Checking a Translation to be Published on Video

Harry J. Harm

Harry J. Harm has a B.A. in classical studies from the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and an M.A. in linguistics from the University of Texas at Arlington. He has done course work on a Ph.D. in linguistics. He and his wife, Geri, serve as consultants to the Choctaw Bible Translation Committee in Mississippi. He is a translation consultant in SIL’s North America Branch and is serving as coordinator for anthropology.

More and more translation teams are using shell videos to publish their translations of books of the Bible on video. The New Media Bible has Genesis and Luke shell videos, and the Visual Bible has Matthew and Acts. (Contact Vernacular Media Services for information on these and other shell videos and also for information on funding.) Producing a Scripture video is not a simple matter, however. It involves “exegetical choices” just as translation does. But in a visual medium there is less room for ambiguities and therefore a video producer is forced to make decisions which a translator seldom has to face. Every scene requires hundreds of decisions. What type of clothes did the characters wear, how tall were they, were they fat or thin, what time of day did the event happen, how many people were involved, how did the animals look? A printed translation may use generic words like man, woman, clothes, and cow and ignore the time of day and the season, but a video must be specific.

When I check a translation knowing that a team plans to publish the translation on one of the shell videos, I now check the translation with the video. I do an exegetical check of the text and then watch the video and compare it with the text. Using a four-head VCR that has a jog and shuttle control on the remote, I can move through the video frame by frame if necessary. After having checked the translation for exegetical accuracy, I am familiar with the choices the translator made and can watch to see which ones are in the video.

Dubbing a shell video with a translation involves many steps, so it is important to plan ahead. The steps include: integration into the overall project plan, script fitting, selecting speakers, recording, postproduction and distribution.

Script fitting refers to the adapting of a translated text to a shell video in respect to timing: the length of the vernacular text has to be adjusted to fit the time slots in the video. To do this, the translator looks at a work print of the video. In the course of doing this, the translator may notice that the vernacular text and the video reflect different exegetical interpretations. Discrepancies between the vernacular text and the video may also show up when the audio track is taped. Both of these circumstances, if they happen after the translation check, may require adjustments to the text without checking with a translation consultant, sometimes under a severe time constraint (e.g., during the taping process). But if the translation consultant checks the video during the regular consultant check of the vernacular text, then hopefully most of the exegetical choices required for the video will have already been made before the dubbing of the video begins.

The examples in this article are from an actual translation. ‡ In the following one the translator was faced with an ambiguous Hebrew text and chose an interpretation which was acceptable. The producers of the New Media Bible Genesis video also had to choose an interpretation, and the two were diffferent.

\ref Genesis 38:28 (30) ^^^ ‡ 

\txt RSV: … and bound on his hand a scarlet thread …

\ren … did put around his hand one cord of scarlet …

\cat Lexical mismatch

\vid The Hebrew text has ‘a scarlet’. Versions supply words like string, thread, or cord. The UBS A Handbook on Genesis suggests that ‘thread’ be used. In the New Media Bible Genesis video the midwife is shown ripping off a strip from a piece of scarlet cloth. This strip is clearly not a string, thread, or cord. While this interpretation was not supported by any of the translations or commentaries I consulted, it is a possible interpretation. My own suggestion is to replace ‘cord’ with a generic word (‘something’). Look at the video (time code 16:57) to see whether the color mentioned in the vernacular text fits what is shown on the video.

\sug … did put around his hand something of scarlet …

\res It turns out that the vernacular word translated ‘cord’ in the BT is broad enough to include a strip of cloth, so no change was necessary.

In the preceding example the translator did not have to make a change because there was in fact no conflict with the shell video. In the example that follows a change was necessary.

\ref Genesis 39:12 ^^^

\txt JPS (Jewish Publication Society): she caught hold of him by his garment and said, “Lie with me.” But he left his garment in her hand and got away and fled outside.

\txt RSV: she caught him by his garment, saying, “Lie with me.” But he left his garment in her hand, and fled and got out of the house.

\txt TEV: She caught him by his robe and said, “Come to bed with me.” But he escaped and ran outside, leaving his robe in her hand.

\ren Did caught-him in his cloak and said to him: “Now come-you to bed with me.” But he left cloak-his in hand-her and run away to outside and get out from house.

\cat Lexical mismatch

\vid The Hebrew word under consideration, ‘garment’, is generic, but it can be translated with a more specific meaning. Translations have used words like garment, robe, cloak, coat, jacket, and loincloth. The commentaries are not definite about the type of garment. However, the Handbook on Genesis gives a good description of the clothing worn by Egyptian workers. The video shows Joseph wearing such a garment covering him from his waist to his knees but wearing nothing from the waist up (video timing 3:27). Fortunately, it is a two-piece affair so that when she rips off his garment he is still covered by a ‘loincloth’. The text should match the JPS or RSV.

