The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1860-05-10
Rc,i-ion OF the Hawaiiun Bible.

ual~ on the SUBJECT Of . REVISION 81 IAe i1a"a4idH
Bible. which We discussed a few weeks since. One
Is :. very sorry TO see the article published, and
thinks l. it will do much injury" In his opin-
ion. e there are as many mistakes in our English
Bible as there are in our Hawaiian, and ne
hopes that there may never be a new translation,
as he i very well satisfied with the present.
Another % Is heartily glad to see the article, and
liked most of the Ideas expressed therein very
much and says. if We are L. have a 1rsa-
Pruted edition. let Us have a -ed-frgus'atc9 YER
sion also. The new edition had better wait five
years 70 he put into the right condition. than 10
b. hurried with it. present blcmishes." y third
Is a cOnservativy-bu In = less degree than the
first. ~ the same objections may be urged
against altering tie Hawaiian Bible a. the
English, though not. perhaps. equally strong. he
would have but few alterations made. To the
aPpe.aciOn - excellent. which our correspond
ent {. in & recent number. applies to the Hawai-
ian Bible. we are ready To subscribe in q moaf-
fed sense. That 1t Is equal 10. and even eIce's
what might reasonably have been expected, con
siderin- the circumstance Of the case" We most
cheerfully admit. But that it Is entitled TO take
rank with our authorized English version, we can
by no means coucede.
In his reference TO Robinson as authority for
the use of =. haalele." in Rom. " =. We con-
slider him quite unfortunate. Does he 50 con-
found the learned photographer with the trans
lator n to suppose that, because the former uses
one word in explanation Of another, therefore it
i proper 10 substitute it for the other. in a trans
Iati9n? Because Robinson tells US that boimao,
70 S}eep, i used for die in numerous passages in
the New Testament. would he therefore render
the word by de, or make. in those passages. and
cite Robinson as his authority? We think that
the photographer would not consider himself
honored by the citation. So in reference to the
passage under consideration. This Is Robinson's
language. :. To die 10 or from anything. i. e, to
renounce, - &c. by which he simply informs US
that " ayofhnesko" and its synonym : : de-" are
used fguratively in this passage, and he employs
the word - renouuce." To explain the figure.
But doe: this authorize the translator TO reject
the figure. and substitute fer it the explanatory
word? We think not, except in cases where the
fguratiyc language would not be understood.
Bat the incongruity of the word hoalcla in this
verse with the context. greatly enhances the i'm
I~roTriety Of its use. Paul employs ogeHauomen
to Introduce t. his readers a most striking and
impressive figure, by which the relation of the
believer TO SIN is represented as that of a dcad
person, with no ear, no voice, no tongue, no
motion by which TO listen. or respond TO the
demands OF sin. This figure is extended and
diversified through all the succeeding verses to
the eleventh. when it reaches its climax, forming
a whole from which no part can be spared with
ont marriug the effect. But in the Hawaiian
the starting point Of the figure is entirely hid by
the use Of hGaleie. instead Of make and it is not
till be has made considerable progress that the
reader finds himself confusedly in the midst of Il
metaphorical representation, which ends indeed
with some distinc.ncsS. but for the beginning
and foundation of which he knows not where to
look.
Does such an ooScuring of the unity of the
inspired language in no wise offend the sense of
what is due to the original in Il translation? If
not, is not the reason obvious why 50 few imper-
fcctions are acknowledged to exist in the Hawai-
ian Bible? If it be still asked, how else the
ov1,rDssia" a"n he translated. we have ONLY to
point - the eleventh verse, which contains ex-
actly the same idea. If the language there used
by the translator is the best adapted to convey
the idea, and we are Inclined to think it is, then,
surely, it ought 70 be employed in the second
verse also. G.. says that "a literal translation,
mate : Ia hero, would convey just the opposite
idea intended" If TO, does the literal transla-
ton. MAKE ! h kanarai, in Gal. ii: 70, convey
just the opposite idea intended?
We do not understand C.'s logic in showing
that the translators understood the meaning OF
conrcr>aioH. Because same OF the translators
rendered from the Greek, or rendering from the
understood ihe meaning of courcrsation,
it Of necessity follow that all understood the
of the word? And he goes on to say
that - they have translated it noho ana fourteen
times, and hama aRc twice in the New Tcsta-
Translated what? Not the Greek word
anGstrophc, surely fr that is found only thirteen
times in the New testament. while c. speaks of
a word that is found eighteen times. Ii, then, .
must refer to the Euglish word, and not to the !
Greek. l
But in his defense Of Eolaailo ana. he Is less {
than in tina; of hoalclc. He says the '
translators employ hat term 'as better fitting !
contest Now if oaos1 ophe, taken in its
proper sense of maHcr If Htc, is not a more .
= fitting tc the context, then we have =
no eye to see a fitness. What he saws amounts r
10 just this the traslators either translated the t
English word conversation in its present s~ignifca- |
ton, or they took tie responsibility TO attribute c
10 auostrophe a sens which it ncrOr has. and no a
exicographer, or piilologi-t ever pretended that Y
Z has and he i - disposed to approve their v
udrmout.' ?
In regard to a redundancy of small PARTICLES -
n the Hawaiian Bile. We beg leave TO dissent -
rom the opinion EXPRESSED by our correspondent, ~
hat " w haol.s arenot 50 capable of Judging as g.
intelligent natives" After having made them a.
elves familiar with the Hawaiian idioms. then ~
t becomes the duty f those engaged in teaching b
hem, TO instruct ttn in the laws of language Of
own languae-the Offices and relations
o one another of al its different parts. - of p
fyle in writing people just emerging from 70
will not make its laws a subject of b.
indy. NOR will tbr- lear, IN form - correct n
o., - 81