Over the past year, the bible translations I have most been using have been the English Standard Version (ESV) for Sunday School and web quotes and Today’s New International Version (TNIV) for personal reading. This compares to being brought up on a the New International Version (NIV).
But I find difficult is if the translation is not Anglicised, i.e. Commonwealth or British English. Although it shouldn’t matter, I find it very off-putting when words are spelt in a way I am not used to, honor instead of honour, counselor instead of counsellor, savior instead of saviour and others.
But reading Philippians last week, I came across garbage in my Anglicised TNIV. It should have read ‘rubbish’ as my Anglicised NIV says. Is this a mistake?
Phillippians 3:8b;
Anglicised NIV: I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ…
Anglicised TNIV: I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ…
But looking further, I see that the non-Anglicised NIV has ‘rubbish’ and not garbage. This means that in updating the NIV with the TNIV, they have chosen to replace ‘rubbish’ with ‘garbage’. This may work for US English, but it does not work for British English. There is no way I could stand at the front of church and use ‘garbage’, I would have to change it. I consider this an error.
And reading, on the Better Bibles Blog, I see that there are many differences with the British English TNIV.
3 comments
Comments feed for this article
20 April 2007 at 7:37 am
markrmorris2
Sorry, I lost you at “spelt”. You aren’t the only one, even though I’m about as American as they come I still get aggravated with my word processor gagging over continental spellings. Growing up without a Tv I consumed a lot of Dickens, Kipling, Robert Louis Stevenson and the like and the spelling habits you learn young die hard, so don’t feel too bad.
20 May 2007 at 5:04 pm
Anonymous
Hi, I found it helpful to review the Greek word behind refuse and garbage: σκυβαλα
“what is thrown to the dogs, i.e. refuse”
(See http://bible.cc/philippians/3-8.htm)
So, rather than impose a current word and meaning on this, I think it’s important to consider – how were dogs regarded at the time of the writing of the New Testament? Lowly, I believe, and even worse. Cross-referencing “dogs” indicates something of their perhaps despised character.
What would you (or more importantly, Paul and his audience) toss to an animal, one that you didn’t love, one that would eat the scraps from your table or kitchen?
Then consider that indeed to be all of what we can lose in light of what it means to win Christ.
I hope this helps!
Regards, Phil
21 May 2007 at 4:13 pm
David
Thanks Phil, what I meant was that a word such as ‘garbage’ is not part of my vocabulary or part of British English. It is American English.
So in a Anglicised translation, I wouldn’t expect to see it. And if it were read out at church, people would only hear that word and fail to listen to the passage because it is so out of place.