tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 13 07:00:08 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: KBTP in the Wall Street Journal

On Mon, 13 Jun 1994, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:

> >   For anyone who is interested, the Wall Street Journal contains an 
> >article on the Klingon Bible Translation Project on the front page.  Read 
> >and enjoy!
> 
> Surely you jest.  Read, yes... but I didn't enjoy.  I'll have to type it in
> sometime; but it's too long for now.

Well, I was not jesting, but at the time when I typed the original post I 
had not yet read the article.  

> Basically, the article is all about the split in the Bible translation
> between the KBTP and Glen Proechel.  The claim is that Glen is doing a
> paraphrase while "rivals" are doing a literal translation.  I never knew we
> were rivals, nor that we were doing a literal translation (only that *I*
> was, because of my insufficiently imaginative style).  Glen, of course, is
> very supportive of all those involved, realizing, of course, how important
> it is that the community help support itself because no one else will.
> Listen to this outpouring of goodwill to others laboring hard at a goal
> very similar to his: "It's not going to make any sense." (of the KBTP's
> version).  Great.

My thoughts on the subject, which were expressed in the project 
guidelines, was that we would be as literal as possible in order to 
remain faithful to our source text.  Having translated the Bible 
extensively, however, I am well aware that a simple literal translation 
would be an utter failure (see for example the literal translation into 
English which is known as the American Standard Version, which is 
ridiculous).  I knew we would have to take a few steps back from literal 
to be understood (I mentioned this explicitly to the reporter but of 
course it did not get printed), but I do not think we have to go as far as 
Proechel.  His translation is going to end up sounding like the Good 
News for Modern Klingons version.  I would prefer to do a scholarly 
edition.  Having read Mark's and Nick's translations, I think we are 
making good progress in that direction.

> Essentially, the Klingon community comes across as splintered between
> pedantic purists and the clever, creative Proechel (tho neither is honestly
> protrayed that much better than the other)... this in a community that's so
> small it needs all the cohesion it can get!  I'm really really disappointed
> with Glen.

While I think that Glen's split will cause some damage to the community 
itself, I think the biggest loss will be in publicity.  Let's face it, 
one of the biggest selling points about the bible translation is that it 
is a novelty.  This means that if Proechel publishes a New Testament 
first, all the publicity will go to him (one individual) instead of the 
Klingon community as a whole.  By the time the whole Bible comes out, the 
novelty will have worn off.  Personally, I regret Glen's actions, not so 
much because the project lost a good translator, but because the focus 
has shifted from the efforts of tlhIngan Hol linguists as a whole to one 
individual who is off doing his own thing.

You may also notice in the article (which I will post soon) that I did 
not comment about the split.  That is because at the time I gave the 
interview I did not know that we had a split.  It was not until last 
night that Glen called me to tell me that he was resigning.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Kevin A. Wilson				[email protected] |
|									    |
|    "I dislike natural theology.  It takes unbelief far too seriously"     |
|									    |
|   					-- Brevard Childs       	    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to archive top level