By Jim Oct 02 2010 Bible TranslationWhat if they don’t have a word for that? 1357 reads There are 3 Comments deja vu J Ng - Sat, 10/02/2010 - 7:26pm Sounds like good ole Eugene Nida's principles of translating--better late than never! Difference Aaron Blumer - Mon, 10/04/2010 - 7:07am There's a difference between saying "translate to the equivalent reader response rather than an equivalent word" (which is what Nida is widely understood to teach--perhaps incorrectly), and saying "translate to a non-equivalent when no equivalent exists." The former philosophy feels little or no obligation to maintain a close equivalence where the latter departs from close equivalence reluctantly as conditions in the receptor language require. So paraphrasing occurs when necessary ("conies" becomes "shaphan animals" or something like that, for example) but is avoided when not necessary. Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me. How about coining a new word Jonathan Charles - Mon, 10/04/2010 - 3:19pm How about coining a new word like Tyndale did with words like "scapegoat," "passover" and probably others I can't remember off the top of my head.