查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 再思《聖經》「概念合一」語法的翻譯
- 《樂仁聖經》中譯本翻譯計畫的理念與實務經驗
- When "Yahweh" Is Replaced to "Utux Tmninun": Locating and Re-reading Exodus 6:3 in Sediq Bible
- 聖經翻譯的疑與難
- 一個搖滾神話的建構與解構--一九九○年代的Jim Morrison再現與詮釋循環
- The Author's Intention in the Seal
- 前衛運動、現代主義與後現代主義(2)
- 韋伯「官僚化」理論之研究
- 李義山無題詩詮釋新論
- Scriptures and Their Popularization: The Case of the Lun-yu and Hsiao-ching in the Han Dynasty
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 再思《聖經》「概念合一」語法的翻譯=Rethinking Bible Translations Using "Conceptual Unity" Syntax |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 周復初; 謝仁壽; | 書刊名 | 編譯論叢 |
| 卷 期 | 11:1 2018.03[民107.03] |
| 頁 次 | 頁23-60 |
| 分類號 | 811.7 |
| 關鍵詞 | 聖經翻譯; 特定語法; 概念合一; 詮釋; 全球對話; Bible translation; Syntax; Conceptual unity; Interpretation; Global dialogue; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 新約《聖經》有許多「概念合一」的語句,其中τοῦ θεοῦ(神)καὶ(與)σωτῆρος(救主)是一個對基督論而言重要的詞組,但《欽定本》和《美國標準本》皆未顧及這特定語法,是待《英國修訂版》和《新標準修訂版》修訂後才表達出「概念合一」。《和合本》和《現代中文譯本》也未顧及這特定語法,而《思高本》、《聖經恢復本》和《聖經新漢語譯本》的翻譯才表達「概念合一」。另一個重要詞組是ὁ θεὸς(神)καὶ(與)πατὴρ(父),英語和西班牙語譯本皆譯出καί,且多位西方神學家指稱,「主耶穌基督的神與父」是神的「新約頭銜」和「正式慣用語」,取代「亞伯拉罕的神、以撒的神、雅各的神」這舊約頭銜;但大多數漢語譯本不譯連詞καί,只譯為「父神」,未表達「概念合一」,且大多數漢語註釋書也就未提及這「新約頭銜」及其詮釋。兩種的翻譯與詮釋各因英漢語法傳統而有其合理性,但以全球對話視角觀之,其間的歧異是不容忽視的 |
| 英文摘要 | There is an exegetical form of syntax in the New Testament that expresses "conceptual unity". The passage τοῦθεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος is christologically significant and fits the requirements of "Sharp's rule", whereas the King James Version and American Standard Version did not adopt Sharp's rule. The English Revised Version and New Revised Standard Version, however, were revised precisely in order to express this "conceptual unity". Another important passage, ὁθεὸς καὶ πατὴρ, is a literal rendering of "the God and Father". Many Western theologians have claimed that "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" is the "New Testament title" and the "solemn formula" of God, which they felt needed to replace God's Old Testament title "the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob". The majority of Chinese Bible translations rendering Fu Shen 父神 as "God the Father" did not express this "conceptual unity". Furthermore, the majority of Chinese theologians never even mentioned this New Testament title with its various interpretations. Such differences may make mutual understanding in global dialogues between and among Christians much more difficult. Therefore, a rethinking of Bible translations using "conceptual unity" syntax may be called for |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。