http://worldcat.org/entity/work/id/34357057

A critical examination of the New Testament of the Contemporary English Version and its translation philosophy

This study investigates the claim of the translators of the Contemporary English Version (CEV) that this translation is in keeping with the "spirit" of the King James Version. Both the translation philosophy and the accuracy of the New Testament text of the CEV were analyzed. A product of the American Bible Society and heavily influenced by Eugene Nida's translation philosophy, the CEV translators employee the dynamic equivalence method of translation. Though the KJV translators were aware of dynamic equivalence, they chose rather to use the formal correspondence method of translation. Since the KJV translators sought to improve existing English translations in their day, this study compared the two polar methods of translation to determine whether dynamic equivalence methodology was superior to formal correspondence. If so, then the CEV translators could still claim to have produced a translation in keeping with the "spirit" of the KJV. The dangers of dynamic equivalence, however, outweighed the advantages, and formal correspondence appears to be the better of the two translation philosophies. The target audience of the CEV translators differs significantly from that of the KJV. The former targets the non-churched primarily, whereas the latter targeted the Church. A survey of each New Testament book revealed that the apostles wrote primarily to the Church. The difference in target audience explains the absence of theological terminology in the CEV. Also significant is the CEV's treatment of gender and race. The translators' use of gender-inclusive language and their treatment of the Greek phrase oi Ioudaioi (the Jews) obscured meaning. The analysis of the translation of the text in part two revealed that the CEV fell short of the beauty and accuracy of the KJV. By failing to translate some of the imagery inherent in the Greek text, the CEV is less vivid at times then the KJV. This finding is especially important because the CED translators contend that more people hear the word of God read then actually read it for themselves. When portrayed vividly, the truths of Scripture are much more memorable to the listener. Furthermore, translator interpretation adversely affects both key doctrines and individual verses. Though the CEV employees fresh phraseology and modern wording, overall it is not an improvement over the KJV. - Abstract.

Open All Close All