erratio: (Default)
[personal profile] erratio
The Poll
When you sing the Australian National Anthem, how do you pronounce the word 'advance'?
A: To rhyme with 'pants'
B: Advarnce, to be assonant with the word 'path'


For myself, I have no idea. I read both pronounciations and they both sound correct to me.

Random Linguistics

I finally discovered why I've occasionally been mistaken for Canadian/British!

From the Wikipedia article on Australian English:

Cultivated Australian English has many similarities to British Received Pronunciation, and is often mistaken for it. Cultivated Australian English is now spoken by less than 10% of the population.


I find this strange though because I don't consider my word usage to be very.. cultivated, to say the least. In fact I often seem to go out of my way (without really meaning to) to use some really weird or earthy turns of phrase and pronounciation. Sometimes I think that it's my subconscious need to distance myself from the speech patterns of people who I don't like, so my mum's strange idioms are in, my high schools' South African phrases and accents are out, and in between is a healthy sprinkling of random phrases that seemed particularly apt to me when I heard/read them. Oh and growing up with a reading vocabulary far beyond your spoken can lead to some really strange pronounciations :) I'm still coming across them nowadays (who the hell uses that word anyway? Other than me)

Anyway, I guess that puts my accent mostly in General Australian English but sometimes straying into Cultivated. Woot!

The requests

1. Does anyone know where I can buy dreidels? At some point I'll probably go check Gold's near Bondi Beach but I have no idea where else one could possibly buy these. And Gold's has a reputation for being expensive, so an alternate source would be nice. Heck, any source would be nice, I don't even know if Gold's has them.

2. If I wanted to read the Christian Bible (ie. the New Testament, Gospels, etc) what version(s) would you recommend I read?

Date: 2006-11-06 05:51 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
Straight to the Bible question: your best bet is the NRSV. They have attempted to be non-denominational, and have Jews as well as different demoninations of Christians on their editorial committee. King James Version (also known as the Authorised Version) is also very good, but does not take recent scholarship on the Dead Sea Scrolls into account. Do not, however, bother with the NIV or any of the idiomatic translations (like Good News Bible, etc).

Date: 2006-11-06 02:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mia-at-lj.livejournal.com
King James is fun to read, especially if you are into linguistics. They wrote the King James bible to make it sound poetically beautiful, and not just a complete literal translation if what my English teacher said in high school is correct.

I've only read Good News Bible and New International Version and the Catholic Revised Standard Version. The advantage of the idiomtic ones is that they are easy to read. I haven't really made an opinion on the differences, though there is a huge difference in the language structure in the three editions though they basically kinda mean the same thing.

Though I do like the childrens version with pictures!

Date: 2006-11-07 01:02 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
True, the idiomatic translations are a lot easier to read (which is the whole point, I guess!), but you do have to be careful. Idiomatic translations are also doctrinal translations. An example (one of many):

Jer 7:22 says that "For when I freed your fathers from the land of Egypt, I did not speak with them or command them concerning burnt offerings or sacrifice". Bit a problem, this verse, considering God almost speaks of nothing else throughout the entire book of Leviticus! How does the NIV resolve this problem? "I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices". Sure, they makes things easier, but it's completely unfaithful to the text.

An example from the New Testament might be 1 Pet 4:6. This says that the gospel was preached "to them that are dead, that they may be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit". This is also a problem as this implies that conversion is possible after death. How does the NIV resolve this? That the gospel was preached "to those who are now dead". Again, this solves the problem, but it is still unfaithful to the text.

In reality, the NIV was created as a response to the NRSV. Because of the fact that the NRSV allowed non-Protestants (and even non-Christians) on their editorial committee, a group of evangelical Protestants went and made their own translation. Unless you have the time to check every verse that you read against another version, my advice would simply be to stick with an alternative version instead. NIV is very readable, but it is too often simply incorrect.

Profile

erratio: (Default)
erratio

September 2019

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
2223242526 2728
2930     

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Dec. 25th, 2025 03:32 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios