# Where do you find the NASB "wooden?"



## Whitefield (May 12, 2009)

Several times on the PB I have seen people refer to the NASB as "wooden." I'm not interested in debating the value (or lack thereof) of the NASB. I just want to gather some of the passages people find "wooden," so I can look at them more closely and see what the Hebrew and Greek is behind that passage.


----------



## LawrenceU (May 12, 2009)

Well, my NASB is wooden in the fact that the paper in one of my copies I'm pretty sure was originally trees. I wonder sometimes if the 'wooden' comments come from the fact that the popular media keeps 'dumbing down' the reading level of printed work.


----------



## PresbyDane (May 12, 2009)




----------



## Whitefield (May 12, 2009)

LawrenceU said:


> Well, my NASB is wooden in the fact that the paper in one of my copies I'm pretty sure was originally trees. I wonder sometimes if the 'wooden' comments come from the fact that the popular media keeps 'dumbing down' the reading level of printed work.



Don't forget the cardboard in the covers.


----------



## Marrow Man (May 12, 2009)

Some of the readings in the psalms don't flow quite as well as they could, primarily b/c of word choice.

In other places, it doesn't seem so wooden during private reading, but when you read it out loud (i.e., during the Scripture reading on the Lord's Day) it can sound a bit cumbersome.


----------



## kevin.carroll (May 12, 2009)

Let's see...Gen. 1 through Rev. 22...

-----Added 5/12/2009 at 10:50:22 EST-----

On a more serious not, its switch to the second person familiar when addressing God would be a good example. I could list many many more. But I think that suffices.


----------



## Whitefield (May 12, 2009)

Marrow Man said:


> Some of the readings in the psalms don't flow quite as well as they could, primarily b/c of word choice.
> 
> In other places, it doesn't seem so wooden during private reading, but when you read it out loud (i.e., during the Scripture reading on the Lord's Day) it can sound a bit cumbersome.



Yes, the translation of poetry is a very difficult thing to do in any language.


----------



## Marrow Man (May 12, 2009)

Whitefield said:


> Marrow Man said:
> 
> 
> > Some of the readings in the psalms don't flow quite as well as they could, primarily b/c of word choice.
> ...



Agreed. But the KJV, NKJV, and ESV do a much better job, In my humble opinion. And I say that as one who uses the NASB as my preferred translation.


----------



## larryjf (May 12, 2009)

Gives good Hebrew idiom, but poor English idiom - 
Lk 20:2 - _and *they spoke, saying to Him*, "Tell us by what authority You are doing these things, or who is the one who gave You this authority?"_


----------



## Whitefield (May 12, 2009)

Marrow Man said:


> Whitefield said:
> 
> 
> > Marrow Man said:
> ...



Yes, I remember that you, like me, use the NASB primarily. Maybe its just a quirk for me, but I would rather tolerate the "woodenness" if it is because it is closer to the Hebrew. My intent behind this question was to find some verses to study the Hebrew/Greek behind the NASB and ESV and see which was closer to the Hb/Gk. My suspicion is the NASB is closer and hence the awkwardness of some passages in the NASB, but I wanted to test that out and have some pointedness in my Hb/Gk study today. 

-----Added 5/12/2009 at 11:18:25 EST-----



larryjf said:


> Gives good Hebrew idiom, but poor English idiom -
> Lk 20:2 - _and *they spoke, saying to Him*, "Tell us by what authority You are doing these things, or who is the one who gave You this authority?"_



Yes the double use of λεγω there can sound stilted.


----------



## Robert Truelove (May 12, 2009)

Just have someone read a random chapter out loud to you from the NASB, then the ESV, then the KJV and listen to the difference.

I think the 'woodenness' of the NASB is discerned moreso when it is read out loud then silently. 

Finally, this is not a reflection on whether or not it is an accurate translation; rather its style. If accuracy where all we were going for in a translation, its hard to beat translations like the Young's Literal Translation (which is a great tool but not a standard Bible--the more literal the translation, the clunkier it is going to sound).


----------



## Whitefield (May 12, 2009)

Robert Truelove said:


> Just have someone read a random chapter out loud to you from the NASB, then the ESV, then the KJV and listen to the difference.
> 
> I think the 'woodenness' of the NASB is discerned moreso when it is read out loud then silently.
> 
> Finally, this is not a reflection on whether or not it is an accurate translation; rather its style. If accuracy where all we were going for in a translation, its hard to beat translations like the Young's Literal Translation (which is a great tool but not a standard Bible--the more literal the translation, the clunkier it is going to sound).



True. The line between readability and literalness is a subjective line. My line happens to be more towards the literal. But I like finding out where that line is for others.


----------



## larryjf (May 12, 2009)

As far as closeness to the original languages i would say the NASB does a great job most of the time, especially with verb tenses and idioms.

However, the NASB also has some consistently poor translations of the originals.

for instance, in the OT they consistently translate "ach" as "countrymen" rather than "brothers" (eg: Lev 25:46).
This this might be because of theological bias. If the OT people of God were made up of "countrymen" and the NT people of God is made of "brothers" (eg: Rom 14:10), then one could more easily argue a distinction between Israel and the Church.

They also translate "porneia" as "immorality" instead of as "sexual immorality" on many occasions (eg: Mat 19:9). Though cheating at cards is immoral, i would hope that nobody would divorce their wife for such an offense.


----------



## Whitefield (May 12, 2009)

larryjf said:


> As far as closeness to the original languages i would say the NASB does a great job most of the time, especially with verb tenses and idioms.
> 
> However, the NASB also has some consistently poor translations of the originals.
> 
> ...



