What is it about?
Scholars sometimes say that the Septuagint translator of Joshua was very competent in the execution of his task. But because the resulting Greek text does not show it, they say his competence was OK, but his flawed method (segmentation, literalism as an easy technique) maimed the result. Others ascribe to him the intention to write a "hieratic style," in which linguistic oddities are supposed to be intentional to make it sound sacred. My paper analyses LXX Joshua 2 and outlines the translational norms underlying it. The translator had little previous experience. .
Photo by Steve Harvey on Unsplash
Why is it important?
This paper shows that juggling with concepts like "competence" or "intention" is not enough. It is a close analysis of Greek renderings and the translation problems underlying them that reveals how the translator was operating. That is interesting in its own right, whether or not the translator was competent or intentional.
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Translator’s Competence And Intention In LXX-Joshua 2, January 2009, Brill,
You can read the full text:
The following have contributed to this page