Introduction

Chapter 1

NETS Translation Procedures

Comment: Though departures from any text edition, including critical editions, are allowed they are not encouraged. In other words, translators must have solid reasons for setting aside any given reading in the Greek edition on which their English translation is based. Moreover, all departures from the base text which affect the meaning in English must be carefully and fully noted (see 4a below).

Comment: NETS focuses on translator's intent rather than on audience perception. That is to say, NETS attempts to reflect the manner in which the Greek translator intended his text to be understood rather than the manner in which a Greek audience might understand that text. While from a purely statistical

(p.10)
point of view "translator's intent" and "audience perception" will most often coincide, such coincidence should be demonstrated rather than presupposed. Not infrequently, however, "translator's intent" (in distinction from possible perceptions by the readers) is circumscribed or dictated by the meaning of the Hebrew text (see the "Introduction to Psalms.)

Comment: NETS strives to maximize synoptic use of the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures. To that end all modifications of the NRSV should reflect as closely as possible what meaningful differences exist between the Greek and Hebrew texts and, conversely, no departures from the NRSV should be introduced without good reason. As in the case of Article 5, a useful modus operandi might be: "Retain what you can, but change what you must."

NRSV: the NRSV is availalable in electronic form, including the deutero canonical books (Apocrypha). Since the National Council of Churches retains the control of the NRSV, the NETS project will need to insure that its members are acting responsibly in using these materials for our purposes.

LXX/OG (Rahlfs), with morphological analysis: the two-volume Rahlfs handbook edition of LXX/OG, with all known typographical errors corrected, is available either by itself, or with morphological analysis (not completely verified yet). The latter is especially valuable for determining the degree of consistency of translational practice at the grammatical and syntactical levels, and can be used very effectively alongside the parallel Hebrew-Greek text (see below). Currently, the LXX/OG Morph files are available on the gopher at ccat.sas.upenn.edu, under archives of CCAT > religious texts > biblical. Table 1 contains a sample (coding is available with the files).

BHS, with morphological analysis. Similarly, the morphologically tagged MT/BHS material is also available, as well as the BHS text by itself (with or without vocalization and/or cantillation). Again, this information will prove most effective in conjunction with the Greek morphological patterns, and the basic information contained in the parallel Hebrew // Greek files. Currently, information about the BHS Morph

files is available on the gopher at ccat.sas.upenn.edu, under archives of CCAT > religious texts > biblical. Table 2 contains a sample.

The Parallel Hebrew-Greek texts: probably most basic for the tasks of translating is the parallel Hebrew-Greek text, which can be searched for patterns, anomalies, etc., on either side of the evidence. Further help with interpreting the evidence can also be gained by observing the annotations on differences between the two texts that Emanuel Tov and his team have supplied in the full form of these files [Footnote 7 See Tov, A Computerized Data Base for Septuagint Studies: the Parallel Aligned Text of the Greek and Hebrew Bible. (Computer Assisted Tools for Septuagint Studies 2 = Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages Supplementary Series 1, Stellenbosch, 1986). The unannotated parallel texts are available on the gopher at ccat.sas.upenn.edu, under archives of CCAT > religious texts > biblical. Table 3 contains a sample.

Greek textual variants (for some sections): the CATSS project to encode all published Greek variants to the LXX/OG texts continues at the University of Pennsylvania, and some of the results are available or can be made available. Currently, samples may be seen on the gopher at ccat.sas.upenn.edu, under archives of CCAT > religious texts > supplemental. It should be remembered, however, that NETS translators are not encouraged to deviate from the Greek text which forms the basis for their English translation, though such deviation is allowed.

Greek Lexica: an electronic version of the full LSJones lexicon has recently been prepared, and we will attempt to add it to the available tools. The

Table 4. Jonah 1:6
<1KAI\>1
<1EI)=PEN>1
+<<1PROS>1 A'`-410-764 86{mg} Bas.N.
<1AU)TW=|>1 W 86{c} Clem.] > 86{*} Arm
    : <1AUTON>1 A'`-410-764 86{mg}
    Bas.N.
<1*TI/>1] > 106(~)
<1SU\>1] > Syh
+ <1TI/>1 106(~)
+<<1KAQEUDEIS>1 Syp
+ <1KAI>1 Syp
<1R(E/GXEIS>1]
    : <1REGXEI>1 S{*}
;
<1A)NA/STA>1 W(vid.) Chr. II 310]
    : <1ANASTHQI>1 S{c} Q{c} <2L>2'-86(mg)-613 <2C>2'(-538)-68-239
Clem.Cyr.{F}(2nd): cf. Mich. 2:10
    : <1ANASTAS>1 <2lII>2

(p. 24)

brief Newman Lexicon to the Greek New Testament is already available, and it is possible to find the "middle" Liddell-Scott from some distributors.

