Relevant, readable, and reliable English?

1 September 2010 Bible Translations  10 comments

The new Common English Bible (CEB) is said to be “relevant, readable, and reliable.” From the back cover of the paperback New Testament I received last week (though you can also find this info online at commonenglishbible.com), this new translation was worked on by “115 leading biblical scholars from 22 denominations,” and was “field tested by 77 reading specialists in 13 denominations.” All of this with the intent to produce a text that is

easier to read and understand. For many, reading the Bible and then truly grasping what it means can be a challenge. Yet the Bible is meant for everyone. The Common English Bible is a brand new translation of the Bible in a language that readers naturally speak and communicate—a common language.

Here’s a little test for you. There isn’t necessarily a right answer. Just be honest. Go with your gut.

I’ll list several translations of a passage. The CEB will be one of them. As you read these translations, answer these questions: (1) Which is the CEB translation?; and (2) Which is the most comfortable, readable English version?

First passage, Mark i.21-22:

  • (A) Jesus and his companions went to the town of Capernaum, and every Sabbath day he went into the synagogue and taught the people. They were amazed at his teaching, for he taught as one who had real authority––quite unlike the teachers of religious law.
  • (B) Jesus and his followers went into Capernaum. Immediately on the Sabbath Jesus entered the synagogue and started teaching. The people were amazed by his teaching, for he was teaching them with authority, not like the legal experts.
  • (C) They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue and taught. They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
  • (D) Then they went to Capernaum. When the Sabbath came, Jesus went into the synagogue and began to teach. The people there were amazed by his teaching, because he taught them like one who had authority, not like the experts in the law.

So, think about it for a minute. Read them over again. Then, answer. Which of these four is the CEB? And, then, which of these three do you think is most comfortable, most readable, in English? I only picked four, and there are many more English translations out there. So I’m not asking for the most readable of all translations out there . . . just these four.

Is there any of these four that you think read poorly for an English translation?

Here’s another passage to look at: John vi.32.

  • (A) Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread from heaven, but My Father gives you the true bread from heaven.
  • (B) Jesus said, “I assure you, Moses didn’t give them bread from heaven. My Father did. And now he offers you the true bread from heaven.
  • (C) Jesus told them, “I assure you, it wasn’t Moses who gave the bread from heaven to you, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.”
  • (D) Jesus responded, “The real significance of that Scripture is not that Moses gave you bread from heaven but that my Father is right now offering you bread from heaven, the real bread.

Again, run through the same questions. Take a minute.

Do you have your answers?

Whether you do or not, you’re probably ready to move on and find out which was which. Well, here you go.
Mark i.21-22:

  • (A) Jesus and his companions went to the town of Capernaum, and every Sabbath day he went into the synagogue and taught the people. They were amazed at his teaching, for he taught as one who had real authority––quite unlike the teachers of religious law. New Living Translation (NLT)
  • (B) Jesus and his followers went into Capernaum. Immediately on the Sabbath Jesus entered the synagogue and started teaching. The people were amazed by his teaching, for he was teaching them with authority, not like the legal experts. Common English Bible (CEB)
  • (C) They went to Capernaum; and when the sabbath came, he entered the synagogue and taught. They were astounded at his teaching, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes. New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
  • (D) Then they went to Capernaum. When the Sabbath came, Jesus went into the synagogue and began to teach. The people there were amazed by his teaching, because he taught them like one who had authority, not like the experts in the law. New English Translation (NET)

John vi.32.

  • (A) Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, Moses did not give you the bread from heaven, but My Father gives you the true bread from heaven. New King James Version (NKJV)
  • (B) Jesus said, “I assure you, Moses didn’t give them bread from heaven. My Father did. And now he offers you the true bread from heaven. New Living Translation (NLT)
  • (C) Jesus told them, “I assure you, it wasn’t Moses who gave the bread from heaven to you, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven.” Common English Bible (CEB)
  • (D) Jesus responded, “The real significance of that Scripture is not that Moses gave you bread from heaven but that my Father is right now offering you bread from heaven, the real bread. The Message (MSG)

So. How’d you do? Or, I guess, more relevant to this post, did your guess of which one was the CEB match up with your idea of which one presented the more readable, comfortable English?
I must say, though this is early in my readings of this translation, I have not been all that impressed. In fact, I’ve struggled to see the translation as very easy to read for us English folk. It staggers, stutters, and feels choppy at times. It fortunately seems to avoid the theo-technical terms like justification, but then unfortunately turns repent into “Change your hearts and lives” (see Mk. i.4, Ac. ii.38).

There’s still more reading to do. Honestly, I’d much rather the great minds and hearts behind these English translations turn to help the more than 2,000 languages out there that don’t have a word of the Scriptures in their heart language yet. For us English reading folk, the NLT, NET, NASB, and NRSV are plenty good enough. The New Living Translation and New English Translation are my top choices.

