PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION

The Translation of the New Testament here offered to

English-speaking Christians is a bona fide translation made

directly from the Greek, and is in no sense a revision. The plan

adopted has been the following.

1. An earnest endeavour has been made (based upon more

than sixty years' study of both the Greek and English languages,

besides much further familiarity gained by continual teaching) to

ascertain the exact meaning of every passage not only by the

light that Classical Greek throws on the langruage used, but also

by that which the Septuagint and the Hebrew Scriptures afford;

aid being sought too from Versions and Commentators ancient and

modern, and from the ample _et cetera_ of _apparatus grammaticus_

and theological and Classical reviews and magazines--or rather,

by means of occasional excursions into this vast prairie.

2. The sense thus seeming to have been ascertained, the

next step has been to consider how it could be most accurately

and naturally exhibited in the English of the present day; in

other words, how we can with some approach to probability suppose

that the inspired writer himself would have expressed his

thoughts, had he been writing in our age and country. /1

3. Lastly it has been evidently desirable to compare the

results thus attained with the renderings of other scholars,

especially of course witll the Authorized and Revised Versions.

But alas, the great majority of even "new translations," so

called, are, in reality, only Tyndale's immortal work a

little--often very litLle--modernized!

4. But in the endeavour to find in Twentieth Century

English a precise equivalent for a Greek word, phrase, or

sentence there are two dangers to be guarded against. There are a

Scylla and a Charybdis. On the one hand there is the English of

Society, on the other hand that of the utterly uneducated, each

of these _patois_ having also its own special, though expressive,

borderland which we name 'slang.' But all these salient angles

(as a professor of fortification might say) of our language are

forbidden ground to the reverent translator of Holy Scripture.

5. But again, a _modern_ translation--does this imply

that no words or phrases in any degree antiquated are to be

admitted? Not so, for great numbers of such words and phrases are

still in constant use. To be antiquated is not the same thing as

to be obsolete or even obsolescent, and without at least a tinge

of antiquity it is scarcely possible that there should be that

dignity of style that befits the sacred themes with which the

Evangelists and Apostles deal.

6. It is plain that this attempt to bring out the sense

of the Sacred Writings naturally as well as accurately in

present-day English does not permit, except to a limited extent,

the method of literal rendering--the _verbo verbum reddere_ at

which Horace shrugs his shoulders. Dr. Welldon, recently Bishop

of Calcutta, in the Preface (p. vii) to his masterly translation

of the _Nicomachean Ethics_ of Aristotle, writes, "I have

deliberately rejected the principle of trying to translate the

same Greek word by the same word in English, and where

circumstances seemed to call for it I have sometimes used two

English words to represent one word of the Greek;"--and he is

perfectly right. With a slavish literality delicate shades of

meaning cannot be reproduced, nor allowance be made for the

influence of interwoven thought, or of the writer's ever

shifting--not to say changing--point of view. An utterly ignorant

or utterly lazy man, if possessed of a little ingenuity, can with

the help of a dictionary and grammar give a word-for-word

rendering, whether intelligible or not, and print 'Translation'

on his title-page. On the other hand it is a melancholy spectacle

to see men of high ability and undoubted scholarship toil and

struggle at translation under a needless restriction to

literality, as in intellectual handcuffs and fetters, when they

might with advantage snap the bonds and fling them away, as Dr.

Welldon has done: more melancholy still, if they are at the same

time racking their brains to exhibit the result of their

labours---a splendid but idle philological _tour de force_ --in

what was English nearly 300 years before.

7. Obviously any literal translation cannot but carry

idioms of the earlier language into the later, where they will

very probably not be understood; /2 and more serious still is the

evil when, as in the Jewish Greek of the N T, the earlier

language of the two is itself composite and abounds in forms of

speech that belong to one earlier still. For the N.T. Greek, even

in the writings of Luke, contains a large number of Hebrew

idioms; and a literal rendering into English cannot but partially

veil, and in some degree distort, the true sense, even if it does

not totally obscure it (and that too where _perfect_ clearness

should be attained, if possible), by this admixture of Hebrew as

well as Greek forms of expression.

8. It follows that the reader who is bent upon getting a

literal rendering, such as he can commonly find in the R.V. or

(often a better one) in Darby's _New Testament_, should always be

on his guard against its strong tendency to mislead.

9. One point however can hardly be too emphatically

stated. It is not the present Translator's ambition to supplant

the Versions already in general use, to which their intrinsic

merit or long familiarity or both have caused all Christian minds

so lovingly to cling. His desire has rather been to furnish a

succinct and compressed running commentary (not doctrinal) to be

used sidc by side with its elder compeers. And yet there has been

something of a remoter hope. It can scarcely be doubted that some

day the attempt will be renewed to produce a satisfactory English

Bible--one in some respects perhaps (but assuredly with great and

important deviations) on the lines of the Revision of 1881, or

even altogether to supersede both the A.V. and the R.V.; and it

may be that the Translation here offered will contribute some

materials that may be built into that far grander edifice.

