Inside Cassius: Translation and the Book of Mormon

[_MrStakhanovite]

In the cause of public service, the faculty and staff of Cassius University have graciously allowed an undergraduate seminar concerning languages and the Book of Mormon to be open to the public. Just above the Brutus Memorial Rectory in room B400, the Reverend Kishkumen and Professor Darth co-teach a small seminar to a senior class of students in their final year. Today, Mr.Stakhanovite is leading the discussion with his thoughts on the recent reading assignment, which was a mopologetic paper from the late 90s.

When you become a student of Hebrew, you really begin to see the Hebrew Bible in a way that is simply unavailable to readers of the English translations. This is not to say that English translations can’t provide a reader with plenty of insight (they can), but even modern secular translations are still influenced more by the King James Bible than by the modern study of linguistics and translation theory.

For a good example, take the Hebrew word AMR (you‘d pronounce it like ‘aw-mare‘), one of the most common words in the Hebrew canon. The word literally means “to say” and is responsible for all those atrocious translations like this:

Genesis 27:6 And Rebekah spake [AMR] unto Jacob her son, saying [AMR], Behold, I heard thy father speak unto Esau thy brother, saying [AMR] (KJV)

But it isn’t just used for speaking, but also songs:

Exodus 15:1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake [AMR], saying[AMR], I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. (KJV)

And questions:

Genesis 37:15 And a certain man found him, and, behold, [he was] wandering in the field: and the man asked him, saying [AMR], What seekest thou?

In English, we don’t say songs or say questions (neither in Hebrew for that matter), but the translators of the KJV still literally translated AMR where they found it, no matter the context. Today we know that AMR in these instances is not used to convey “to say” but to serve the function of introducing direct quotations exactly like a comma and a quotation mark.

So the KJV translators looked at the internal word structure to come up with an incorrect meaning, I wonder what impact this has translation theories for the Book of Mormon? Take for example this:

1st Nephi 3:1-2 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, returned from speaking with the Lord, to the tent of my father. And it came to pass that he spake unto me, saying: Behold I have dreamed a dream, in the which the Lord hath commanded me that thou and thy brethren shall return to Jerusalem.

In my opinion, this would be Joseph Smith merely mimicking the KJV’s idiosyncrasies in an attempt to sound more biblical to his audience at the time (who would only be familiar with the KJV).

What impact does this have on translation theories? When Joseph was translating this 1st Nephi 3 passage, did he literally see the words “spake unto me saying”? If so, was this Reformed Egyptian using the same conventions as Biblical Hebrew for introducing direct quotes with AMR since it lacked the punctuation to do so? If it was following this convention, wouldn’t the true meaning behind AMR be revealed to Joseph and he could have easily inserted the punctuation that was necessary? Why perpetuate the errors of the KJV?

Consider this from Royal Skousen

This evidence does not support theories that Joseph Smith composed the text himself or that he took the text from some other source. Instead, it indicates that the Lord exercised what I refer to as "tight control" over the word-by-word translation of the Book of Mormon. In particular, the evidence suggests that Joseph Smith saw specific words written out in English and read them off to the scribe, and that the accuracy of the resulting text depended on the carefulness of Joseph and his scribe. Indeed, this evidence is most compatible with the account that Joseph himself gave, that he translated the Book of Mormon "by the gift and power of God."

The above quote in conjunction with what we know about AMR would seem to implicate that God revealed it wrong to Joseph.

Are there other implications I’m missing?

[_Doctor Scratch]

Stak:

Have you read any of David P. Wright's stuff? He digs into some of the issues you mention here. As I recall, one of the tidbits of evidence he analyzes is the way that Joseph Smith handled instances of italics in the Bible, and some of the reasons why Joseph Smith decided to fiddle with the formatting.

[_Kishkumen]

Well done, Stak. Are you looking for a more permanent position with Cassius University?

[_brade]

This evidence does not support theories that Joseph Smith composed the text himself or that he took the text from some other source. Instead, it indicates that the Lord exercised what I refer to as "tight control" over the word-by-word translation of the Book of Mormon. In particular, the evidence suggests that Joseph Smith saw specific words written out in English and read them off to the scribe, and that the accuracy of the resulting text depended on the carefulness of Joseph and his scribe. Indeed, this evidence is most compatible with the account that Joseph himself gave, that he translated the Book of Mormon "by the gift and power of God."