Hebrew lexica: it is possible that some of the information found in BDB can be made available; otherwise, the less-valuable, old Hebrew lexicon by Davidson is in electronic form.

1. English translations. since NETS is an English translation of the Greek, other English translations such as Thomson and Brenton are always of interest, often of direct help, but sometimes to be ignored. Hard copy of these, for individual units, can be made available.
   
2. Lexica: along with standard Greek and Hebrew lexica, the following work may be used with great profit: E. A. Nida, and J. P. Louw (eds) Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (2 vols.; New York, 1988).
   

Chapter 2

Introduction to Greek Psalms

It is usually necessary to have three types of Scriptures: (1) a translation which will reflect the traditional usage and be used in the churches, largely for liturgical purposes (this may be called an "ecclesiastical translation"), (2) a translation in the present -day literary language, so as to communicate to the well-educated constituency, and (3) a translation in the "common" or "popular" language, which is known to and used by the common people, and which is at the same time acceptable as a standard for published materials. [Footnote 1 E. A. Nida and C. R. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden, 1982), p. 31]

Greek Text

Translating a Translation

Semantic Scale or Spectrum

The Greek Translator of the Psalter

Categories of Renderings

1. The choice of the Greek word or lexeme may be based primarily on contextual requirements and, as a result, no standard (a term intended to refer exclusively to frequency
   
   (p. 38)
   of occurrence, not primacy of meaning) Hebrew-Greek equivalency is established. For obvious reasons, this kind of rendering occurs typically but by no means exclusively on the verbal (i.e. the least concrete) side of the language and less often on the nominal (i.e. the most concrete) side. For example, (LC (BDB: "rejoice/exult") which occurs four times in Psalms, is translated by three quite distinct Greek verbs: AGALLIAOMAI ("rejoice") and KATAGELAO ("deride"), KAUCHAOMAI ("boast"). On the nominal side, one might cite (Z (BDB:"strength/might") which is often translated by words signifying power or strength, such as DYNAMIS (20x), ISCHYS (4x), KRATOS (4x) but also AGIASMA ("sanctity"), AGIOSYNE ("holiness"), AINOS ("praise"), BOETHOS ("helper"), DOXA ("glory") and TIME ("honour"). It is to be borne in mind, of course, that terms such as "verbal" and "nominal" are to be taken more in a semantic than a morphological sense. That is to say, semantic classifications into objects, actions/events, attributes/characteristics and relationals are of greater importance than word classes based on formal characteristics.
   Not unexpectedly, in numerical terms the majority of renderings in the Psalter fall into this contextualized category.
   
2. The choice of Greek lexeme may be based less on contextual sense than on perceived Hebrew-Greek verbal equivalency. The result is a combination of standard and non-standard equivalents. That is to say, though a given Greek lexeme is established as an unmarked or default rendering, exceptions do appear. Thus M$P+ (BDB: "judgment") is almost always glossed by KRIMA ("judgment") (41x) or KRISIS ("judgment") (21x) and only once each by DIATAXIS ("arrangement"), DIKE ("right"), and PROSTAGMA ("decree"). Needless to say, the line of demarcation between categories 1 and 2 is a fluid one and can, moreover, best be drawn on a case by case basis.
   We include in this category of renderings so-called closed Greek-Hebrew equations, which, however, are in all
   
   (p. 39)
   their individual occurrences fully concordant with the context, due to the high degree of semantic overlap between the given Hebrew and Greek counterparts.
   
