| Kommentar | @#208: -Okay, I don't understand "gebongt". -eine/die Wurzel . . . na und? I imagine lots of sayings have changed over the course of time; I can point to several in English. -The original is Greek; according to Random House Dictionary of Proverbs and Sayings the phrase first appears in English around 1000 AD and derives from the Bible passage I cited (1 Tim. 6:10). So, you can postulate one of three things: 1) the phrase entered English through the Bible but originated in German independent of either English or the Bible; 2) the phrase entered English through the Bible and then was borrowed by German, so it really is a 6-gear phrase; 3) the phrase entered both languages through the Bible. I think option 3 is the most likely. -The Bible, in both English and German, was an influential book; much of what we say and how we say it in both languages has been influenced by the Bible in the vernacular. So, there may be more that would have sounded 6-gear to a speaker in the 1000s - 1600s than to us. However, there are various principles involved in translation, and the English Bible and German Bible had different origins. The KJV was translated by a committee, which has advantages and disadvantages. In addition, the committee had a number of prior translations with which to compare their work: Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops Bible (to name just three). Furthermore, the KJV was working with a fairly well-established language (Shakespeare had already written many of his plays). The aim was for a literary translation that could be used in public reading in churches. Luther was working alone and putting the finishing touches on the creation of a new language (already forged in the chanceries of the HRE) and intended to write a more down-to-earth translation that anyone could read; he looked for powerful figures of speech and word pictures, and even created a few himself. In addition, whenever translating any work there is a tension between staying true to the original to the point of woodenness or even incomprehensibility in the target language* ("literal") and getting the main idea across vividly and comprehensibly ("dynamic equivalents"). Add to this misunderstandings of the original text, guesses at what rare words mean, and attempts to translate essentially untranslatable elements in one language into another, and you can get two very different versions of a work, even within the same language let alone between two different languages; you can compare some of the versions in German to see what can happen in translation (Luther, Schlachter, Elberfelder, Hoffnung für Alle - just to name four). Thus no, the Bible won't necessarily sound 6-gear throughout.
Oh, BTW, which sounded 6-gear to you? The English or the German?
*An example of this may be seen in the translation of the Bible into Sango (a language in Central Africa). Micah 7:19 says that God will cast sins "into the depths of the sea" (und alle unsre Sünden in die Tiefen des Meeres werfen). That is an image that means something to someone connected with the sea (both England and German were seafaring nations). It is meaningless to a Central African, who has never seen the sea and has no concept of its size. However, the central idea is that of getting rid of sins permanently. In Central Africa, the grass in places grows taller than a person, and if something is dropped into that grass it can be lost forever. So, the decision for one version of the Bible in Sango was to translate it "God will throw our sins into the tall grass". |
|---|