# Mark Strauss' criticisms of the ESV missing idioms



## Polanus1561 (Today at 9:37 AM)

takes awhile to load

Any thoughts?

Further, I believe shows that the NASB is not as wooden as the ESV in the NT.


----------



## JimmyH (Today at 11:40 AM)

I haven't checked the rest yet, but the LSB gets Mark 1-2 'right' according to Strauss.
I love the ESV. It is very reminiscent ... to me ... of the KJV, of which it is after all a revision.
I also love the '95 NASB. I've never thought it wooden, though I'm not a preacher, and though I've read both of these cover to cover in past years, I've never read them aloud.


----------



## Scottish Presbyterian (Today at 12:59 PM)

Odd criticisms (and most here know I’m no ESV apologist). Translating idioms word for word is often impossible, but keeping as close as possible to the vocabulary of the source language is a good thing, if it’s intelligible in the target language (which the examples given all are, as far down the list as I’ve had the will to read). It’s clear that when translating an idiom, the result will not necessarily correspond to daily speech in the target language. The linked piece simply assumes it’s own conclusion that this is problematic - it isn’t.

Reactions: Like 2


----------

