Sociocultural Power of Biblical Translation in Early Modern Europe: The Cases of the Ostroh Bible (1581) and the King James Bible (1611)
Taras Shmiher
Ivan Franko National University of Lviv , Ukrainehttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-2882
Oksana Dzera
Ivan Franko National University of Lviv , Ukrainehttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3471-0724
Abstract
This paper presents sociocultural profiles of the Ostroh Bible (1581) and the King James Version of the Bible (1611) in terms of their agency, authoritative status and regulative functions. Despite scholarly and popular attention given to both texts, no attempts have been made so far to compare them. This paper intends to break the mold and focuses on the causes and results of the collective agency of the two versions at the textual, paratextual and extratextual levels as well as on the gatekeeping role of these translations and the ways they affected the development of their respective cultures. It is also demonstrated that the OB and the KJV performed the function of “the second originals.” Also subject to analysis are the prefaces to the two editions, which disclose information about important translation figures and deal with issues of universal and sacred history.
Keywords:
biblical translation, Ostroh Bible, King James Bible, translation research, religious studies, textual, extratextual and paratextual agencyReferences
Bibliya syrich knyhy Vetkhaho i Novaho Zavita po yazyku slovensku (Ostroh 1581), https://archive.org/details/OstrogBiblija1581/mode/2up (access 13.11.2023) (= OB).
Campbell, G., Bible. The Story of the King James Version 1611−2011 (New York: Oxford University Press 2010). (Crossref)
Chyzhenko, A., “Chomu tserkva tak dbailyvo zberihaye tserkovnoslovyansku movu?,” Pravoslavnaya zhyzn 24 May (2019), https://pravlife.org/uk/content/chomu-cerkva-tak-dbaylyvo-zberigaye-cerkovnoslovyansku-movu (access 15.08.2021).
Chyzhevskyi, D., Istoriya ukrayinskoyi literatury (vid pochatkiv do doby realizmu) (New York: Ukrainian Free Academy in the USA 1956).
Ciampa, R.E., “Ideological Challenges for Bible Translators,” International Journal of Frontier Missiology 28/3 (2011) 139–148.
Crystal, D., Begat. The King James Bible and the English Language (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2011).
Dimitriu, R., “Translators’ Prefaces as Documentary Sources for Translation Studies,”Perspectives. Studies in Translatology 17/3 (2009) 193–206. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09076760903255304. (Crossref)
Evseev, I.E., “Rukopisnoe predanie slavyanskoy Biblii,” Khristianskoe chtenie 4 (1911) 435–450.
Franko, I., “Suchasni doslidy nad sviatym pysmom,” Zibrannia tvoriv u 50 tomakh (Kyiv: Naukova dumka 1983) XXXVIII, 403–439.
Fraser, G., “A Fetish for the Bible,” The Guardian 21 December (2010).
Frick, D.A., Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation. Chapters in the History of the Controversies (1551–1632) (Berkeley, CA – Los Angeles, CA – London: University of California 1989).
Frye, N., The Great Code. The Bible and Literature (Routledge & Kegan 1982).
Haroon, H., “The Translator’s Preface as a Paratextual Device in Malay-English Literary Translations,” Translation and Interpreting 9/2 (2017) 100–113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12807/ti.109202.2017.a07. (Crossref)
The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New (London 1611), https://colenda.library.upenn.edu/catalog/81431-p3rv0df45 (access 13.11.2023) (= KJV).
Koskinen, K., Beyond Ambivalence. Postmodernity and the Ethics of Translation (Tampere: University of Tampere 2000).
Lefevere, A. et al., “Translators and the Reins of Power,” Translators through History (eds. J. Delisle – J. Woodsworth; rev. ed.; Amsterdam: Benjamins 2012) 131–158. (Crossref)
Matchauzerova, S., Drevnerusskie teorii iskusstva slova (Praha: Univerzita Karlova 1976).
Matlovič, R. – Matlovičová, K., “Geografický determinizmus a výskumy relígií (Ellen Semple a jej ‘Influences’),” Historia Ecclesiastica 9/1 (2018) 130–154.
Metzger, B.M., The Bible in Translation. Ancient and English Versions (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic 2001).
Ohiyenko, I., “Ostrozka Bibliya 1581 roku,” Dilo 25–29 (1931).
Paloposki, O., “Limits of Freedom. Agency, Choice and Constraints in the Work of the Translator,” Agents of Translation (eds. J. Milton – P. Bandia; Amsterdam: Benjamins 2021) 189–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.81.09pal. (Crossref)
Shmiher, T., Perekladoznavchyi analiz – teoretychni ta prykladni aspekty. Davnia ukrayinska literature suchasnymy ukrayinskoyu ta anhliyskoyu movamy (Lviv: Ivan Franko National University 2018).
Simon, S, “Translators and the Spread of Religions,” Translators through History (eds. J. Delisle – J. Woodsworth; rev. ed.; Amsterdam: Benjamins 2012) 159–190. (Crossref)
Steiner, G., After Babel. Aspects of Language and Translation (Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press 1992).
Strikha, M., Ukrayinskyi pereklad i perekladachi. Mizh literaturoyu i natsiyetvorenniam (Kyiv: Dukh i Litera 2020).
Torkoniak, R., “Ostrozka Bibliya. Skrytyi skarb ukrayinskoyi nauky 16 st.,” Ostrozka Bibliya (Lviv: Mastih 2006) 1033–1055.
Tsurkan, R., Slavyanskiy perevod Biblii. Proiskhozhdenie, istoriya teksta I vazhneishye izdaniya (Sankt-Peterburg: Kolo 2001).
Venuti, L., The Translator’s Invisibility. A History of Translation (London – New York: Routledge 1995).
Weissbort, D. – Eysteinsson, A. (eds.), Translation – Theory and Practice. A Historical Reader (Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press 2006). (Crossref)
Ivan Franko National University of Lviv https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-2882
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The author(s) grant (s) to the Licensee a non-exclusive and royalty-free license in accordance with the provisions of the Appendix: LICENSE TO USE THE WORK
