Knowing a couple of foreign languages and having familiarity of and finding affinity with several others gives me some sensitivity to the matter of translation.
Sometimes folks think that converting a message to another language is simply a matter of swapping out words from one language for words of the same meaning in another language. The actual process of translation involves more than merely substituting words. The translator has to convert the structure that the source language used to convey sense to some equivalent structure in the target language. And the translator must choose the style he/she believes captures the tone of the source language message.
Take for instance these three words from Latvian:
Tev piedzims bērns.Literally the three words mean (to you) (born shall be) (child). How would the translator fashion this to English? Watch five different decisions made depending on the style the translator believes fits the context.
Standard American English:
"You will have a child."
Standard British English (Besides the Above-mentioned Example):
"You shall have a child."
Colloquial American English:
"You're gonna have a baby."
"You're having a baby."
Jacobean Era English:
"Unto thee a child is born."These examples are not necessarily instances of translator arbitrariness or license, but of the challenge faced by converting sense conveyed in one language and culture to sense conveyed in a different language and culture.
Sometimes a feature that is salient in the source language gets lost, as it were, in the translation process, not through deception or inadvertence, simply because the mechanism of one language differed just enough from that of the target language as to lose the salient feature.
We read the following passage in The Book of Moses, as revealed to Joseph Smith in June-October of 1830 (Moses 5:4-8):
4: And Adam and Eve, his wife, called upon the name of The Lord, and they heard the voice of The Lord from the way toward the Garden of Eden, speaking unto them, and they saw Him not; for they were shut out from His Presence.
5: And He gave unto them commandments, that they should worship The Lord their God, and should offer the firstlings of their flocks, for an offering unto The Lord. And Adam was obedient unto the commandments of The Lord.
6: And after many days an angel of The Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer sacrifices unto The Lord? And Adam said unto him: I know not, save The Lord commanded me.
7: And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of The Only Begotten of The Father, which is full of grace and truth.
8: Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of The Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of The Son forevermore.
First of all, thank goodness for the gift of repentance and the Atonement of Jesus Christ which allow a sinner like me to feel hope and bright resolve to do as father and mother Adam and Eve did, to obey God, worshiping together by His Temple, as He commanded, in preparation for the restoration to His Presence. Second, notice how Adam is taught that his obedience to sacrifice is symbolic of the sacrifice of The Only Begotten Son. But also focus on the usage of the name "Adam". To be sure this specific event involved the father and mother of humanity, hence it is only expected to find "Adam" addressed repeatedly here.
Now, I will cite a passage from Leviticus in our ever superb King James Translation, then a more precise translation from the Hebrew. In the instance of the more precise Hebrew translation I will suspend syntactical considerations (rules for putting words together) to allow all to see how Hebrew constructed the thought. From opening words of Moses' great book on Priestly officiation, Leviticus 1:1-5:
1: And The Lord called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,
2: Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto The Lord, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.
3. If his offering be a burnt offering of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before The Lord.
4. And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.
5. And he shall kill the bullock before The Lord: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
Now from the Hebrew:
1. And Jehovah called to Moses and spake to him out of the Tent of Meeting, saying:
2: Speak unto the sons of Israel and say unto them: If Adam from among you bringeth forth an offering to Jehovah from the cattle, from the flock, ye shall bring your offering forth.
3. If his burnt offering from the herd is a male of perfections, he shall bring it to the door of the Tent of Meeting, he shall bring it at his pleasure before the face of Jehovah.
4. And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him.
5. And he shall kill the son of the herd before the face of Jehovah, and shall bring the sons of Aaron, the priests, the blood and sprinkle the blood on the altar all around, which is the door of the Tent.
The similarities are striking. Both Adam and Moses were commanded to offer sacrifices, both by the door (gate) of the Temple or Tent, both by shedding blood, and (as one reads Leviticus further), both by fire. Adam was told that his sacrifice was in similitude of The Only Begotten Son, and Moses was told to sacrifice the "son of perfections" of the herd, the key words "son" and "perfections" being lost in translation. But also, the Hebrew communicated the idea of "if any man of you bring an offering" as "if Adam of you brings an offering." So yet again I find in the Hebrew source text confirmation of the truthfulness of what was revealed to Joseph Smith and to me, that is, in my case, that these Holy Writs are true. As I ponder this circumstance the truth becomes so plain, namely, that what The Lord commanded Moses to do would clearly have been what He had always ever commanded His people to do, from the beginning. What was revealed to Joseph Smith as teachings that Moses once received, but were lost, still have their echo in that record of Moses that survives to the present day. However, as the King James Translation did not convey the key concepts of "Adam" or "Son", the only way Joseph Smith could have been so right was to have received this knowledge from The Lord through His Holy Spirit.
There is something more I could say about the idea that "any man" offering sacrifice is referred to as "Adam", but as our British brethren say, "I shan't explain it here". The Temple is the place where I would mention it.
The reader may take these observations to be coincidence, happenstance, insignificant, curious, or confirming of truth. Whatever the reader sees in this, my observations are, in the very least, actually textual.
No comments:
Post a Comment