Biblica (IBS & STL merged) have announced that the Committee for Bible Translation is to revise the NIV, to be published in 2011 by Zondervan, and will take the TNIV off the market at that time. The announcement is here, and Justin Taylor as usual summarises it well here.
As I think that the NIV was too male chauvinistic, and the TNIV too far in 'gender neutrality,' this should be interesting. I wonder how much the ESV has harmed sales of the TNIV in the USA? Certainly it seems here that the NIV remained the main translation of choice, so to replace both makes commercial sense.
[HT: Rob]
Love the Church Like Jesus
2 hours ago
8 comments:
I don't think I'd even heard about the TNIV until I became interested in Bible translation. None of the Evangelical churches in Cambridge (as far as I know) use it.
The impression I've got from reading about the history of the TNIV saga is that many American evangelicals reacted very strongly against the TNIV. Some I would say went far too far (e.g. Wayne Grudem). As a result the sales of the TNIV have (presumably) been rather poor.
I suspect the lack of sales is the main driver for ditching the TNIV and going with NIV 2011, but given that the gender issues were the thing that the American evangelicals reacted against, and as Moo said "I can't predict what will happen with gender usage. My guess would be we made a lot of the right decisions for the T-NIV but every one of those is open for consideration. We may even be returning to what we had in the 1984 NIV," I suspect what will happen is that the most controversial gender changes will be rolled back (like where OT prophecy seems to refer to Jesus e.g. Psalm 8:4) but the general approach of using people or brothers and sisters where the NIV had men will remain (which let's be honest, the ESV almost does - it does in it's footnotes anyway).
I'm curious - what about the NIV did you find chauvinistic ? Which translation(s) do you favour?
Oops. Didn't click the box to get emailed follow-ups.
I'm amused by the marketing speak on the article - it's the first major revision to the NIV in 25 years... but isn't that what the TNIV was meant to be?
...the NIV was too male chauvinistic...
?!!
Hi Dan, thanks for stopping by! When listening to the NIV being read while reading along in my ESV, I'm not infrequently surprised by a specifically masculine reading in the NIV which doesn't need to be so for good translation. My father, who was on the NIV UK advisory committee, realised after publicising it that it 'is more male chauvinist than the AV in places.' I've never bothered to catalogue those places, however, so it'll have to remain anecdotal! My knowledge of Greek is extremely limited (I'm slowly working on it!) but my linguistic knowledge generally isn't bad, and from speaking French I certainly don't baulk at the idea of man / brothers, etc., being gender inclusive - nevertheless, I have found the 1984 NIV strangely & unecessarily masculine in translation. It was all the replacing of singular man where it was clearly The Man = Adam (fail) => Christ which was my main problem with the TNIV when others were using it. Obscures Ps.8, Hebrews 2, etc. I look forward to seeing if they do indeed improve the NIV, but I'm happy with ESV for myself. Just a bit clunky on NT narrative. I'm afraid the Holman's not going to catch on over here, because it's American, seems attached to one denom., and sounds more like a brand of mayonnaise than anything. ;)
From elsewhere on the interblog:
"Name suggeston: Today’s Even Newer International Version."
*bwhaha*
No matter what the translation, we must be careful that the true MEANING is not tainted, or changed…we cannot add or take away words, lets not forget what it says in the last book of Revelations.
Yes Jeff, indeed we need to take care with the meaning and be faithful to the wording, which is the hard task in translating from one language (mostly NT Greek) to another, and why there's so much healthy scholarly discussion about Bible translation. What counts as 'adding' words in any translation is difficult to say, even if all concerned are very much committed to the spirit of Rev.22:18-19.
Post a Comment