IMHO, this is more an issue of "language as a medium of culture" than "proper-translation" or anything else, so I understand why people prefer the references to G-d in the English translation of the Bible to be gender-neutral, and don't have any "problem" with this. In fact, I too, find it preferable in many ways, because of these cultural differences.
The cultural differences inherent in the language that I refer to, which (of course) some authorities (which I'm not) will dispute, is that while Hebrew does indeed assign "gender" value to practically ALL words and parts of speech, we are actually, much less "concerned" with gender, than English is. Men and women are different and thus do things differently (thus verbs and adjectives are affected by the gender of the subject). Nu, end of story. A wall {Kir} is [IIRC] female, while the rocks {Even} that compose it are male. Why this is so, and not vice versa, I have no idea, but I am certain this implies nothing to do with their general worth or comparative whatever.
In English, on the other hand, much "importance" [and "baggage"] is attached to gender, practically to the extent of obsession in modern times. So I would actually prefer references to the Divine be gender-neutral in English (or similar tongues), to counter the [stern] bearded old man image of G-d, that many [non-Jewish] authorities try to evoke.
"My" translation is that of the "JPS 1917 Edition", which is the one all Jewish sites use, due to more recent and more accurate ones, all being copyright protected. While the Jewish Publication Society may possibly be considered more main-stream these days, it was/is mostly affiliated with the Reform movement. As such, [this] their first translation is heavily based on the Christian KJV and ASB translations with certain problems in those version "fixed", rather than doing it from scratch, as an Orthodox body would have, and as they too later did.
In general, translating the "gendered nature of all Hebrew words" into English, would be just rather pointless, because all it would do, is make the text impossible to read, without adding anything actual to it. The Talmud tells us, that while it was admitted to be necessary due to exile induced ignorance, the [forced] translation of the Torah into Greek - the Septuagint, was a cause for great mourning.
The only change I would make to your preffered translation is to add the word "Come" at the beginning. In Hebrew, the word "enter" is implied in the "come" {Bo'uh}, while in English the opposite is the case - the "come" is implied in the "Enter". Because of this difference, I would prefer having both in the English text. To me at least, and this may be yet another of the language/cultural differences, the word "come" is much more welcoming then the more neutral "enter". The whole Psalm is dealing with the "togetherness" of the praise of G-d, as a group effort, hence the greater need for the emotion and in-drawing of welcome.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: I'm curious
Date: 2005-10-23 03:22 pm (UTC)The cultural differences inherent in the language that I refer to, which (of course) some authorities (which I'm not) will dispute, is that while Hebrew does indeed assign "gender" value to practically ALL words and parts of speech, we are actually, much less "concerned" with gender, than English is. Men and women are different and thus do things differently (thus verbs and adjectives are affected by the gender of the subject). Nu, end of story. A wall {Kir} is [IIRC] female, while the rocks {Even} that compose it are male. Why this is so, and not vice versa, I have no idea, but I am certain this implies nothing to do with their general worth or comparative whatever.
In English, on the other hand, much "importance" [and "baggage"] is attached to gender, practically to the extent of obsession in modern times. So I would actually prefer references to the Divine be gender-neutral in English (or similar tongues), to counter the [stern] bearded old man image of G-d, that many [non-Jewish] authorities try to evoke.
"My" translation is that of the "JPS 1917 Edition", which is the one all Jewish sites use, due to more recent and more accurate ones, all being copyright protected. While the Jewish Publication Society may possibly be considered more main-stream these days, it was/is mostly affiliated with the Reform movement. As such, [this] their first translation is heavily based on the Christian KJV and ASB translations with certain problems in those version "fixed", rather than doing it from scratch, as an Orthodox body would have, and as they too later did.
In general, translating the "gendered nature of all Hebrew words" into English, would be just rather pointless, because all it would do, is make the text impossible to read, without adding anything actual to it. The Talmud tells us, that while it was admitted to be necessary due to exile induced ignorance, the [forced] translation of the Torah into Greek - the Septuagint, was a cause for great mourning.
The only change I would make to your preffered translation is to add the word "Come" at the beginning. In Hebrew, the word "enter" is implied in the "come" {Bo'uh}, while in English the opposite is the case - the "come" is implied in the "Enter". Because of this difference, I would prefer having both in the English text. To me at least, and this may be yet another of the language/cultural differences, the word "come" is much more welcoming then the more neutral "enter". The whole Psalm is dealing with the "togetherness" of the praise of G-d, as a group effort, hence the greater need for the emotion and in-drawing of welcome.