Did the NET Bible Translators change text?

[ByTheSpirit]

So my question has to do with this idea that a translation team may have actually changed a text in order to make it "work".

Here is what I mean (see picture). I clearly highlight from Psalm 27 where the NET translation notes state:

Now this is not the only time I have encountered such wordage in the NET Bible notes and it has me worried. But perhaps someone smarter than myself can explain this.

What does it mean they "emended" the text. The word emend means:

Did the NET Bible translation team "Make corrections & improvements" to biblical texts?

 

[paul1149]

Here's what Jameison has on that:

When thou saidst, Seek ye my face; my heart said unto thee, Thy face, LORD, will I seek.

My heart said unto thee - rather, 'my heart saith unto thee' (i:e., is continually, with silent speech, reminding thee of thine own gracious exhortation), "Seek ye my face (virtually contained, in Deu 4:29); Thy face, Lord, will I seek." David, in the spirit of faith, appropriates to himself the general exhortation of God, Seek YE (plural) my face;' "Thy face Lord, will (or do). I seek" (singular). To seek they face of a king involves the idea of seeking his favour and protection, answering to Psa 27:4 (Psa 24:6; Pro 29:26, cf. margin; 2Sa 21:1, margin; Hos. 5:16 ).​

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I get that on the second half of the text, but that is not what the NET Bible is referring to.

The portion of the notes I screenshot up there is only for the first half of the verse so it can't possibly be in reference to the second half where David makes the plural command a singular action.

 

[dysert]

I encourage you to read the NET Bible's preface (NET Bible Preface | NET Bible). It provides a good deal of information on how the Bible was produced, what sources were used, some issues that are involved in a translation, etc.

Every translation goes through emendation. You can't help it (and you'll learn that as you read the preface). That's not a bad thing, it's an essential thing.

I haven't read much of the NET Bible yet because I'm still trying to decide about the HCSB and the ISV, but going strictly by the preface it sounds like a good, accurate, faithful, readable translation.

The only problems I have with it at this point are the same problems I have with other good Bible translations (e.g., ESV, ISV). (1) I like to have the pronouns for deity capitalized. I know they weren't capitalized in the original text, but to capitalize them in English makes some passages easier to understand. (2) I like the words of Jesus to be rendered in red letter. Again, they weren't in the original, but again, it makes some passages a bit more readable.

I can't recommend what I haven't studied for myself, but I will say that it *sounds* like the NET Bible is a very good Bible to use both for study and for reading, and that if you don't get hung up on the two points I get hung up on, I'd give it a try.

 

[-V-]

It seems to simply be a matter of dynamic vs. formal equivalence. It's a simple fact of translating from one language to another that you're going to have words & phrases that don't have an exact match, or sometimes when there is an exact match (formal equivalence), it isn't meaningful in the language you're translating to.

The notes in the NET there, as far as I can see, are indicating that the literal Hebrew used doesn't translate directly to English in a meaningful way (it would sound nonsensical or seem like very poor grammar to use a direct word-for-word translation). So they translated it with a more dynamic equivalent style.

Also, I don't consider it "trying to alter the text" when they give you the notes pointing out exactly what they're doing. They're being open and honest about what they're doing and why.

 

[paul1149]

The portion of the notes I screenshot up there is only for the first half of the verse so it can't possibly be in reference to the second half where David makes the plural command a singular action.

Jameison is saying that David recalled the Lord's commandment to the whole nation of Israel, Seek Ye (appropriately plural) MY face, and replied with his personal answer in the singular. This makes perfect and natural sense to me, and I think the NET translators missed it this time.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Jameison is saying that David recalled the Lord's commandment to the whole nation of Israel, Seek Ye (appropriately plural) MY face, and replied with his personal answer in the singular. This makes perfect and natural sense to me, and I think the NET translators missed it this time.

I certainly don't think any translation is "perfect" in itself and each one has probably missed some things. Some more than others.

My concern is more with their note that seems to imply gown the translators made their determination. I am sure if we had notes on every translation there would probably be something similar on every one in some place.

I guess I was just thrown off by the implication that a translation team deemed the text as needing emending to meet a specific purpose. Just translate it and let the text speak for itself. I don't know. I appreciate your thoughts.

 

[pescador]

Did the NET Bible translators change the text? From what? How do you know what the original text(s) said?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Did the NET Bible translators change the text? From what? How do you know what the original text(s) said?

If you read the OP fully you might now...

 

[pescador]

If you read the OP fully you might now...

I read the OP. It makes no sense. The people who created the NET Bible are extremely skilled. Just because you found some note somewhere is insignificant compared to the result of the years of scholarship of the translators. They knew exactly what they were doing when they translated from ancient Hebrew into modern English, taking into account not only the words in context but also the meaning in the ancient language.

I doubt that you are capable of judging whether their wording is right or wrong.

 

[hedrick]

The NET Bible differs from other translations in that they have notes describing details of how they translated. All translations have to make decisions like that. They just don't explain it.

The King James uses the same translation here. Notes in the Word Commentary give a number of ways that have been suggested for translating the phrase. They all involve emendations, some more radical than what NET and KJ use.

There are plenty of places in the OT that you can't translate exactly as they stand.