3. The choice of Greek lexeme may be based primarily on the perceived meaning of isolated words and results a stereotyped equivalent. That is to say, not only is the established Hebrew-Greek equivalence rarely if ever departed from, but more importantly in some of its uses the Greek word or phrase stands in tension with its context. In fact, it is precisely the latter characteristic that distinguishes a stereotype from other standard or closed Greek-Hebrew equations which, however, fit smoothly into all their contexts.
   Since stereotypes clearly arise out of a perceived one-to-one Hebrew-Greek equivalence, it comes as no surprise that they share certain features with what we have termed isolate translations.
   In our perception, a true stereotype, in which the semantic range of the Hebrew word is adjusted to fit that of its Greek counterpart, exists only for its creator. That is to say, a given translator may create a stereotype (due to his strained use of lexemes) but if such an item becomes fully contextualized, through continued use within the Greek reading/speaking-community, it turns into a calque, i.e., a Greek word with a Hebrew meaning, so to speak (see further below). As noted above and true to the meaning of the term, a stereotype (unlike a calque) smacks of woodenness and strained use. Items in the Psalter include PIKRAINO ("embitter"), YPOMONE ("endurance") + verbal cognates, THELO ("want") + nominal cognates, EIS TELOS ("completely"), NEPHROS ("kidney") etc.
   To the extent that one can speak of points on a continuum, it is from this point onward on the semantic scale that the Hebrew semantic range of a given lexeme should be regarded as dominant, as has been noted above. That is to say, whereas a stereotype may be said to carry the meaning of the target language (Greek), a calque must effectively be
   
   (p. 40)
   assigned the meaning of its counterpart in the source language (Hebrew).
   
4. Sometimes the selected Greek lexeme is a calque, that is to say, an item moulded by prior linguistic usage rather than one shaped, on an ad hoc basis, by the individual translator. In other words, we perceive a calque to be a stereotype that has been acclimatized to the host language. Consequently, the semantic range of a calque is fully concordant with its context and may thus be viewed effectively as having regained its Hebrew meaning. An obvious example is DIATHEKE, a word which no doubt began its life in Jewish usage as a stereotype, but which in the Psalter is clearly a calque and therefore appropriately glossed or translated by "covenant" (in the sense of Hebrew BRYT rather than extra-biblical Greek "testament"). Others are deictic IDOU ("behold"), recitative LEGON ("saying"), SOTERIA ("salvation") + cognates, ELEOS ("steadfast love"), PAROIK- ("sojourn"), KYRIOS ("Lord"), and other words typically of central religious importance to the translator. On the more structural side we have the ways of dealing with the infinitive absolute etc.
   As is clear from the above delineation, the essential difference between a stereotype and a calque is perceived to be one of degree of integration into the target (Greek) language. In practical terms, however, the distinction is not always easily made, mainly for two reasons: (1) the early stage of development from stereotype to calque may pre-date our written corpus of literature (this is particularly true in the oldest portion of our corpus, namely, the Greek Pentateuch) and (2) the positing of such development entails questions about the relative chronology of the books or translational units within our corpus. For example, one more than suspects that important religious terms such as DIATHEKE ("covenant") and NOMOS ("law") had already received calque status by the time the translation enterprise commenced. For example, the determination that THELO ("want") + cognates is a calque rather than a stereotype in
   
   (p. 41)
   the Psalter means that the translator of Psalms was the first to make it the standard and rigid equivalent of H.PS. .
   
5. The choice of Greek lexeme may be based purely on the perceived meaning of individual words in (virtual) semantic isolation, resulting in isolate translations. Typically, etymology of the Hebrew word plays a central role. By way of illustration, in Ps 7:7 Hebrew (BRH (BDB: "overflow, arrogance, fury") is translated, via (BR = PERAN ("across"), by PERAS ("end")--- a word representing entirely different Hebrew lexemes elsewhere in Psalms----and the Greek line as a whole should be glossed something like: "Be exalted at the ends (deaths) of my enemies." A glance at Ps 38:5 (39:5 MT) confirms that PERAS within the Psalter can indeed refer to the terminus of human life. Or should one translate with Thomson "Exalt Thyself in the borders of mine enemies"? Whatever the case, as a result of the translator's histrionics his text, on the one hand, means something quite different from MT and, on the other, is scarcely intelligible in Greek. Of course, there can be little doubt that contemporary as well as succeeding readers of the Greek Psalms, in all such cases would maximize context and minimize the individual lexemes; but a modern translator who seeks to uncover the Greek translator's intent is more restricted.
   As has been noted repeatedly, the semantic spectrum or scale we have tried to portray is wholly continuous. Consequently, the lines of demarcation we have suggested should not be overdrawn.
   Given the difference in vocabulary stock, between Hebrew and Greek, it is not in and of itself surprising to find a relatively large number of one-to-many equations. Thus, for example, ANTILEMPTOR and BOETHOS translate seven Hebrew words each. It would be incorrect to suggest, however, that one-to-many equations obtain exclusively in the Greek-Hebrew relationship. The reverse also occurs, particularly on the verbal side of the language (including the semantic category of "events"). Hebrew $WB, for example, is
   
