[sword-devel] John Gill

Trevor Jenkins sword-devel@crosswire.org
Tue, 04 Jul 2000 00:28:56 +0100

On Monday, 3 July, 2000 23:21:36, John Keiser <jkeiser@iname.com> wrote:

>> > Perhaps they want to protect the translation from being corrupted by
>> > unscrupulous people taking the results of prayerful work and bending it to
>> > their own interpretation. Otherwise one descends into the ?Cottonpatch?
>> > mentality.

> What is the Cottonpatch translation?

According to Beekman and Callow, who wrote the textbook on Bible
translation[1], the "Koinonia Cotton Patch Version" by C L Jordan[2] is:

'... a translation that very obviously departs from the historical framework
of the Scripture ... This translation assumes a setting in the southern
United States, and is translated as if it had just been written. Thus 1
Corinthians is given the title "A Letter from Paul to the Christians in
Atlanta". Chapter 8, v 1 in the same letter ...*  is translated "Now about
working on Sundays ...". Jews are represented by "whites" and gentiles as
"Negros" so that 1 Cor 10:32 ...* is transalted as "Set a good example for
both whites and Negroes --- for God's whole church --- ..." Whatever merits
this translation may have it is clear that it has abandoned the principle of
historical fidelity ... but objects, places, persons, animals, customs,
beliefs or activities which are part of a historical statement must be
translated in such a way that the same information is communicated by the
translation as by the original statements.'

[1] John Beekman and John Callow
    Translating the Word of God
    Zondervan, 1974
    republished Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1988

[2] Clarence L Jordan
    Koinonia "Cotton Patch" Version
    Koinonia Publication, GA, 1966

Ellipsis marked "*" are mine and are the rendering of these verses in the
AV. All other ellipsis are Beekman and Callow's.

Your milage with the "Cotton Patch" may vary but for most people it's so far
beyond the boundary (aka out in left field) as to be inappropriate.

Regards, Trevor

British Sign Language is not inarticulate handwaving; it's a living
language. So recognise it now.


<>< Re: deemed!