ask questions to ensure that I’m getting things right.

First off, the book I’m working on uses a lot of scriptural passages. When I went to college and took a course on Biblical prophecies, we used the New Revised Standard Bible, so I just assumed that that was the right, scholarly choice. Now I’ve come across information that Catholics have a somewhat different list of texts than other Christians. So: is it OK to use the NSR Bible for a Catholic work, or is there a different one I should use? The text’s author did not give me any guidance in this question, he was just clear that the language should be clear and modern, without any “Thou Shalts” or “Begats.”

The next question regards the word “Testimony.” What preposition is best to use when it is a testimony (regarding) Christ? This is crucial, because the book’s title is (something like) A [author’s profession]'s Testimony XXXX Christ. Now, should that be “Testimony ON Christ”? “Testimony OF Christ?” “Testimony ABOUT Christ”? Or something else? So far my bet is with “On Christ” but I would love to hear what Catholic experts say.

Thank you so much.

Baudolina

 

[mdgspencer]

If this book will sell primarily to a Catholic audience, I would use a Catholic edition. I am not completely sure if the NSR edition you name is an edition of the Revised Standard version or not (which does not correspond to the Catholic Bible). Some Catholics would object to the New Revised Standard version on further grounds, if that is the edition you mention, since some passages use politically correct wording rather than an actual translation of the original Greek and Hebrew.
Catholic editions of the Bible have more Old Testament books than Protestants have. You could use the Catholic edition of the Revised Standard Version Bible, which has all the Old Testament books Catholics use. Many Catholics prefer to use the RSV. If you are concerned though about what Bible editions are most accepted by Catholics, you could use the editions of the Bible officially preferred in the liturgy. Maybe someone else can list these.
I do some writing myself and on occasion have problems about what precise wording to use. I deal with this by seeing what other books do, by, for example, checking Bible concordances or by going onto google to see what writers customarily do.

 

[NHInsider]

Hi and welcome -

I am sure people here will be happy to help you sort out possibilities, but be warned that we’re a disputative bunch!

The translation issue can be complicated. However, the Revised Standard is commonly used by scholars and, I have read, is the version the present Pope uses when writing in English, so I think it will be a good choice. (The New Revised Standard is less-acceptable for Catholics as it has some questionable “inclusive language” choices.)

“Testimony ON Christ”? “Testimony OF Christ?” “Testimony ABOUT Christ”? Or something else? So far my bet is with “On Christ” but I would love to hear what Catholic experts say.

well, “of” would suggest that the book is Jesus testimony about himself, so no a good choice. “About” would suggest that the book is primarily an account of Jesus’ life and teachings, while “on” could be broader and include not only Jesus’ acts and words but also reflection on those things, theological implications and the author’s opinion.

But others may have differing opinons . . .

 

[JRKH]

Hello all!

I am a non-Catholic translator currently working on translating a work of theology from Czech into English. If you don’t mind, I’d like to pop in from time to time and ask questions to ensure that I’m getting things right.

I’m sure you’ll get a lot of help here. But as someone else already said, we can be a pesky bunch so the help may not be “answers” so much as it might be helping you “talk through” an issue…If you know what I mean.

First off, the book I’m working on uses a lot of scriptural passages. When I went to college and took a course on Biblical prophecies, we used the New Revised Standard Bible, so I just assumed that that was the right, scholarly choice. Now I’ve come across information that Catholics have a somewhat different list of texts than other Christians. So: is it OK to use the NSR Bible for a Catholic work, or is there a different one I should use? The text’s author did not give me any guidance in this question, he was just clear that the language should be clear and modern, without any “Thou Shalts” or “Begats.”

If you are writing for a U.S. Audience the translation used in liturgy is the NAB. Mainly I agree with others that, it would be best to use whatever translation is going to be most familiar to your readers.
As others have pointed out the main difference between the “Protestant” and “Catholic” Bibles are in the number of OT books, but one should also note that, I believe, there is some minor differences in numbering the Psalms, and that two of the books, Daniel and one other, contain passages in the Catholic Bible that are not in the “Protestant” Bible. None of this particularly effects the NT which is the same in both the Protestant and Catholic bibles.

Not to complicate things further, and I may show my ignorance here, but is the work you are translating from the “Roman Catholic” tradition or from the Eastern Orthodox tradition. The reason I ask is because I believe that the EO has even more books in their canon of Scripture…

The next question regards the word “Testimony.” What preposition is best to use when it is a testimony (regarding) Christ? This is crucial, because the book’s title is (something like) A [author’s profession]'s Testimony XXXX Christ. Now, should that be “Testimony ON Christ”? “Testimony OF Christ?” “Testimony ABOUT Christ”? Or something else? So far my bet is with “On Christ” but I would love to hear what Catholic experts say.

