[sword-devel] The penultimate word on the "PorAA" module
jonatas at gmail.com
Wed May 31 06:59:00 MST 2006
Em 2006/05/31, às 06:42, Chris Little escreveu:
> I will try to check the pedigree of the "PorAA" module by checking
> the three public domain print "Almeida" texts at my library. I've
> requested that they be pulled from storage, but since I will be out
> of town for a few days, I won't be able to pick them up or do the
> necessary comparisons until next week.
> I have compared the text we have, the "Almeida Atualizada", with
> the other electronic Almeida texts I know of:
> the Corrigada Fiel (Copyright SBB 1995)
> the 1994 revision of the Trinitarian Bible Society
> the Revista e Atualizada (Copyright SBB 1997)
> and the Revista e Corrigida (Copyright SBB 1997)
> It is my understaning that Leandro Dutra considers our PorAA to be
> derived from the Revista e Atualizada text above. If that is not
> the case, then I do not understand which text it is assumed that
> the PorAA is a derivative of.
No, Leandro affirms that the text comes from other source, not ARA
(Revista e Atualizada) but from AVR (Versão Revisada). And it's not
from SBB but from IBB (JUERP).
> The text we are distributing bears resemblances to all of the above
> texts, but is clearly not simply a corrupted copy of any of them.
> It is certainly not derived from the Revista e Atualizada text
> cited above.
Yes, it resembles all the others because all share the same source.
And yes, it is different from Revista e Atualizada (ARA).
My greek's professor's opinion (Pastor Prof. Dr. Manuel Alexandre
Júnior): "It's different. (...) It's better than ARA or ARC." So I
asked him to compare it with Versão Revisada (curiosity: that version
is, generally, considered better). I'm waiting for him to answer me.
He is an authority in Bible translation here in Portugal and he is
even recognized around the world. He has been involved in every
revision and translation ever done in Portugal for at least 30 years
(except for catholic ones, that never use Almeida's translation as a
source). And he probably knows every translation ever published
(wether here or in Brazil). He was present at the Bible Technologies
Conference (I think 3 years ago?). About PorAA he said to me: "I'm
not aware of any Almeida's revision called Almeida Atualizada."
> If our text closely matches one of the print editions I will
> examine, then we will know that it is a public domain text and I
> will post the corrected text that Jónatas Ferreira sent me.
> If it does not match any of them, then it will remain unclear what
> the ultimate source of our text is. However, it has been and
> presently continues to be my belief that this translation is what
> it claims to be, given our source and the other sites that offer
> this text as public domain.
If it matches the edition Leandro talks about you should use his
text, no mine. If it matches then you'll have to remove PorAA from
the server, because it will be copyright infringement.
I've been comparing the text myself (I discovered that I own a hard
copy of Revista e Corrigida, Revista e Atualizada, Versão
Contemporânea and Versão Revisada; and an eText of Corrigida Fiel and
Trinitarian Bible Society's revision). I also asked Pastor Alexandre
to do the same for me. I'm waiting for his opinion. So far I didn't
find a single difference except for the missing text.
I think that everyone went to the same source and now everyone is
distributing the same text, with the same errors: Unbound,
BibleGateway and Crosswire.
I spoke today with the president from the Portuguese Bible Society
(SBP) and he told me that the only versions of Almeida that are
Public Domain are the ones prior to 1920's decade. The others have
copyrights because each time SBP or SBB or IBB (JUERP) made a new
edition they made a few changes and renewed the copyright. So, the
most recent copy of Revista e Corrigida that is Public Domain is the
one from (if I remeber right) 1918. Those copies have an all
different orthography and some words are now incomprehensible at all,
both to european portuguese speakers and brazilians, as well as all
> If you have information as to the print source of our text, please
> feel free to send it my way. Website addresses with some sample
> text of copyrighted translations (not called Almeida Atualizada)
> would be the best way of proving to me that our text is under
> copyright. A title and date (or other identifying information, such
> as ISBNs or US LOC call numbers) would be acceptable, assuming I
> can track down a copy.
The "Almeida Versão Revisada" doesn't have an ISBN (many of the
brazilian books I own don't have one; in fact, just talking about
Bibles, I own 3 copies of brazilian editions of Almeida's Revision
Bibles and only one has an ISBN). A can scan you some pages if you
want. The original copyright is from 1967, renewed in 1974 all by
JUERP / Imprensa Bíblica Brasileira; my copy is the 9th reprint,
dated 1993; Certificado de Registo nº 23.947 BN (Registration
Certificate nr. 23.947 BN) — BN probably means Biblioteca Nacional
> Continued arguing on the list is not helpful or necessary.
I agree. Thank you! I had already suggested that already. This is my
final word here about this subject until you publish your
conclusions. From now on I will only write to the list about this
subject if specifically requested.
Greetings to all,
More information about the sword-devel