Wait, hold on a second. How does the evidence in question indicate that a deity of any kind exercised any amount of control over what Joseph Smith was involved in producing? If this is the case, then it seems Skouson is overlooking something ground breaking in focusing so narrowly on Book of Mormon apologetics. If, indeed, the evidence in questions indicates that a deity was involved in anything at all, then it would seem as if Skouson has got hold of evidence indicative of the existence of a deity! This should be headline news.

[_Nightlion]

Are there other implications I’m missing?

Sort of like saying, I mean, "Look! There is a young beautiful girl in Joseph's home. She must have had an abortion because everybody knows Joseph got her pregnant. Or else why did she hastily run off?"

What ever you make up must be so.
This is not mopologetics, it is MDB's poliogetics. Malformed logic.

To say an instance in the Book of Mormon of saying something as reasonable as, "he spake unto me saying"
proves AMR was mistranslated from off the gold plates is malformed logic indeed. In fact is is stinky poo!

First off. Nobody who thinks this believes that the gold plates existed and therefore nothing like AMR was ever even considered and still they poop this stuff like a serious hunker downer.

I do not have a problem with satire per se. Just don't say your satire don't stink. Like its serious business.

[_MrStakhanovite]

To say an instance in the Book of Mormon of saying something as reasonable as, "he spake unto me saying"
proves AMR was mistranslated from off the gold plates is malformed logic indeed.

Break it down for me Nightlion, why is this a malformed logic?

[_Nightlion]

To say an instance in the Book of Mormon of saying something as reasonable as, "he spake unto me saying"
proves AMR was mistranslated from off the gold plates is malformed logic indeed.

Break it down for me Nightlion, why is this a malformed logic?

1. You have no clue what reformed Egyptian is as it relates to Hebrew.
2. No way you can establish that any specific Hebrew word was ever inscribed on the Gold Plates.
3. Joseph Smith was not translating anything. He was looking at Reformed Egyptian characters with a desire to know their English meaning. He was utterly dependent upon revelation to know anything about it.
4. Calling it translation or mistranslation are equally absurd.
5. Acting all learnedly in an attempt to poke fun is transparent folly.

Care to defend anything with real logical deduction?

[_sock puppet]

1. You have no clue what reformed Egyptian is as it relates to Hebrew.

What is reformed Egyptian? Are there samples available? How does it relate to Hebrew?

2. No way you can establish that any specific Hebrew word was ever inscribed on the Gold Plates.

That has flummoxed Mormons for 180 years now, at least those that want to vet it out and prove it. For others, the fact of no plates has been a pole holding up the tent that provides refuge from the rain of reality falling down around them.

3. Joseph Smith was not translating anything. He was looking at Reformed Egyptian characters with a desire to know their English meaning. He was utterly dependent upon revelation to know anything about it.

No, the self-described translator wasn't translating anything. No way can it be established that there were ever any gold plates, much less any 'reformed' Egyptian characters on them, to have been looked at.

4. Calling it translation or mistranslation are equally absurd.

Agreed. There was no translation going on. I wonder why JSJr was so enamored with the idea that was what he was doing, even donning the title 'translator'?

[_Drifting]

1. You have no clue what reformed Egyptian is as it relates to Hebrew.

You have no clue that 'reformed Egyptian exists at all.

2. No way you can establish that any specific Hebrew word was ever inscribed on the Gold Plates.

Which is kind of like there being no way you can establish that there was ever any gold plates upon which anything was inscribed at all.

3. Joseph Smith was not translating anything. He was looking at Reformed Egyptian characters with a desire to know their English meaning. He was utterly dependent upon revelation to know anything about it.

No, he was looking at a rock.

4. Calling it translation or mistranslation are equally absurd.

Agreed

5. Acting all learnedly in an attempt to poke fun is transparent folly.

Then why do you do it?

Care to defend anything with real logical deduction?

I'm not sure 'real logical deduction' is the language of your particular planet, so your challenge to Stak seems redundant.

[_dblagent007]

This evidence does not support theories that Joseph Smith composed the text himself or that he took the text from some other source. Instead, it indicates that the Lord exercised what I refer to as "tight control" over the word-by-word translation of the Book of Mormon. In particular, the evidence suggests that Joseph Smith saw specific words written out in English and read them off to the scribe, and that the accuracy of the resulting text depended on the carefulness of Joseph and his scribe. Indeed, this evidence is most compatible with the account that Joseph himself gave, that he translated the Book of Mormon "by the gift and power of God."

The tight theory has a huge problem. The language and grammar of the original, as Skousen ought to well know, reads like it was written by a country bumpkin. Hence the need for the 3,000+ changes to the text. Maybe God would reveal his most important work, word for word, using horrible grammar and syntax. Maybe, just maybe (or NOT).