The Literal Translation Method

    The literal translation method of Bible interpretation seeks to translate the original languages of ancient texts into modern English while maintaining the sentence structure or grammatical style presented in the original document. This type of translation may also be referred to as “formal equivalence” or “word for word”. This differs from a dynamic equivalent translation (also known as “thought for thought” or “functional equivalent”) which translates the source language into English using more modern or common English structure, grammar or wording.

     One example of a Bible that relies primarily on the literal translation method is the English Standard Version. The translation philosophy used for this Bible is posted on the ESV’s official website. It states, “The ESV is an ‘essentially literal’ translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on ‘word-for-word’ correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original. In contrast to the ESV, some Bible versions have followed a ‘thought-for-thought’ rather than ‘word-for-word’ translation philosophy, emphasizing ‘dynamic equivalence’ rather than the ‘essentially literal’ meaning of the original. A ‘thought-for-thought’ translation is of necessity more inclined to reflect the interpretive opinions of the translator and the influences of contemporary culture. Every translation is at many points a trade-off between literal precision and readability, between ‘formal equivalence’ in expression and ‘functional equivalence’ in communication, and the ESV is no exception. Within this framework we have sought to be ‘as literal as possible’ while maintaining clarity of expression and literary excellence.” It is important for me to point out that the previous quote came from a source that used this particular translation method and therefore they are naturally supportive of it over other methods. I do not intend to promote one translation or translation method over another but simply to show the differences between them.

    As pointed out by Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart in their book, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, one of the issues of the literal translation method is that the translated sentence structure may be confusing to modern readers. The sentences may be obscure or lose some of their meaning because they don’t flow naturally to the reader. As seen in the quote from the ESV website this is one issue they sought to correct while maintaining most of the original structure. For this reason and others Fee and Gordon lean more to the use of the functional equivalence method but the literal method can still be an important tool to understanding the Bible. Fee and Gordon note, “If the best translational theory is functional equivalence, a translation that adheres to formal equivalence is often helpful as a second source; it can it can give you some confidence as to what the Hebrew or Greek actually looked like.”

 The important thing to remember when reading a Bible translation or choosing a translation method is that it needs to understandable while maintaining accuracy and that many different translations should be consulted to get a broader perspective.