I appreciate your comments, Larry, but those venture into theological choices of words and not "woodenness." Although you make good theological points, I don't see the use of "countrymen" or "brothers" making the verse sound any more wooden. Same with πορνεια.


----------



## larryjf (May 12, 2009)

Whitefield said:


> larryjf said:
> 
> 
> > As far as closeness to the original languages i would say the NASB does a great job most of the time, especially with verb tenses and idioms.
> ...



I'm sorry if i misunderstood you, Lance....or if i didn't make my post clear.

I was specifically bringing these instances up to show that the NASB is not closer to the original languages in some of its translation in response to your statement:


> My intent behind this question was to find some verses to study the Hebrew/Greek behind the NASB and ESV and see which was closer to the Hb/Gk.


----------



## DMcFadden (May 12, 2009)

Whitefield said:


> Several times on the PB I have seen people refer to the NASB as "wooden." I'm not interested in debating the value (or lack thereof) of the NASB. I just want to gather some of the passages people find "wooden," so I can look at them more closely and see what the Hebrew and Greek is behind that passage.



Lance,

One of the artifacts of NT Greek is a preference for participial formations. These do NOT translate into idiomatic English since we do not speak/write that way. The NAS prefers to render ALL the participles in Greek by participles in English. This can lead to leaden, wooden, or awkward flow of language to one with an ear for English. Other "literal" translations (e.g., KJV, NKJV, ESV, and HCSB) mix it up a bit, using a past tense where appropriate.

Also, in direct conversational discourse, most English speakers use contractions. "Let's" is just as literal as "let us." However it gives a very different tone to the piece. Notice the participles and contractions in the following random passages:




> John 3:22-24 (HCSB)
> 22 After this, Jesus and His disciples went to the Judean countryside, where He spent time with them and baptized.
> 23 John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was plenty of water there. People were coming and being baptized,
> 
> ...





> Mark 4:35-41 (HCSB)
> 35 On that day, when evening had come, He told them, “Let’s cross over to the other side [of the lake].”
> 36 So they left the crowd and took Him along since He was [already] in the boat. And other boats were with Him.
> 37 A fierce windstorm arose, and the waves were breaking over the boat, so that the boat was already being swamped.
> ...


----------



## Robert Truelove (May 12, 2009)

As for my line...for a translation to be adopted as a primary Bible, it should be at least within the 'formal equivalent' realm of the spectrum. A 'dynamic equivalent' like the NIV, while it can have its uses, is 'over the line' as far as what I would recommend as a primary Bible (unless someone has already been reading it for years and would find the change difficult--I don't want my zeal for formal equivalents to discourage NIVers from reading their Bibles).

As for paraphrases...



Whitefield said:


> True. The line between readability and literalness is a subjective line. My line happens to be more towards the literal. But I like finding out where that line is for others.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (May 12, 2009)

Note that the NASB update is a little less 'wooden' than the original NASB.


----------



## puritanpilgrim (May 12, 2009)

I used NASB for seven years and switched to HCSB.


----------



## Idelette (May 12, 2009)

It's interesting because I've often heard people refer to the NASB as the wooden translation.....but I don't find it wooden at all! Personally, I find the poetic language very beautiful and not as others have described. I tend to be much more literal so I love the NASB! I often wonder if it has to deal with how many languages a person speaks and which ones.....for example, I've studied several languages and to me the translation of the NASB is very logical......but I wonder for someone who only speaks one language if certain translations seem wooden or awkward because they are accustomed to a certain pattern of thought. I've noticed that multi-lingual people love the language of the NASB but others do not. I'm just wondering if that is one reason.....


----------



## Stephen L Smith (May 12, 2009)

Stephen L Smith said:


> Note that the NASB update is a little less 'wooden' than the original NASB.



The NASB committee took the environmental and global warming concerns seriously; hence they made the update "less wooden".


----------



## PointyHaired Calvinist (May 12, 2009)

I love reading the NASB and have no difficulty reading silently, but reading aloud is somewhat tough, possibly since I don't do it much. The NIV is possibly the best flowing modern translation, In my humble opinion, even though other factors have something to be desired.


----------



## SolaGratia (May 12, 2009)

Pastor John MacArthur preaches from the 1977 NASB

and Pastor Charles Stanley from the updated 1995 NASB.


----------



## matthew11v25 (May 12, 2009)

Here are a few examples I find annoying in their immediate context, although I find the same things in the ESV (many times I find the ESV more awkward than the NASBU). you can find renderings like this on almost every page from what I remember and I think it is simply the readers preference on if they bother you or not.


Emphasis mine:

*Numbers 11:12-14:*
"Was it I who conceived *all this people*? ...*all this people*? For they weep before me, saying, 'Give us meat that we may eat!'...I alone am not able to carry *all this people*, because it is too burdensome for me."

Matthew 24:32:
"*Now learn the parable from the fig tree*: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near;

Hebrews 1:3:
3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact (J)representation of His nature, and (K)upholds all things *by the word of His power* When He had made (L)purification of sins, He (M)sat down at the right hand of the (N)Majesty on high, 

Mark 4:5:
5"Other seed fell on the rocky ground where it did not have much soil; and immediately it sprang up because it had *no depth of soil*.

Hebrews 10:7:
7"(M)THEN I SAID, 'BEHOLD, I HAVE COME
(*IN THE SCROLL OF THE BOOK* IT IS WRITTEN OF ME)
TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD.'"


----------

