Shared with permission from Criswell Theological Review
The Art of Bible Translation. By Robert Alter. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019, 129 pp., $24.95, Hardback
In The Art of Bible Translation, Robert Alter (PhD Harvard University, 1962), Professor of the Graduate School and emeritus professor of Hebrew and comparative literature at the University of California, Berkeley, winner of the Robert Kirsch Award for Lifetime Contribution to American Letters, has added significantly to his already impressive list of achievements. In addition to numerous works as a critic in Western and Modern Hebrew literature, Alter has made noteworthy contributions to biblical studies in works like, The Art of Bible Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981), winner of the National Jewish Book Award, The Art of Bible Poetry (New York: Basic Books, 1985), and his decades long translation work now collected in, The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019).
The multiplying of Bible translations over the last 50 plus years has entrenched, says Alter, a standard approach to translation that strives to one degree of representation or another to capture the essential “meaning” of a Hebrew text with little regard for the literary art of the Hebrew text. The Art of Bible Translation is a direct challenge to this approach. Alter calls for a revolution in translation theory through an intentional consideration of English excellence, and a reflection of Hebrew Syntax, word choice, Sound & word play, Rhythm, and the specialized articulation of Hebrew dialogue. He writes, “…the literary style of the Bible in both the prose narratives and the poetry is not some sort of aesthetic embellishment of the “message” of Scripture, but the vital medium through which the biblical vision of God, human nature, history, politics, society, and moral value is conveyed” (xiii).
In Chapter 1, Alter lays the foundation for his translation theory, praising the achievements of the KJV, in spite of a measure weakness in Hebrew, for matching the literary genius of the Hebrew with its own literary brilliance in English. While modern translations tend to over-translate, eliminating meditative possibilities in the original through excessive explanation, the KJV marches toward a word for word rendering that marks out necessary English additions, preserves parataxis (i.e. simple conjunction) in Hebrew clause structures, and consistently represents the texts’ employment of basic words. So too, deviations from the routine should get representation. Rather than domesticating the text through dynamic equivalence, Alter wishes to see its foreignness preserved, reflecting the differences of linguistic instrument and cultural setting between it and the modern reader.
In Chapter 2, Alter insists that much of the Hebrew’s syntactic artistry can and should be reflected in translation. If the Hebrew fails to express causal relations, opting for flexible conjunctive links, we should follow suit. English translators tend to replace participial phrases in Hebrew with independent clauses with explicit logical connectors. Inversions in Hebrew, like fronting with nouns, pronouns, subjects and objects are commonly ignored when they could easily be reflected. Strong poetic statements are rendered in pedestrian English. Concise Hebrew wording is too often reflected in verbose artless English.
In Chapter 3, Alter targets the modern translational habits that surround word choice. He praises the amount of energy that has been dedicated to understanding Hebrew words, but feels that more precision is needed when translating. Specialized poetic terms should get specialized English renderings, and archaic Hebrew should be met with archaic English; bawdy, rude, or abrupt Hebrew should be presented in kind. It is a bad habit to over-translate by context, giving basic Hebrew words constantly shifting renderings; basic Hebrew words should be consistently translated with basic English words. The writers chose either stock phraseology or specialized terms and the translator should be attuned to these choices and do their utmost to represent them.
In Chapter 4, Alter considers the first of the two greatest challenges to a translator—Hebrew artistry in sound play. The Hebrew writers routinely express themselves through pun, alliteration, rhyme, assonance and the like. While Alter recognizes that some sound play is impossible to represent in English, he bemoans the fact that translators rarely even try. Alter writes, “…meaning in the Bible or in any literary text cannot be reduced to lexical values… it involves the communication of affect and can never be separated from the nuanced connotation of words and their dynamic interaction as they are joined through sound, through syntax, and through poetic or narrative context.” (p. 75). “…the meaning of these writings—sometimes a flourish of emphasis, sometimes a pointed revelation—also flow from the sound of the words and the subtle ways in which they are linked with each other.” (pg. 81).
In Chapter 5, Alter addresses the second great challenge to translators, rhythm. The Hebrew original boasts an impressive use of rhythm which serves a variety of purposes in both prose and poetry. The Hebrew writers’ prolific use of pronouns, the absence of the “to be” verb, and verbal leading make capturing Hebrew rhythm in English a great challenge, but the temptation to make Hebrew poetry sound like English poetry should be avoided; let translation give a nod to the foreignness of the original, remembering that nuanced meaning is often found in cadence, particularly when the rhythms are strong.
Finally, in Chapter 6, Alter turns his attention to the particular Hebraic practices of representing characters through their dialogue. Dialogue takes up a vast portion of biblical narrative and is used differently than narration to capture emotion and character, personality and social status. Not all characters use proper grammar, articulate speech, or conformity to social norms. Alter writes, “The draining of the vitality of biblical dialogue in English translations is manifested in two ways: a failure on the part of the translators to understand that language is being used expressively to reflect personality, narrative situation, social position, and much else, and an insensitivity to the nuances of language that would be appropriate for ancient speech…” (p. 115).
To sum up the whole, Alter’s own words serve best. He writes, “…the full breadth of nuanced perspective on the interactions between the human and divine realms will not be visible in translation if the stylistic subtleties of the original are ignored. As I have repeatedly conceded in the course of this study, those subtleties do not always lend themselves to adequate representation in another language. The point, however, is that a translator need first to see them and then to attempt to do something with them in translation, and the lamentable fact is that this has very rarely been the case.” (Pg. 121)
The Art of Bible Translation is a laudable aide to any pastor who works with the original languages. It draws much needed attention to the nuances of style for interpretation and the demand for precision. It lays down guidelines for evaluating existing translations whether in Bibles or commentaries. It is rife with meaningful examples. If I had one criticism to make, it would be that there were not many more of these examples. Alter’s insights were so compelling, I didn’t want the journey to end.
~Andrew D. Sargent, PhD
