# Interesting Incomplete Sentences in the LSB



## Taylor (Apr 19, 2022)

I've been using the LSB for a while now, and I've come across something quite odd. We all know the Apostle Paul is fond of having lengthy sentences, with strung-together relative clauses one after another, sometimes lasting for entire paragraphs. Colossians 1 is one of these places. The LSB renders some of these relative clauses as standalone and thus incomplete sentences. Look at the underlined verses in the below excerpt from Colossians 1:9-16...





I found this very odd. One thing I except from a very "literal" (I know, I know...) translation is impeccable grammar and punctuation, and therefore not incomplete sentences as here. What do you think this going on here? Does anyone know of other places where this happens in the LSB? I would expect 1 Timothy 3:16 to be so, but it's not.


----------



## arapahoepark (Apr 19, 2022)

No semicolons even????


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Apr 20, 2022)

Taylor said:


> a very "literal" (I know, I know...)


You actually gave me a 'reprimand' on this point last year 


Taylor said:


> With all due respect to both of you, this conversation about "most literal" has been had so many times on this forum that I’m surprised you are deciding to hash it out again in this thread.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 20, 2022)

Stephen L Smith said:


> You actually gave me a 'reprimand' on this point last year


Hence the scare quotes around “literal” and the parenthetical “I know, I know.”

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Taylor (Apr 20, 2022)

All the resources I've looked at so far say this is definitely an error. A relative clause simply cannot stand on its own as independent. Of course, no translation is perfect, but this seems like something that should have been edited out. So, I'm still wondering if it's deliberate for some very odd reason.


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 20, 2022)

All I can suggest is that they were rightly committed to "who", and may have let their subheading render an error.

I'm personally not as disciplined as brother Paul, and I know when I start to include subheadings in long, drawn out sentences or trains of thought, well, let's just say my car couplings aren't always as secure as they need be. Someone trying to later parse Paul in a different language and then add subheadings was bound to run into difficulty. That's how I once wound up in Duluth.


----------



## Taylor (Apr 20, 2022)

reformed grit said:


> All I can suggest is that they were rightly committed to "who", and may have let their subheading render an error.


Possibly, but that still leaves v. 13 unexplained.


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 20, 2022)

Yep, yep, so it was maybe a battle between word choice and grammar, with perhaps a new-fangled computer program getting confused. I run into that with Alexa sometimes, but she's such a friend I just roll my eyes.

To be bluntly honest, I'm from the PCA, and we would usually just pencil-in a couple of semi-colons and pretend the issue went away.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 20, 2022)

If you are on Facebook, I'd recommend asking your question in the LSB group. At least one translator, William Varner, answers questions about the LSB there.


----------



## Taylor (Apr 20, 2022)

Pilgrim said:


> If you are on Facebook, I'd recommend asking your question in the LSB group. At least one translator, William Varner, answers questions about the LSB there.


I don’t have a Facebook. Could someone here who is part of that group kindly post there for me?


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 20, 2022)

Um... I got off Facebook for... reasons, but I had my brother join the group and ask.

added: It looks like a reply may take a while...


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 23, 2022)

reformed grit said:


> Um... I got off Facebook for... reasons, but I had my brother join the group and ask.
> 
> added: It looks like a reply may take a while...


I'm going to ask it myself as I don't see this question having been posted in the group. What group did he post it to? I'm referring to the "Legacy Standard Bible Fan Group."

EDIT: I posted it and see that it needs approval. I uploaded the graphic from the OP here but I don't know if that has anything to do with it being held for moderation. Is the post being held for moderation what happened to your brother's post if the question was indeed posted in the correct group? I think I'm "friends" with at least a couple of the translators but I don't know any of the admins or mods.


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 23, 2022)

He ran into a time issue of having to be around at 8PM.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 23, 2022)

This video may help explain why this passage is formatted this way, but it doesn't cover most of the passage in question in the OP and doesn't cover the English grammar question.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 23, 2022)

Here's one response, although I don't think the man is one of the translators. 



> Relative pronouns do not necessarily indicate the presence of a relative clause. A relative clause is found within a sentence, providing either needed or unneeded information about another noun (commonly the subject). However, a relative pronoun can be used as the head noun of a stand-alone sentence. Which it is doing here. Other, non-Bible examples: 1. Who keeps company with the wolf will learn to howl. 2. Who waits for time, loses time.


----------



## Charles Johnson (Apr 23, 2022)

Pilgrim said:


> Here's one response, although I don't think the man is one of the translators.


Those examples are bad English, though. Such relative pronouns in Greek should be translated "the one who" or "he who".


----------



## Taylor (Apr 23, 2022)

Pilgrim said:


> Here's one response, although I don't think the man is one of the translators.


The problem with that response is that the cited verses _are_ dependent clauses, and the underlying Greek verses_ are _dependent clauses.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## hammondjones (Apr 23, 2022)

Definitely not proper English. It is proper Greek? As mentioned, Paul rambles, and seems sometimes not to go back and edit his dictation. E.g., in Romans 5:12 he apparently breaks his line of thought mid sentence. (NKJV has 13 - 17 as parenthetical). So, should a translation have better grammar than the source? Not knowing Greek, I'll leave it to others to tell me if the Greek in this passage is that out of the ordinary to justify abnormal English expression.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## reformed grit (Apr 23, 2022)

Still no answer. It's the LSB Legacy Standard Bible group.


----------



## Pilgrim (Apr 23, 2022)

reformed grit said:


> Still no answer. It's the LSB Legacy Standard Bible group.


Maybe Drs Varner, Riccardi, etc. are doing sermon prep today. Yesterday somebody asked a question and they acknowledged it was an error and submitted it to the publisher on the same day.


----------