Why not just use the term “regarding”? Is that the most accurate to what you are trying to say?

Thank you so much.

Baudolina

You are welcome

Peace
James

 

[Baudolina]

Thank you for your replies. I will see if there is an online version of the Revised Standard Version.

As for the testimony, the author is bringing the knowledge of his secular line of work to bear on his study of scripture in trying to understand the mind (as well as other aspects) of Jesus. I don’t think he intends for only Catholics to read the book, though it is likely that they will feel the most at home with his reasoning. One of the sideline ideas he develops is that the Christian religion is based upon testimony, where one person passes down stories to the next, the next, (etc.) and that is the essence of the living tradition. This is the testimony he wants to add, based upon his own experiences.

Another question, if I may: is it better to abbreviate the names of books of the Bible? The original text has them in short form but I have been writing them out because it seems that if readers are not that familiar with the Bible it will be easier for them to look the passages up. What is the usual practice in theological works?

Thanks!

 

[NHInsider]

RSV online here: ewtn.com/devotionals/biblesearch.asp
Scholarly works generally abbreviate the book names and provide a list of abbreviations at the front of the book. (Similar treatment for other documents that may be frequently cited, such as writings of Early Church Fathers or Declarations of Councils . . .)

 

[Apollos]

The NRSV (1989) has been controversial in English-language Catholic circles chiefly for its use of nonsexist language that occasionally obscures the meaning of a passage to the point of interfering with exegesis, depending on the point your author is making. You can easily avoid this problem by using the *Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition *(1965, 1966) or the Revised Standard Version Second Catholic Edition (2006), the latter of which eliminates archaic forms.

“Testimony” is typically joined to its direct or indirect object by the adverb “to”. For example:

The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth

“Barry Bonds and the New York Yankees’ Jason Giambi were not called to the hearing. Both **testified **in 2003 **to **a grand jury investigating a steroid-distribution ring, and there were concerns **testimony to **Congress could hinder the probe.” - Joel Roberts, "McGwire’s Testimony Leaves Doubts: Questions On Steroid Use Remain In Wake Of Congressional Hearing. CBS/AP, 18 March 2005 (cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/18/entertainment/main681498.shtml)

 

[Apollos]

Another question, if I may: is it better to abbreviate the names of books of the Bible? The original text has them in short form but I have been writing them out because it seems that if readers are not that familiar with the Bible it will be easier for them to look the passages up. What is the usual practice in theological works?

Theological works - that is, whose intended audience is religious - are *always *abbreviated, and this fact can be verified by browsing the Religion & Spirituality shelves at your local bookstore. However, this is a judgment call made by the publisher, not the translator.

 

[Spirithound]

“Testimony” is typically joined to its direct or indirect object by the adverb “to”. For example:

That’s true enough, but in the examples you gave, “to” exhibits different meanings. “To [inanimate noun]” means you are testifying to the trustworthiness of that [inanimate noun]. On the other hand, “To [animate noun]” shows that you are giving testimony about something else to that [animate noun].

 

[Apollos]

That’s true enough, but in the examples you gave, “to” exhibits different meanings. “To [inanimate noun]” means you are testifying to the trustworthiness of that [inanimate noun]. On the other hand, “To [animate noun]” shows that you are giving testimony about something else to that [animate noun].

That’s covered by the example taken from the book title, “testimony to the truth”.

 

[Baudolina]

Thanks again for the prompt answers. I want to let you know (Apollos, and others who may be wondering) that the reason why I’ve come here to ask questions rather than going somewhere to talk with English-speaking Catholics in person or checking things out at a local bookstore is I live in a remote part of the Czech Republic. I do translations because it’s a good way to stay at home with my 3 small children and still earn an income. And my usual fields are culture and politics, not religion.

Ahem. 1 more question before I pack it in for the day:

As a matter of style, is it best to set Biblical passages off with quotation marks or is there another more accepted format?

Thanks once more.
Baudolina

 

[Apollos]

As a matter of style, is it best to set Biblical passages off with quotation marks or is there another more accepted format?