10. THE GREEK TEXT here followed is that given in the

Translator's _Resultant Greek Testament_.

11. Of the VARIOUS READINGS only those are here given

which seem the most important, and which affect the rendering

into English. They are in the footnotes, with V.L. (_varia

lectio_) prefixed. As to the chief modern critical editions full

details will be found in the _Resultant Greek Testament_, while

for the original authorities--MSS., Versions, Patristic

quotations--the reader must of necessity consult the great works

of Lachmann, Tregelles, Tischendorf, and others, or the numerous

monographs on separate Books. /3 In the margin of the R.V. a

distinction is made between readings supported by "a few ancient

authorities," "some ancient authorities," "many ancient

authorities," and so on. Such valuation is not attempted in this

work.

12. Considerable pains have been bestowed on the exact

rendering of the tenses of the Greek verb; for by inexactness in

this detail the true sense cannot but be missed. That the Greek

tenses do not coincide, and cannot be expected to coincide with

those of the English verb; that--except in narrative--the aorist

as a rule is _more_ exactly represented in English by our perfect

with "have" than by our simple past tense; and that in this

particular the A.V. is in scores of instances more correct than

the R.V.; the present Translator has contended (with arguments

which some of the best scholars in Britain and in America hold to

be "unanswerable" and "indisputable") in a pamphlet _On the

Rendering into English of the Greek Aorist and Perfect_. Even an

outline of the argument cannot be given in a Preface such as

this.

13. But he who would make a truly _English_ translation

of a foreign book must not only select the right nouns,

adjectives, and verbs, insert the suitable prepositions and

auxiliaries, and triumph (if he can) over the seductions and

blandishments of idioms with which he has been familiar from his

infancy, but which, though forcible or beautiful with other

surroundings, are for all that part and parcel of that other

language rather than of English: he has also to beware of

_connecting his sentences_ in an un-English fashion.

Now a careful examination of a number of authors

(including Scottish, Irish, and American) yields some interesting

results. Taking at haphazard a passage from each of fifty-six

authors, and counting on after some full stop till fifty finite

verbs--i. e. verbs in the indicative, imperative, or subjunctive

mood--have been reached (each finite verb, as every schoolboy

knows, being the nucleus of one sentence or clause), it has been

found that the connecting links of the fifty-six times fifty

sentences are about one-third conjunctions, about one-third

adverbs or relative and interrogative pronouns, while in the case

of the remaining third there is what the grammarians call an

_asyndeton_--no formal grammatical connexion at all. But in the

writers of the N.T. nearly _two_-thirds of the connecting links

are conjunctions. It follows that in order to make the style of a

translation true idiomatic English many of these conjunctions

must be omitted, and for others adverbs, &c., must be

substituted.

The two conjunctions _for_ and _therefore_ are discussed

at some length in two Appendices to the above-mentioned pamphlet

on the _Aorist_, to which the reader is referred.

14. The NOTES, with but few exceptions, are not of the

nature of a general commentary. Some, as already intimated, refer

to the readings here followed, but the great majority are in

vindication or explanation of the renderings given. Since the

completion of this new version nearly two years ago, ill-health

has incapacitated the Translator from undertaking even the

lightest work. He has therefore been obliged to entrust to other

hands the labour of critically examining and revising the

manuscript and of seeing it through the press. This arduous task

has been undertaken by Rev. Ernest Hampden-Cook, M.A., St. John's

College, Cambridge, of Sandhach, Cheshire, with some co-operation

from one of the Translator's sons; and the Translator is under

deep obligations to these two gentlemen for their kindness in the

matter. He has also most cordially to thank Mr. Hampden-Cook for

making the existence of the work known to various members of the

OLD MILLHILIANS' CLUB and other former pupils of the Translator,

who in a truly substantial manner have manifested a generous

determination to enable the volume to see the light. Very

grateful does the Translator feel to them for this signal mark of

their friendship.

Mr. Hampden-Cook is responsible for the headings of the

paragraphs, and at my express desire has inserted some additional

notes.

I have further to express my gratitude to Rev. Frank

Baliard, M.A., B.Sc., Lond., at present of Sharrow, Sheffield,

for some very valuable assistance which he has most kindly given

in connexion with the Introductions to the several books.

I have also the pleasure of acknowledging the numerous

valuable and suggestive criticisms with which I have been

favoured on some parts of the work, by an old friend, Rev. Sydney

Thelwall, B.A., of Leamington, a clergyman of the Church of

England, whom I have known for many years as a painstaking and

accurate scholar, a well-read theologian. and a thoughtful and

devout student of Scripture.

I am very thankful to Mr. H. L. Gethin. Mr. S. Hales, Mr.

J. A. Latham, and Rev. T. A. Seed, for the care with which they

have read the proof sheets.

And now this Translation is humbly and prayerfully

commended to God's gracious blessing.

Weymouth New Testament in Modern Speech, Preface and Introductions · 第 7 / 40 题