Repositioning the NLT as a "Scholarly Translation" [UPDATED]
10/08/2008 01:45 Filed in: Faith & Reason
Note: for the sake of clarification, I’ve offered a few footnotes since the original posting of this article a few hours ago.
Consider this a mild follow up to my post “The Rise of the New Living Translation,” but I’ll keep this one short and to the point.
Notice the graphic which I’ve swiped from the Tyndale website. Here the NLT is described as “The standard in scholarly translation with rich, clear language.” I have no real argument with this description. The NLT’s language is certainly richer and clearer than the NIV/TNIV, ESV, HCSB, and other contemporary translations. I’ve described the NLT as having phrasings closer to natural, conversational language than any other translation.
But is the NLT scholarly? I’d point to the translators involved and the continued fine tuning of the NLT through three revisions in 12 years to say, yes.
Granted this is the real question. We probably haven’t always thought of the NLT as a “scholarly” translation, and perhaps its status as such was more questionable in 1996, but it has continued to improve. As I pointed out in my “Rise” post, the creation of an NLT-dedicated commentary series such as the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series, the tying of the translation to the original languages through the newly formulated “Tyndale Strong’s Numbering System,” and the publication of an NLT Study Bible at least on par with--if not slightly more academic than--the standard NIV Study Bible, all point to Tyndale’s repositioning of its flagship translation as a translation intended to be taken very seriously.
The link to the Tyndale Strong’s Numbering System in the paragraph above will take you to a post on the NLT blog asking if the NLT, as a dynamic translation, is suitable for word studies. The newest post on the NLT Study Bible Blog asks “The NLT: Good for Study?”
If you haven’t already guessed--YES, Tyndale is serious about this.
Look, I don’t know what it will take for the NLT to become a standard English translation in seminaries one day, but it’s not beyond imagination considering the NIV has held that spot for over two decades.1 But let’s put seminaries aside for the moment.
I currently teach in church and in the college classroom. My desire is for the people that I’m teaching to (1) understand the Bible, (2) take what they understand seriously, and (3) let the Bible transform their perspective on life and the world. However, I’ve often noticed when watching others teach the Bible that eyes glaze over when the Scriptures are being read. Reading from the Bible is often a cue to zone out. Why is this? Is it perhaps because we’re too used to what we’ve heard in Tyndale-family translations,2 and even from the NIV?
Granted, it never hurts to read the Bible with a little expression, and sadly many preachers and teachers don’t have a clue as to how to effectively read from the scriptures; but it may just be that it’s time for a new kind of translation to catch people’s attention. Maybe it’s time to use a translation that is fresh enough and bold enough to capture the spiritual imagination of people again.
As for the scholarly angle, there are a few things that Tyndale will have to do if they want to take things to the next level.
I do believe that Tyndale is smartly doing most things well in their promotion of the NLT and repositioning it as a translation both for serious study and one for scholarly pursuits, but there is still a lot of work to done creating a suitable scholarly context for the NLT before it is completely there. Nevertheless, as I originally pointed out in the “Rise” post, Tyndale is not going to be content to sit back and let the NLT continue to be seen as secondary translation to be read alongside supposedly more scholarly ones. Rather, the message being proclaimed is clear: the NLT can serve these purposes as well.3
1I’m referring primarily to conservative/evangelical schools, but the NIV has also gained acceptance beyond these circles where translations like the RSV and NRSV are considered standards.
2This can quickly become confusing. When I use the designation “Tyndale-family translations,” I’m referring to versions of the Bible that follow in the lineage established by William Tyndale including the KJV, RSV, NASB, NRSV, ESV and others. Obviously, the reader should not confuse this with the fact that the company, Tyndale House Publishers, publishes the NLT.
3As I’ve discussed before, my greatest challenge in using the NLT for teaching would come when discussing poetic passages. Although the second edition of the NLT is an improvement here, I still struggle with wanting to hold on to the beauty of some Hebrew metaphors that often become flattened out a bit in the NLT. However, that is not to say that I couldn’t use an approach such as that in Tom Gledhill’s helpful commentary on the Song of Solomon (The Message of Song of Songs [Bible Speaks Today], IVP) in which he uses both a free translation as well as a literal translation to get the meaning of the Hebrew text across.
Notice the graphic which I’ve swiped from the Tyndale website. Here the NLT is described as “The standard in scholarly translation with rich, clear language.” I have no real argument with this description. The NLT’s language is certainly richer and clearer than the NIV/TNIV, ESV, HCSB, and other contemporary translations. I’ve described the NLT as having phrasings closer to natural, conversational language than any other translation.
