tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post5225197939176808759..comments2023-06-08T07:32:39.725-05:00Comments on Aristotle's Feminist Subject: Marrying Foreignness and Naturalness: As If That's NOT TranslationJ. K. Gaylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-17580235483195382112009-05-05T14:48:00.000-05:002009-05-05T14:48:00.000-05:00Rich, As I mentioned in reply to you at BBB (and t...Rich, As I mentioned in reply to you at BBB (and thanks for cross-posting your comment there), I do sincerely appreciate your acknowledgment of Barnstone's work and your confession of your own rhetorics in trying to do what he does.<br /><br />Notice I haven't replied at BBB to parts of what you've said to me there - Wayne would catch me violating the blog guidelines. But you say:<br /><br />"The fact that feminist theory problematizes everything for the dominant group makes you think the problem is in our translations. I’m not willing to go there. If I were translating for a minority group, I’d be making the same moves nativizing (i.e., foreignizing) the Scripture as I make in English."<br /><br />The fact is that you were translating for Jews (in a sort of mock experiment to show how it must fail by your dominant standards). Sigh. At least you recognize how feminisms must trouble that.J. K. Gaylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07600312868663460988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3931921496989071942.post-26959967073373694492009-05-04T13:46:00.000-05:002009-05-04T13:46:00.000-05:00(I'm leaving this comment on both here and on BBB....(I'm leaving this comment on both here and on <A HREF="http://betterbibles.com/2009/05/03/what%E2%80%99s-in-a-name/#comments" REL="nofollow">BBB</A>.)<br /><br />Kurk,<br />The work of the translator is to take that which is outside and make it inside. The question is: how far inside to you take it? Barnstone (the way I read him) is surprised to find how Jewish the NT is. He wants to express that. Names are a really good place to work with. I wasn't intending to poke fun at Barnstone, but some 30 years ago I was at a big charismatic conference in Kansas City and one of the speakers from Jews for Jesus gave a talk on how Jewish Christianity is. He spoke in plain English -- in the sense we at BBB mean -- but by the judicious use of Yiddishisms and Hebrew borrowings, made his point perfectly and cogently clear. He had none of the awkward/archaic wordings of the English of Barnstone's translation.<br /><br />BTW, I am very conscious of the rhetoric stance I am taking. Assuming that we share no assumptions (and hence logic is impossible) is a dead end street, as deconstruction shows. NB, this is not a Platonist position. If I were arguing to an Ojibwe audience, my rhetoric would be quite different, but logical argumentation sells to this audience.Rich Rhodesnoreply@blogger.com