\res The translator decided to use a word for a garment worn from the waist to the knees, the equivalent of the English skirt.

Sometimes when I watch the video I spot a possible exegetical discrepancy that turns out not to be a problem, as in the following example:

\ref Genesis 41:14 ^

\txt JPS and RSV: … and changed his clothes …

\ren … and did put on him clothes clean …

\cat Cross-cultural difference

\vid The video shows Joseph wearing what appears to be a breast plate or a large necklace, also a white linen garment covering him from his waist to his knees. Is the vernacular word glossed as ‘clothes’ a generic word meaning any sort of clothes or is it more specific? The Hebrew שׂמלה  (simlah) is a generic word for clothes but sometimes it refers specifically to a long outer garment. Since the video shows Joseph wearing a short garment (an acceptable interpretation), the word in the vernacular text should reflect this choice or use a generic word.

\res No change is necessary.

When we went over this verse during the exegetical check, I didn’t question it because the word in the translation appeared to be a generic word for clothes and it fit the context. However, when viewing the video, I saw that the clothes Joseph was wearing during this scene were different than expected, so I decided to write up a note to make sure there would be no conflict.

In some instances a video producer makes an exegetical choice that may be poor or just plain wrong. The two following examples are from the New Media Bible Genesis video.

\ref Genesis 44:11 ^^^

\txt JPS: So each one hastened to lower his bag to the ground and each one opened his bag.

\txt RSV: Then every man quickly lowered his sack to the ground, and every man opened his sack.

\txt TEV: So they quickly lowered their sacks to the ground, and each man opened his sack.

\txt CEV: Each one of the brothers quickly put his sack on the ground and opened it.

\ren And each one of them take down load-his on ground and did open-it.

\cat Wrong exegesis

\vid The text indicates that each of the brothers put his sack on the ground and opened it. In the video Benjamin left his sack on his donkey. All of the other brothers put their sacks on the ground but not Benjamin. This is not what the text says (video timing 2:56) and is clearly an error.

\sug1 Since there is a considerable lapse of time between the narrator’s saying that each one put his sack on the ground (timing 2:22–2:36) and the steward’s searching Benjamin’s sack (timing 2:56), the text could be left as it is without the viewer’s noticing the discrepancy.

\sug2 Another option is to delete this part from the narrator’s speech. You can do this since the action is shown on the video. But if you do delete, you may end up with dead space; the text may not be long enough to fill the allotted time. But this may not be too bad since it is a narrator’s part and not an on-screen character’s speech and the viewer won’t see lips moving without speech.

\res The translator will follow the first suggestion. No change is necessary.

In this instance the video’s exegetical choice did not require the translator to make any adjustments. I am expecting that viewers will not notice the discrepancy between the vernacular text and the video. The next example is similar in that it required no change either.

\ref Genesis 44:14 ^

\txt JPS: When Judah and his brothers reentered the house of Joseph, who was still there, they threw themselves on the ground before him.

\txt RSV: When Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house, he was still there; and they fell before him to the ground.

\txt: TEV: When Judah and his brothers came to Joseph’s house, he was still there. They bowed down before him,

\txt: CEV: When Judah and his brothers got there, Joseph was still at home. So they bowed down to Joseph,

\ren When entered Judah and brothers-his to house of Joseph, was Joseph stayed at home. Bowed-they all on ground and bowed their knees and head to him.

\cat Wrong exegesis

\dis In the video the brothers don’t bow down before Joseph until much later in this episode, in 44:18. This is clearly an error, but this problem has already been solved by the video script, which instructs you to omit verse 14.

\res No change is necessary.

Video is a means of reaching people with the translated Scriptures who may not be reached by other means. It also introduces challenges: it represents a set of exegetical decisions which cannot be modified. It is all right to let these exegetical decisions influence the translator’s own choices as he refines the text but they should not be the driving force. Careful attention to exegetical details will enable the translators and the consultant to avoid most of these clashes between the translation and the videos.

Another way to help avoid exegetical clashes between the translation and a shell video is to use the video as a tool early in the translation process. The Choctaw translators with whom my wife, Geri, and I worked on the first two chapters of Luke, used the New Media Bible Luke video before starting translation in order to learn about such things as the kind of clothes the people wore and the kind of houses they lived in and what an incense table was and how it was used. (This method is described in the 1994 article “Video Assisted Translation” in Notes on Literature in Use and Language Programs 42, pp. 34–35.)

References

Reyburn, William D. and Euan McG. Fry. 1997. A Handbook on Genesis. New York: United Bible Societies.