When we are working with a particular ethnic group or socio-ethnic group, how many others should we include as partners? Often we tend to include:
But what about including church leaders from the wider churches, those that speaker the language of wider communication? They often feel excluded from what we are doing, and we do tend to exclude them because they seem not to have an immediate interest in it, and don't usually speak the language. There is also the issue of religious background. If the socio-ethnic group is MBB or insider, the LWC churches are often against the kind of language used in the translation, seeing it as syncretistic, or just plain heretical. It's very difficult to know whether to include them or not. If we include them, they may well force us down a certain route (literal translation, no attempt at contextualisation or use of natural MBB language). If, however, we don't include them the translation will only be used by the MBB or insider readers/hearers and not at all by the wider church. Sometimes folk in the Bible Translation world suggest that two translations are needed - one for the church, and one for MBBs and others. This, however, is not such a good idea, as outsiders can compare the two translations, point out the differences, and 'prove' that we have corrupted the Bible. Let's remember that whatever goes into print will be 'The Bible' for some time to come, and will be taken as authoritative, inspired, and so on. We need to think more carefully about such audience issues before starting projects, and one tool to enable us to do this is the project brief. This should be written not just by the project coordinator with input from the team and consultant, but including as many partners as possible. The project will then get off to a good start, with clear 'ends' in sight. Please let's spend more time working on relationships and partnership-building at the local level. For this to happen we need good project coordinators, not necessarily with a linguistic background. Will you join us?
- Church leaders from that particular socio-ethnic group
- Mission leaders from within the country, especially those working with that group
- Representatives from Bible Translation agencies such as the Bible Societies, IBT
But what about including church leaders from the wider churches, those that speaker the language of wider communication? They often feel excluded from what we are doing, and we do tend to exclude them because they seem not to have an immediate interest in it, and don't usually speak the language. There is also the issue of religious background. If the socio-ethnic group is MBB or insider, the LWC churches are often against the kind of language used in the translation, seeing it as syncretistic, or just plain heretical. It's very difficult to know whether to include them or not. If we include them, they may well force us down a certain route (literal translation, no attempt at contextualisation or use of natural MBB language). If, however, we don't include them the translation will only be used by the MBB or insider readers/hearers and not at all by the wider church. Sometimes folk in the Bible Translation world suggest that two translations are needed - one for the church, and one for MBBs and others. This, however, is not such a good idea, as outsiders can compare the two translations, point out the differences, and 'prove' that we have corrupted the Bible. Let's remember that whatever goes into print will be 'The Bible' for some time to come, and will be taken as authoritative, inspired, and so on. We need to think more carefully about such audience issues before starting projects, and one tool to enable us to do this is the project brief. This should be written not just by the project coordinator with input from the team and consultant, but including as many partners as possible. The project will then get off to a good start, with clear 'ends' in sight. Please let's spend more time working on relationships and partnership-building at the local level. For this to happen we need good project coordinators, not necessarily with a linguistic background. Will you join us?
No comments:
Post a Comment