In the comments of a previous post, regular This Lamp commenter, "Larry" has challenged my assertion that the NASB is more literal than the NRSV. He has proposed that we examine a number of selections to determine which of these two best embodies the literalness of the Tyndale tradition. His suggested method is interesting in and of itself:

We use the most current versions of the NRSV and NASB (in particular, the 1995 edition of the latter). Our comparison is the standard Masoretic text and the NA27. For the purposes of this comparison, we do not consider the apparatuses of the original text. We strive to use the simplest "plain meaning" of the source text, for example, translating idioms literally rather than by meaning. We do not consider poetic issues such as prosody, rhythm, alliteration, multiple meanings but only plain meaning. If there is some point which calls for theological interpretation, we use the simplest and most straightforward interpretation.

We use a random number generator to pick 10 verses each at random from each of the following sections of the Bible, for a total of 50 verses:

Torah
Nevi'im
Kethuvim
Gospels+Acts
Epistles+Revelation

We count footnotes in the translation if they include some indication of "literal meaning" or "Hebrew original" etc. We evaluate the resulting 50 verses to see if the NASB or NRSV are equivalent in their degree of literal, if one translation is more literal than the other, or if they are incomparable for some reason (for example, they are both literal but in different parts of the verse). If we agree, we count it as a point, if we disagree, we briefly explain why. If either of us feels the random selection of verses was not representative, we draw additional verses from the section(s) in question. At the end, we see if we have a general consensus or not.

I'm sure the results will be very interesting, although I've already stopped using the NASB publicly because of its literalness. If the NRSV were to prove even more literal, I don't think that would be a positive aspect for it. But I stand behind my initial statement. I've used the NASB since 1980 and the NRSV was the primary translation I used in my M.Div papers from 1991 to 1994. The NASB is definitely more literal as a whole.

Tags: NASB, NRSV