인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록·키워드
This article examines how faithfully the translation principles were exercised for the Korean New Testament, in particular the Romans, which was initially published in 1900 and revised in 1904 and 1906. It is often insisted that, for both the original translation and the revisions, the Board of Translators set the rules to use Palmer’s Greek edition as the basic text; to make reference to the English Revised Version; and to let the Korean helpers consult the Chinese Delegates’ Version. However, a closer examination hints us that these rules were not kept reliably. Evidences show that the Greek grammar was not applied to a number of passages. It is not difficult to find inappropriate expressions, exaggerations, and omissions. Presumably, the draft of the Korean assistants would have been adopted by and large. In addition, the Korean New Testament (1906) influenced the Korean Revised Version (1961) and the New Korean Revised Version (1998).
This study comes to the following conclusions. First, the translators did not take the original Greek into consideration very seriously. They did not consult even the English R.V. carefully while the Korean helpers dealt with the Chinese Version at their disposal. Secondly, the Korean Old Version ought to be considered as the work of the Korean helpers since they made use of their free language style for translation. They deserve, therefore, to be called ‘translators,’ not ‘helpers’ or ‘assistants,’ despite the fact that they have made many mistakes. Lastly, the latest Korean version (NKRV) influenced by the Korean New Testament (1906) should be also thoroughly examined and corrected as soon as possible, and it is necessary to publish a more reliable and accurate version in Korean immediately.
This study comes to the following conclusions. First, the translators did not take the original Greek into consideration very seriously. They did not consult even the English R.V. carefully while the Korean helpers dealt with the Chinese Version at their disposal. Secondly, the Korean Old Version ought to be considered as the work of the Korean helpers since they made use of their free language style for translation. They deserve, therefore, to be called ‘translators,’ not ‘helpers’ or ‘assistants,’ despite the fact that they have made many mistakes. Lastly, the latest Korean version (NKRV) influenced by the Korean New Testament (1906) should be also thoroughly examined and corrected as soon as possible, and it is necessary to publish a more reliable and accurate version in Korean immediately.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-233-001304065