Have you read the Common English Bible yet? What are your thoughts? What translations do you prefer? Why?

  • http://twitter.com/sheddenm mshedden

    I got my free one just the other day. I like it for the most part but I think they really dropped the ball on Galatians and the “faith of Jesus” thing.

  • Iver Larsen

    I am one of those bible translators who work in languages other than English, and English is not my first language.
    In your test I guessed wrong both times. I thought the CEB would be the most readable and accurate, but it wasn’t. It turned out to be the NLT, at least in these two passages. That is not to say that the NLT cannot be improved upon.

  • http://www.askchaka.blogspot.com Chaka

    My first impressions of the CEB are similar to yours. In your test, I found NLT and NET to be the most readable.

  • Toryninja

    Yeah, I chose the NLT both times. I also ranked the translations as I read from 1-4 of which I prefered. The CEB came last both times. I honestly don’t understand how the CEB could have been field tested. If it was, it probably was tested on people who don’t read the Bible to begin with or have only read it in the RSV or KJV.

  • Amy

    I found the CEB to be most readable in both instances. There are many other instances where this is the case. Romans 4:1 is a good example. Before anyone makes a judgment, however, I think it’s only fair to read the text in context. Free downloads of Genesis, Matthew and Luke are available on the Common English Bible website: http://www.commonenglishbible.com The NT is also available on the site (or from your bookstore) for just $5.

  • Pingback: Good news? New English Bible translation released | Holy Post | National Post

  • Carriehsmith

    Is the question of most-readable not also tied to the demographic that will be reading the book? The general population does not have the vocabulary of great journalists : ) If you want people to read the bible you need to pick phrasing and vocab that is easily understood. I picked both CEB passages.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_LKYLQULBNH4UQQJYPUIQQ6TDS4 Jake

    I found this test to be interesting at first (and btw, thanks, it was fun.) But it’s not how I’d set up the test. Reading the same passage 4 times, makes some things difficult to spot. Although it would be more complex to set up, better to survey people without other passages as a comparison.
    It’s just that the whole verse is going to be QUITE understandable when you read it 4 times.

    How could you possibly miss the meaning with that kind of careful read through?

    Still the test gave me some thoughts:

    For one, the word scribe – without having read the other passages, I would have assumed the meaning of the word scribe was a person who made copies of things. But the other passages make it clear, that scribes refers to ‘legal experts.’ I became curious about this and looked up the meaning. Sure enough, it appears at one time in history, there was a job to be a legal expert and scribe, all in one.

    Well if you say scribe, I wouldn’t have understood that person to also be a legal expert. If you say legal expert, no way am I assuming that person is also a scribe. Neither choice is perfect, but I think perhaps the choice of legal expert was the better choice.

    I also found, the “I say to you” to be quite antiquated english, that is most definately “Bible Speak”.

    I told them, ok. I said to them…no way.

    So it was easy for me to give a “old english” rating to NRSV from passage one, and to the NKJV from passage two.

    I’ve studied Russian for 8 years. Mostly I’m trying to talk in Russian, but if I switch to English, allowing my Russian friends to converse in English for a while, I have to be careful about my English. It’s made me somewhat aware of what is awkward style. Take the phrase “I can’t speak to readability”.

    Why is that phrase so awkward? Because it is the dative case – it is something given to a recipient. I did what to a recipient of “readability” – This type of phrase makes no sense to ESL learners.

    “I say to you” is not as bad, as my example, but its bad. You is the recipient of the object, but what is the object? a message? It’s implied, I guess, it’s understandable to a native English speaker, but you can make this understandable to non-native English speakers, by not using the the antiquated style.

    Lots of people choose the Bible as their first English book to read, and they’d like it to be modern English, so that they are learning something that also advances their English skills, in general.

    It was easy for me to spot two versions that seem awkward. As for the best? I think its valid point that any modern translation should get the English mostly right – after all these are linguists doing the translation. But which is best? I think a no-comparison, blind analysis where only the final scores are compared – not the passages themselves, would be required. It’s just not possible to forget what I read one second before to see how easy I’m absorbing the meaning with the same verse being repeated.

  • Anonymous

    I picked the CEB both times. I like it. I think it is an exciting read, and I can see what is going on in the text. BUT—–make no mistake about it, I am NOT pleased with the ‘Happy-tudes’ or the ‘Human One’ thingy. They both are lousy translations. But, all is not lost. I own a ballpoint pen.

  • S. Miller

    I’ve been reading from the NLT and NKJV and get a clearer understanding of reading both. As a college student, CEB is really dumbed down and isn’t language I would use in intellectual conversation or in  paper BUT CEB is a version I would suggest for my some between the ages of 12 and 18, especially those who may not understand NLT or NKJV. However, when it comes to Bible study, I would compare versions for a clearer, more accurate understanding.