Talk:Semantic equivalence (linguistics)

Much of this page is inaccurate. The differences between various translation approaches do blurr, it's true, but this page clearly confuses different terms. In addition the description of Bible translations is inaccurate and the declaration of version popularity is... at least debatable and certainly unreferenced. Hopefully I will have time to edit this, but until I do... anyone else care to take a stab at it? Anne 1-July-2006

I removed the unnecessary claim "most popular", although the NIV is the best selling contemporary translation. I also removed the cleanup tag. It is more appropriate for poor grammar, spelling, or poorly formatted text rather than content concerns. --Blainster 15:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The two concepts should be two different articles frankly. 70.177.68.209 17:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. --Anne 23:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Until the article is expanded a lot more, splitting it seems silly. Policy supports having foo and bar articles (particularly for two opposites).

I would suggest that the article should possibly be renamed linguistic equivalence and some more general stuff about finding equivalent terms be put here too (maybe copied from translation). I suppose it could be merged into translation too, but that article is quite long.

Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley _{talk contrib} 23:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Bible version debate

After making a start at creating a more balanced presentation of Bible version debate, I realized that it is effectively a fork of the subject dynamic and formal equivalence, in other words a debate about the methods of Bible translation. Since debates generate more heat than light, I propose that that article be merged into this one. --Blainster 20:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me Blainster. The debate over Bible versions boils down to equivalence anyway --Raogden 21:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Might I also suggest that the merged entry be titled "Biblical Translation Philosophy" or some such. 'Bible Version debates' sounds like arguments waiting to happen. --Raogden 22:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I am FOR the merge. I suggest that the Dynamic and formal equivalence content is simply inserted into the section on the Bible version debate page before the section which discusses the debate between the two of them. I think calling the combined page "Biblical translation philosophy" is a bad idea, and support keeping the existing name, since it is an article about the debate (the debate is not causing much debate here on Wikipedia) but it is worth documenting the different sides of the debate, and worth calling it what it is. Brusselsshrek 16:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)