LL-L "Literature" 2005.07.06 (07) [E/LS]

Wed Jul 6 19:04:39 UTC 2005

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 06.JUL.2005 (07) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or
lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net Server Manual:
http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have been subscribed upon request.
To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l" as message
text from the same account to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or
sign off at http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: "jonny" <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Folklore" 2005.07.05 (02) [E]

Leeve Gabriele un' Reinhard,

Jii schreeven wat tou Psalm 23.

 Jou'n Ã–versetten sÃ¼nd un' blievt Ã–versetten van een frÃ¶mde un' anner
Tied,
- een Doun, wat dat van Luther or van de oul'n Hebreer's affkoomt. Dat is
tohoup kÃ¼nstlichen, 'douden' Kroom, un' nÃ¼mms kann door recht wat mit
anfang'n. Passt amend ne tou NedderdÃ¼tsch un' hett mi all argert, as ick dat
opp HougdÃ¼tsch leern mÃ¼ss'.

Ick dee dat vandoog woll sou schrieven:

As 'n Scheeper fÃ¶Ã¶r sien Schoop passt de Herr opp mi. Mi schall dat an nix
fehl'n.
Hei drifft mi oppe Wisch mit grÃ¶net Gras un' bÃ¶rmt mi uut'n kloor'n Soud.
Hei mookt reinen Kroom in mien Kopp un' Liev un' wiest mi dennen rechten
Stieg, un' Du kannst Di opp Em jÃ¼mmer verlooten.
Un sitt ick mol heel deep inne Schiet, un waard dat tohoup dÃ¼sser
uuttouseen, bÃ¼n ick jÃ¼mmer noch ne bang: Hei steiht jo achter mi. Sien
StÃ¼tt
un Sien Sticken schÃ¶llt mi woll Troust un' HÃ¶lp ween.
Un wenn door mol allerwÃ¤rts leegen Kroom rÃ¼m mi is, schall Hei mi woll
jÃ¼mmer noch wat tou eten geeven. Hei striekt mi mit Sien Hand Ã¶vern Kopp un
mookt dennen Beeker bit bobenhen full.
Sou lang as ick op disse Eerd leeven dou, schall Hei woll inne Neicht
blieven un' goud tou mi ween.
Un' ick bÃ¼n al mien Leev opp 'n houge Wourth, wenn ick mi op Gott, unsen
Herrn, verlooten dou.

----------

From: "Global Moose Translations" <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Literature" 2005.07.05 (05) [E]

Reinhard wrote:
> You gave us as an example Psalm 23 in Low Saxon as published in a Lutheran
> hymnal, and you say that it is a beautiful piece of literature,
> irrespective of what one's belief may be.  I do agree.  (And I have you
> give me credit for agreeing with you at times.)
>
> However, it is in my opinion also an example of a bit too much poetic
> license.  I find many such examples in contemporary Bible translations,
> both in German and in Low Saxon.  Perhaps this is because those are not
> translated from the Hebrew and Greek but from earlier German translations.

Well, yes, I agree (what? Me, too? What is this world coming to??).

I didn't write this translation, after all, I was just quoting from an old
hymnal that I found in the old farmhouse we bought. I don't know from which
version this was translated, because your own version seems to be much more
similar to the translation by Martin Luther. Maybe the translator did this
on purpose, in order to clearly distinguish the text from the High German
version?

Gabriele Kahn

--------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Literature

Jonny (baven):

> Jou'n Ã–versetten sÃ¼nd un' blievt Ã–versetten van een frÃ¶mde
> un' anner Tied,
- een Doun, wat dat van Luther or van de oul'n Hebreer's
> affkoomt. Dat is
> tohoup kÃ¼nstlichen, 'douden' Kroom, un' nÃ¼mms kann door recht
> wat mit
> anfang'n. Passt amend ne tou NedderdÃ¼tsch un' hett mi all
> argert, as ick dat
> opp HougdÃ¼tsch leern mÃ¼ss'.

Wou so? Hest Du wat in 't Hebreesche orginaal vunden, dat annere luyd'
noch nich wys' worren is?

Myn oeversetten is meyr or min wourd-voer-wourd un lykers noch tou
verstaan.  Dat is keyn saak vun akraat un valsch.  Myn is 'n oeversetten,
un Dyn is 'n *interpretatschoon* in 'n wissen dialekt verteld, keyn echt
oeversetten.  Daar tou kÃ¼mt, dat Dyn interpretatschoon schynts nich vun
't Hebreesche orginaal kÃ¼mt.

> un' bÃ¶rmt mi uut'n kloor'n Soud.

In't orginaal heytt dat eyrder "Hey dayt my na stille water leyden."  Daar
stayt niks vun 'n soot, born, bÃ¶rnen or drinken.  Klaar kanst an drinken
dinken, man de metafer segt daar niks vun.  "Born", "beek" un "klaar"
sÃ¼nd heyl annere metafern as "stille water."  Daar wegen hev ik gistern
so wat schreven as "perpetuated mistranslation" un "too much poetic
license," wyl dat sik de meyrsten oeversetten up vroygere oeversetten
stÃ¼tten dout, un in vroygere oeversetten vindst al 'n barg velers un
saken, dey 'n nich in 't orginaal vindt.  As litteratuur or persÃ¶Ã¶nlich
verklaren mag so 'n vreye interpretatschoon wul gaan un schoyn syn, so
lang as dat nich as 'n echt oeversetten vun 'n byblischen tekst verkÃ¶ft
wardt.

Gabriele (above):

> I don't know from which
> version this was translated, because your own version
> seems to be much more
> similar to the translation by Martin Luther.

In the instance of the example phrase, my translation comes directly from
the Hebrew (_`al-mÃªy menuchoth yenaSiyvadiy_ > _... deit mi na stille
Water leden_ = "... leadeth me to still waters"), while the one you found
(_un lett mi drinken an de klare Quell_ = "And lets me drink at the clear
wellspring") falls into Luther's "fresh water" tradition (_... und fÃ¼hret
mich zum frischen Wasser_ = "and leadeth me to fresh water").  As I said
to Jonny above, in the original there is nothing about wellsprings or
drinking, and these are very different metaphors from "still waters."

My point is that mistranslations, overly free interpretations and
additions in the translation of religious texts (as opposed to personal
interpretations that do not claim to be translations) have a way of
becoming perpetuated and of taking on lives of their own, because
relatively few of the translations are directly based on the original
versions.  It is obviously not easy to translate ancient texts faithfully
(without personal interpretation and bias) and at the same produce
authentic contemporary language.  Most of the attempts I see are not only
in Christian translations but Jewish, Islamic and Buddhist ones as well. 
I suppose this is why Jewish and Islamic traditions frown upon
translations and insist on reciting only the originals as well as
requiring their followers to study the languages of the texts, and this
may be why in Buddhism there is a preference for reciting the sutras and
mantras in Pali or Sanskrit (though in Mahayana oftentimes in Sinicized
and then Koreanized or Japonicized forms), keeping interpretations as
separate, personal auxiliary teaching resources that do not enter the
cannon.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
  to be sent to listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or at
  http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
======================================================================