But is the NLT scholarly? I’d point to the translators involved and the continued fine tuning of the NLT through three revisions in 12 years to say, yes.
Granted this is the real question. We probably haven’t always thought of the NLT as a “scholarly” translation, and perhaps its status as such was more questionable in 1996, but it has continued to improve. As I pointed out in my “Rise” post, the creation of an NLT-dedicated commentary series such as the Cornerstone Biblical Commentary series, the tying of the translation to the original languages through the newly formulated “Tyndale Strong’s Numbering System,” and the publication of an NLT Study Bible at least on par with--if not slightly more academic than--the standard NIV Study Bible, all point to Tyndale’s repositioning of its flagship translation as a translation intended to be taken very seriously.
The link to the Tyndale Strong’s Numbering System in the paragraph above will take you to a post on the NLT blog asking if the NLT, as a dynamic translation, is suitable for word studies. The newest post on the NLT Study Bible Blog asks “The NLT: Good for Study?”
If you haven’t already guessed--YES, Tyndale is serious about this.
Look, I don’t know what it will take for the NLT to become a standard English translation in seminaries one day, but it’s not beyond imagination considering the NIV has held that spot for over two decades.1 But let’s put seminaries aside for the moment.
I currently teach in church and in the college classroom. My desire is for the people that I’m teaching to (1) understand the Bible, (2) take what they understand seriously, and (3) let the Bible transform their perspective on life and the world. However, I’ve often noticed when watching others teach the Bible that eyes glaze over when the Scriptures are being read. Reading from the Bible is often a cue to zone out. Why is this? Is it perhaps because we’re too used to what we’ve heard in Tyndale-family translations,2 and even from the NIV?
Granted, it never hurts to read the Bible with a little expression, and sadly many preachers and teachers don’t have a clue as to how to effectively read from the scriptures; but it may just be that it’s time for a new kind of translation to catch people’s attention. Maybe it’s time to use a translation that is fresh enough and bold enough to capture the spiritual imagination of people again.
As for the scholarly angle, there are a few things that Tyndale will have to do if they want to take things to the next level.
- Beef up Tyndale’s academic catalog. This is where Zondervan, primary US distributor of the NIV, has excelled. Tyndale has a few academic offerings, but there’s much room for improvement.
- Continue to connect the NLT to the original languages. I would suggest that Tyndale should immediately launch a project to publish a NLT/Greek diglot. Include notes that offer explanations behind particular NLT renderings from the Greek. Transliterate nothing. This should be a volume strictly for those who have a background in original languages.
- Publish a series of articles (maybe an ongoing series of books?) by the translators of the NLT regarding translational challenges and decisions behind the translation.
- Publish a series of preaching resources that use the NLT as a basis.
- Offer some serious gatekeeper editions: traditional format preaching editions, wide margin editions for study and teaching.
- Renew attention to the NLT apocrypha/deuterocanonicals. Publish an edition of the NLT with these books that is not labeled a “Catholic edition.”
- Make good use of testimonials from both academics and popular pastors.
- Hold off on any further revisions for at least a decade. Three editions in 12 years is unprecedented. The updates to the NLT have been warranted, but readers need to know that the text has been established/set--at least for a while.
I do believe that Tyndale is smartly doing most things well in their promotion of the NLT and repositioning it as a translation both for serious study and one for scholarly pursuits, but there is still a lot of work to done creating a suitable scholarly context for the NLT before it is completely there. Nevertheless, as I originally pointed out in the “Rise” post, Tyndale is not going to be content to sit back and let the NLT continue to be seen as secondary translation to be read alongside supposedly more scholarly ones. Rather, the message being proclaimed is clear: the NLT can serve these purposes as well.3
1I’m referring primarily to conservative/evangelical schools, but the NIV has also gained acceptance beyond these circles where translations like the RSV and NRSV are considered standards.
2This can quickly become confusing. When I use the designation “Tyndale-family translations,” I’m referring to versions of the Bible that follow in the lineage established by William Tyndale including the KJV, RSV, NASB, NRSV, ESV and others. Obviously, the reader should not confuse this with the fact that the company, Tyndale House Publishers, publishes the NLT.
3As I’ve discussed before, my greatest challenge in using the NLT for teaching would come when discussing poetic passages. Although the second edition of the NLT is an improvement here, I still struggle with wanting to hold on to the beauty of some Hebrew metaphors that often become flattened out a bit in the NLT. However, that is not to say that I couldn’t use an approach such as that in Tom Gledhill’s helpful commentary on the Song of Solomon (The Message of Song of Songs [Bible Speaks Today], IVP) in which he uses both a free translation as well as a literal translation to get the meaning of the Hebrew text across.