Almost every translation claims to be ‘literal.’ How can you make any sense of these claims? How can both the New American Standard and the New Living Bible both claim to be more literal than the other? The answer is this: they are using the word ‘literal’ in two different senses, reflecting two different methods of translation.
1. Some versions use ‘Literal’ to mean ‘word-for-word’
Our standard translations like the NASB, NKJV, and ESV mean by ‘literal’ that their translation reflects the words and grammar of the original Greek writings as much as possible in an elegant English translation. They seek to strike the perfect balance between what the NT authors said in Greek and how we would say it in beautiful English. In technical terms, there is a significant degree of ‘formal equivalence’ between the Greek and the English. In layman’s terms, these are word-for-word translations, within the bounds of pleasing and proper English. We like these translations because we feel they are the most accurate.
2. But they are not strictly ‘word-for-word’
Even so-called word-for-word translations cannot follow the Greek absolutely. English is just too different from Greek. Greek does not rely on word order as English does. Long “run on” sentences are normal in Greek, but difficult to follow in English. A strictly word-for-word translation is very difficult for an English reader to follow. To experience this for yourself, just look at an interlinear Greek New Testament that has the English words printed directly under the Greek words.
3. Other versions use ‘Literal’ to mean ‘thought-for-thought’
Translations such as the NIV, the New Living Bible, the Message mean by ‘literal’ that their translation reflects the intended meaning of the Greek words using normal and pleasing English terms and grammar that convey the same meaning. In doing this, these translations rephrase the Greek sentences and clarify or interpret thoughts as needed so that their perspective of the intended meaning in the Greek is beautifully conveyed to the English reader. In technical terms, this method is called ‘dynamic equivalence.’ In layman’s terms, these are thought-for-thought translations. We like these translations because they feel so natural to us. They speak to us in a way we can more easily understand, or even in an exciting or thought-provoking manner.
4. But the thoughts they ‘translate’ vary widely
Each version reflects its decisions on how far the focus is moved from the Greek to the English, and how much ‘interpretation’ is added to the ‘translation.’ At one extreme the translation remains close to the Greek, but enhances or clarifies the meaning in English. The NRSV is an example. At the other extreme the translation is a paraphrase completely rewritten into words and phrases chosen by the translator. The Message is an example, aiming at beautiful contemporary English.
5. Our translations can be ranked on a scale of 0 to 10
Imagine a translation scale where zero is the Greek New Testament and ten is an exciting paraphrase such as The Message. A one would be a Greek-English interlinear, barely understandable to an English reader. A five would be our standard translations that seek to perfectly balance the Greek and English, like the NASB, NKJV, and ESV. The NRSV would be a six; the NIV a seven. There are many wonderful translations available between five and ten.
6. Where does the DLNT and TransLine translation fit in?
It would be a three on the scale above, opening a different view into the New Testament for English readers. The very style and feel of the Greek is reflected in this translation. The connecting words and grammar and sentence structure of the Greek, so essential to follow the apostles’ train of thought, can be clearly seen. This translation allows you to see the words and flow of thought as they are in Greek. The notes help you see the places where there are different opinions about the flow of thought.
7. Is this translation better than the other translations?
The answer is, better for what? Better as one’s standard English translation? No. Since it more closely follows the Greek ways of speaking, it is of course more foreign-sounding, and therefore inferior in its English to all the versions between five and ten on the scale mentioned above. But as a reflection of the Greek mind and thought processes and intent of the original writers, it is indeed a fuller display of the ancient writings. To get any closer to the mind of those writers, you would have to learn Greek. You will love this translation.
8. There is no such thing as a perfect translation
Every translation strives to accomplish a certain balance of translation goals, a balance of Greek accuracy and English expression. To illustrate, the NIV expresses the thoughts contained in the Greek using the full breadth and beauty of English, foregoing strict conformity to the Greek phraseology. The Disciples’ Literal New Testament expresses the breadth and beauty of the Greek phraseology, sacrificing normal English idiom. So ‘better’ is not really a proper question, because each translation serves its purpose. The Disciples’ Literal New Testament, the NASB, the NIV, and The Message, to use these four as examples, are each better at what they are trying to do than the others. Which is better for you depends on what you are trying to accomplish at the time.