Abstract
This book, originally published in Dutch, describes the making of the 2014 Dutch translation Bijbel in Gewone Taal (“The Bible in plain language”; Netherlands Bible Society). The translation was done in seven years by a group of twelve translators.
The book sets out by claiming somewhat boldly that the Bijbel in Gewone Taal (BGT) is “the clearest translation of the Bible ever made in Dutch” (vii). As the title of the book already suggests, a defining feature of BGT is its use of plain language, that is, language that uses “well-known words” (27), and which may thus be understood by an average reader. Presumably, the effect of this is that BGT can be more easily understood by the average reader compared to older Dutch translations, since these either are less idiomatic or tend to have a higher rate of theological or typically “biblical” language. This book therefore claims that BGT presents something fundamentally new to the Dutch public.
Chapter 1 is a presentation of the general ideas behind BGT. The chapter outlines the main principle of the translation, which is described as “the norm of clarity and comprehensibility” (16; emphasis removed). Chapter 2 consists of a number of arguments for the use of plain language. This includes a thorough discussion and definition of what plain language is, and of how to use it. Departing from contemporary linguistic research, the author states that plain language is not something subjective, but that it can be objectively and statistically defined. In its essence, plain language is “high-frequency language,” and is distinguished from “slang, trendy, or highly informal language” (27). Chapters 3 and 4 outline the foundational norms of comprehensibility and clarity, respectively; chapter 3 discusses comprehensibility as a general character of the kind of target text that BGT seeks to be, and chapter 4 defines a number of clarification strategies that are used to achieve a comprehensible text. Chapter 5 outlines BGT's position when it comes to traditional biblical terms; chapter 6 does the same but for biblical figurative language. Finally, chapter 7 briefly discusses the reception of BGT by the Dutch public in 2014.
The author has written a clear, well-structured, and highly interesting book. After having described the basic structure of the book, I will now discuss a couple of matters a bit more in depth.
One of those matters concerns what difference there really is between BGT and other dynamic-equivalent translations, of which we have seen so many since the 1960s. After all, many readers will likely perceive BGT with its plain language as yet another dynamic-equivalent translation. However, as I understand it from having read the book, there are at least two important differences between this and many other contemporary translations: (1) the insistence on clearly demarcating and outlining the skopos (objective) of the translation, and (2) defining the potential readers of the new translation. The latter, in particular, is a welcome contribution to the discussion of one of the most fundamental questions of biblical (and literary) translation, namely that of equivalence and effect. If a certain translation is intended to produce a certain effect on the target text readers, then who are these readers? It seems that one of the weaknesses of Nida and Taber's original work, The Theory and Practice of Translation (1969), was that this question was never properly answered, which produces a considerable hermeneutical problem. But it is an unavoidable question which should be answered before any translation is carried out. For example, we know something about the first generations of Christians for whom the New Testament texts were intended—but what type of readership does a modern translation have in mind? If this question is not answered, then the aim of producing a certain kind of effect on the target text readers would by definition be almost impossible. If the readership of a certain translation is not clearly defined, then it risks becoming a translation for anyone and everyone—that is, in a worst-case scenario, for no one. The book makes a very valuable contribution to the general discussion of this important problem in biblical translation.
One of the most helpful things in the book is the discussion of the old dichotomy between “literal” and “free” (56–59). This is an essential question: In what respect is BGT (or any other Bible translation) actually a translation of the source text? As noted above, many of its readers will spontaneously perceive BGT as a “free” translation, perhaps even as a paraphrase. This is likely a natural reaction, due to the clarification strategies used, which entail restructuring the source text in various ways. But, as the author argues, BGT cannot just be loosely defined as “free” only because it translates in a specific way: “The so-called ‘free’ nature of BGT must therefore be qualified as follows: The translation decisions are not ‘free,’ but are tightly connected to the objective of the project and the criteria set out to reach this objective” (58).
One consequence of BGT's foundational norm is that it certainly does not translate “word for word.” Nor does it translate “verse for verse,” but rather with the pericope as the basic unit (59). The translators rearranged and merged verses where they deemed it necessary: “The more a translation aims at comprehensibility, the more frequently information is rearranged and, as a result, verses are merged” (65). Yes, actually, why not? Why slavishly follow verse divisions and numberings, which, after all, stem from a late period of the transmission of the biblical source texts? Surely the texts themselves must be our primary concern as Bible translators.
At the end of chapter 3, the author sums up: “The examples discussed in this chapter show that the desired clarity is the result of carefully following explicit translation procedures, not of a free reworking or rewriting of the text” (82). Thus, a translation may not only be judged from the actual target text it has produced, from the text an sich. Instead, any translation is contingent upon a number of contextual factors, such as the skopos or the foundational norms outlined. For example, who would criticize the Buber–Rosenzweig translation for trying to reproduce various source-text wordplays, resulting in an awkward target text, when this in fact was something consciously strived for by the translators?
I have lingered on two fundamental problems in Bible translation that this book fruitfully discusses: equivalence and effect; and skopos, including translational norms associated with it. In my mind, the arguments of the book are powerful and convincing. As noted above, the book states that BGT presents something fundamentally new to the Dutch public. The book also discusses important issues every Bible translator has to deal with, and it does so in a profound, and at times innovative, way. It should be an important source for Bible translators, as well as for theoretical reflection on the various problems of biblical translation.