   (p. 42)
   rendered by eleven Greek lexemes. Nevertheless, in view of our task at hand, we are interested in the process solely from a Hebrew to Greek perspective, and in the semantic shifts it entails.
   Clearly, in creating Hebrew-Greek equivalences, at times the translator was motivated not simply by linguistic considerations but by ideological ones. Interestingly, for instance, when (NH and $M( have the deity as subject they are given exclusive Greek equivalents, EISAKOUO/EPAKOUO and EISAKOUO respectively. Since such equations occur in (virtually) identical contexts, we have felt free to adopt a single English gloss, in the cases in question.
   
   

Problems of Grammar

1. One of the most problematic of these is the tense-aspect equation. Quite clearly, the Greek translator of Psalms worked with a set of unmarked or default equivalences. Thus the Hebrew prefixed form equals future indicative, the affixed form equals aorist indicative and the participle equals present indicative. Fortunately, though these equations constitute his default mode, apparent concern for contextual sense did not allow him to adhere to them rigidly. When all is said and done, however, infelicitous and even awkward use of Greek tenses is not an infrequent occurrence. An arbitrary example must suffice. NRSV renders 6:7(6):
   
   

I am weary (= suffixed form) with my moaning;
every night I flood (= prefixed form) my bed with tears;
I drench (= prefixed form) my couch with my weeping

I was/became weary (= aorist) with my moaning;
every night I will wash (= future) my couch;
with tears I will (= future) wet my bed

1. A similar and perhaps equally thorny problem involves the use of prepositions in a translation. Since their primary linguistic function is that of indicating relationships between constituents of a sentence, semanticists have included them under the heading of relationals (in distinction from objects, actions/events, and characteristics). At the same time, however, prepositions, though clearly semantically bleached, are not lexically empty (as is the case, for example, with case inflections). It would seem, therefore, that because of their dual role as relationals (structural morphemes) and lexemes ([bleached] lexical morphemes)
   
   (p. 44)
   they cause particularly serious problems when treated by a translator as (virtual) isolates. All readers of the Septuagint will no doubt be able to supply their own lists of bloopers. Clearly, for the English translator faced with such infelicities in the Greek there are no easy and obvious solutions. We have been guided by a number of considerations. Though prepositions do have some lexical content (and thus might be treated like full lexemes), it is equally true that they tend to have an extraordinarily wide range of possible meanings (in comparison with full lexemes or words). Consequently, one assigns unmarked/default meaning to them at some risk. Moreover, since prepositions typically function as complements of verbs, their meaning is integrally bound up with verbs. From that perspective, it is difficult to see how they could be given any kind of independent semantic status, even from the Greek translator's perspective. In many cases, therefore, their misuse has been judged a matter of style rather than one of semantic difference. As a result, we have taken note of only those instances which mark a fairly clear semantic shift in the Greek away from the Hebrew. Differently put, when a translator clearly deviates from his default Hebrew-Greek equations, one may with some confidence conclude that he is interpretively at work.
   
2. Another primarily structural item is conjunctive KAI, the standard gloss for Hebrew W. Understandably, the NRSV renders the latter often by "and" but also in a number of other ways. Since one is dealing here with an item that, like prepositions, has minimal lexical content, we have not changed the NRSV when it quantitatively corresponds to the LXX. At times, however, the NRSV has chosen (for reasons of English style) not to represent Hebrew W. Again in such cases we have followed the NRSV wherever the LXX simply uses KAI, lest we suggest that MT and LXX are textually at variance in such cases. When on the other hand, the LXX deviates from its default mode by using a marked equivalent, such as E("or") or DE ("but"), we have
   
   (p. 45)
   revised the NRSV accordingly, since the item has been counted as an interpretive variation from the NRSV, though it quantitatively equals MT. Naturally, wherever MT and LXX are quantitatively at odds, we have revised the NRSV. In sum then, these have been our two guiding principles: (a) when the MT and LXX quantitatively disagree we have reflected this difference, and (b) when the MT and LXX quantitatively agree against NRSV, we have revised the latter only if LXX uses a nonstandard (i.e. marked) equivalent.
   
   

Practical Steps

Select Bibliography:

Standard lexica and grammars

Appendix 1

Statement of Principles

Appendix 2

Selected Psalms

Psalm 4

1. Unto completion, among psalms. An Ode
   for Dauid.
   
   
2. (1) When I would call, the God of my righteousness listened to
      me!
   You gave me room when I was in distress.
   Have compassion on me, and listen to my prayer.
   