Best is to quote the Biblical text the way one would quote any other book, with quotation marks followed immediately by a parenthetical reference. For example, from John Paul II, *Crossing the Threshold of Hope *(Knopf 1994), p. 25:

Suffering, in fact, is always a great test not only of physical strength but also of spiritual strength. Saint Paul’s truth about “completing the sufferings of Christ” (cf. Col. 1:24) is part of the Gospel.

 

[beth40n2]

As far as the versions of the Bible, I can tell you the in America the official Bible used in Mass at church is the NAB New American Bible, a version I had never heard of until my conversion 6 years ago. The RSV Revised Standard Bible is used by priests in their private studies. RSV has two versions, the Protestant Edition and the Catolic Edition. The Catholic Edition has 7 historical books in the Old Testement that are not found in the Protesant Bible and they are Tobit, Judith, 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Wisdom and Sirach. If the book you are translating uses any of these scriptures, you will definately need a Catholic Bible.

If you are writting to an audience that you do not know whether are Protestant or Catholic the RSV is the best version, as both groups will accept it.

 

[Baudolina]

OK, here’s another thing I wanted to take up with the author. He is Catholic, as are the majority of Christians in this country. Crucifixes are everywhere you care to look. On the cover of the Czech edition of this book, which has already been published, there is a particularly bloody and gruesome-looking crucified Christ. Now, I’m asking you, is this likely to turn away Protestant readers in the US or other English-speaking countries? My feeling is that it would, since Protestants don’t generally like “occupied” crosses. They might just think “this book is only for Catholics” and not read it, but I think the author would be glad for as many people as possible to experience his work, and I had in mind to suggest that he change the cover picture.

What do you think?

 

[JRKH]

OK, here’s another thing I wanted to take up with the author. He is Catholic, as are the majority of Christians in this country. Crucifixes are everywhere you care to look. On the cover of the Czech edition of this book, which has already been published, there is a particularly bloody and gruesome-looking crucified Christ. Now, I’m asking you, is this likely to turn away Protestant readers in the US or other English-speaking countries? My feeling is that it would, since Protestants don’t generally like “occupied” crosses. They might just think “this book is only for Catholics” and not read it, but I think the author would be glad for as many people as possible to experience his work, and I had in mind to suggest that he change the cover picture.

What do you think?

Yes I believe you are correct about the Protestants in the U.S. Such a picture would turn away Protestant readers. In fact I would go further and say that if it is, as you say, “a particularly bloody and gruesome-looking crucified Christ”, it might not appeal to some U.S. Catholics.

Peace
James

 

[Apollos]

a particularly bloody and gruesome-looking crucified Christ

The cover won’t matter that much. The Mel Gibson movie “The Passion of the Christ” was well received by Protestant audiences here in the United States.

 

[NHInsider]

OK, here’s another thing I wanted to take up with the author. He is Catholic, as are the majority of Christians in this country. Crucifixes are everywhere you care to look. On the cover of the Czech edition of this book, which has already been published, there is a particularly bloody and gruesome-looking crucified Christ. Now, I’m asking you, is this likely to turn away Protestant readers in the US or other English-speaking countries? My feeling is that it would, since Protestants don’t generally like “occupied” crosses. They might just think “this book is only for Catholics” and not read it, but I think the author would be glad for as many people as possible to experience his work, and I had in mind to suggest that he change the cover picture.

What do you think?

In my experience authors have almost no control over cover art (and are frequently distressed when they receive their copies). Is the English-language version going to be published by an American or British publisher? If so they very likely will change the cover, although he could certainly mention the concern to whomever his contact person is at the publisher.

 

[JRKH]

In my experience authors have almost no control over cover art (and are frequently distressed when they receive their copies). Is the English-language version going to be published by an American or British publisher? If so they very likely will change the cover, although he could certainly mention the concern to whomever his contact person is at the publisher.

Yes, I was going to mention this also.
This would be a matter largely decided between the author and the publisher.

I must admit I’m getting more curious about what this work might be…

Peace
James

 

[mdgspencer]

Books are frequently published in several countries. This is true of the U.S. and the U.K. in the case of English-language books. I have never seen the same cover design when a book is published in several countries. So I would not consider the cover an issue.

 

[Baudolina]

I must admit I’m getting more curious about what this work might be…

I guess there is no need to keep secrets. The author’s name is Jeronym Klimes, and he is a well-known psychologist who is also a very pious Catholic. As I mentioned above, I am struggling with the book’s title, which is provisionally A Psychologist’s Testimony On Christ.

Here’s another question for you: should the last supper be capitalized if I am referring to the event, and not, say, a work of art depicting it?