# "Literal" bible translations, and grammer additives



## matthew11v25 (Jan 21, 2005)

I am looking for a literal translation of the Bible (currently using NKJV and ESV), that is more "literal" than ASV, but not necessarily an interlinear. The reason for this is my curiosity in understanding translation of...lets say a portion john 3:16 

"whoever believes in him..." (NKJV)
My understanding is that the "whoever" is not found in the greek, but translates more accurately "the believing ones" or "ones who believe". 
so...

question 1. is there a more literal translation. (I have heard of "Robert Young's literal translation"...but do not know if it is any good)?

question 2. What is the main reason for translating "whoever' in translations if it does not appear in greek? I am guessing that it is probably something to do with grammer that is more readable. But it seems as though translation like this may be more problematic to people understanding the context of similiar passages.

thoughts? suggestions? any other threads I should check out?


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 21, 2005)

> _Originally posted by matthew11v25_
> I am looking for a literal translation of the Bible (currently using NKJV and ESV), that is more "literal" than ASV, but not necessarily an interlinear. The reason for this is my curiosity in understanding translation of...lets say a portion john 3:16
> 
> "whoever believes in him..." (NKJV)
> ...



Young's literal is a good translation. I use it often when doing exegesis for a second opinion.

The "whoever" is simply an acceptable translation of a participle plus the article in Greek. It can be translated:

"whoever believes"
"the man who believes"
"the believing man"
"the one who believes"

or even

"the believer"

Context is the guide.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Jan 21, 2005)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> The "whoever" is simply an acceptable translation of a participle plus the article in Greek.



Got it...thanks


----------



## Shane (Jan 22, 2005)

Fred

Would the NASB not qualify as a good literal translation?


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 22, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Shane_
> Fred
> 
> Would the NASB not qualify as a good literal translation?



I thought what Matthew was looking for was a very wooden translation, almost a exegetical firts step kind of translation. That is what Young's is.

The NASB is very good, and is good at getting behind the Greek; it's just more "polished" than Youngs (and that is fine)


----------



## bond-servant (Jan 22, 2005)

A previous pastor I had once told his discipleschip class that in Seminary they used the NASB to check thier Greek homework....


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Jan 22, 2005)

How about Green's Literal Translation? You can get it at e-sword free. I can put a link to His sight here if you want. It is a take off of his interlinear.


----------



## bond-servant (Jan 22, 2005)

E-sword is a wonderful tool, and with the different Hebrew and Greek dictionaries included, makes a great help on studying the literal meanings :bigsmile:


----------