   
3. (2) How long, you people, will you be dull-witted?^a
   Why do you love vanity, and seek after falsehood?
   
   Interlude on strings
   
   
4. (3) But know that the Lord made his devout to be
      marvelous;
   the Lord will listen to me when I cry to him.
   
   
5. (4) Become angry, but do not sin;
   speak in your hearts and on your beds be pricked^b.
   
   Interlude on strings
   
   
6. (5) Offer a sacrifice of righteousness,
   and hope in the Lord.
   
   
7. (6) There are many who say, "Who will show us
      good things!
   The light of your face was ^cmade a sign^c upon us, O
      Lord!"
   
8. (7) You put gladness in my heart;
   because of the season of their grain and wine and oil
      they multiplied.
   
   
9. (8) I shall both lie down and sleep in peace;
   for you alone, O Lord, settled me in hope.
   

Psalm 7

1. A Psalm for Dauid, which he sang to the
    Lord because of the words of Chusi son of Iemeni.
   
   
2. (1) O Lord my God, in you I hoped;
   save me from all my pursuers, and deliver me,
   
3. (2) or like a lion they will seize me,
   with no one to redeem or save.
   
   
4. (3) O Lord my God, if I did this,
   if there is injustice in my hands,
   
5. (4) if I repaid with evil those who were doing me
      wrong,
   then may I afall away empty froma my
      enemies;
   
6. (5) mayb the enemy pursue and overtake me,
   trample my life to the ground,
   and make my glory pitch a tent in the dust.
   
   Interlude on strings
   
   
7. (6) Rise up, O Lord, in your wrath;
   be exalted ^cin the borders^c of my enemies;
   and^d wake up, O my^e God, because of the decree
      which you issued.
   
8. (7) The congregation of the peoples shall be gathered
      around you;
   and above^f it return on high.
   
9. (8) The Lord will judge the peoples;
   judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness
   and according to the innocence that is in me.
   
   
10. (9) O let the evil of sinners be brought to an end,
    but you shall direct the righteous person;
    God is one who tests hearts and kidneys.^g
    
11. (10) Right is my help from God,
    who saves the upright in heart.
    
12. (11) God is a righteous judge,^h
    not bringing on wrath every day.
    
    
13. (12) If you do not turn back, he will make his sword
       gleam;
    he bent his bow and prepared it;
    
14. (13) and with it he prepared his implements of death;
    he forged his arrows ⁱfor those that are being burnt.ⁱ
    
15. (14) See how they were in travail with injustice;
    they conceived toil,
    and brought forth lawlessness.
    
16. (15) They dug a pit and cleaned it out,
    and shall fall into the hole they made.
    
17. (16) Their toil shall return upon their own heads,
    and on their own pates their injustice shall descend.
    
    
18. (17) I will give to the Lord the acknowledgement due to
       his righteousness,
    and make music to the name of the Lord, the Most
       High. I am here
    

Psalm 20 (21)

1. Unto completion. A Psalm for Dauid.
   
   
2. (1) In your might the king shall rejoice, O Lord,
   and in your salvation he shall exult greatly!
   
3. (2) You gave him his heart's^a desire,
   and did not deprive him of the wish of his lips.
   
   Interlude on strings
   
   
4. (3) For you anticipated him with blessings of kindness;
   you set a crown of precious stone on his head.
   
5. (4) He asked you for life, and you gave it to him--
   length of days forever and ever.
   
6. (5) His glory is great through your saving act;
   glory and majesty you will bestow on him.
   
7. (6) You will give him blessing forever and ever;
   you make him glad with joy through your presence.
   
8. (7) For the king hopes in the Lord,
   and through the steadfast love of the Most High he
      shall not be shaken.
   
9. (8) ^bMay your hand be found for all your enemies; ^b
   may your right hand find all those who hate you.
   
10. (9) You will make them like a fiery oven
    at the time of your presence.
    The Lord will confound them in his wrath,
    and fire will devour them.
    
11. (10) You will destroy their offspring from the earth,
    and their children from among humankind,
    
12. (11) because they turned evils against you,
    they devised a plan, which they could never carry
       out.
    
13. (12) For you will ^cplace them as a back;^{c
    d}in your remnants you will prepare their face^d.
    
    
14. (13) Be exalted, O Lord, in your might!
    We will sing and make music to your sovereignty.