Dear Dave and DC,

Thanks very much for your comments/feedback on the translation and
grammatical analysis of DN 31 that I am sending to the group in small
pieces.

In the detailed word-by-word grammatical analysis we (a group of 3 of
us) aimed for literal accuracy, whereas in the final translation our
goal was for idiomatic, readable, modern English. And bear in mind
that the final translation result was always a consensus by committee
and not necessarily how I would have rendered the final version myself.

Clearly "gahapati-putta" literally means "householder's son", but that
is not how someone would be addressed in modern English, and we chose
the more colloquial "young man" in the vocative, and "young
householder" for other cases. I would note too that Bhikkhu Bodhi
translates "devaputta" as "young deva" rather than "son of a deva", so
we have a solid precedent.

All comments are appreciated.

With metta,
John

--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "P G Dave" <pgd2507@...> wrote:
>
> Dear *DC Wijeratna,*
>
> very true. I agree that a free translation makes better reading than a
> literal translation keeping in mind the fact that every language has
its own
> flavour and peculiarities. but, as you rightly point out, here it
becomes
> misleading.
>
> I searched the net for the "Ara.na <http://ara.na/> Vibhanga sutta".
> couldn't find anything.
> If it's not too inconvenient, would u kindly send me an attaced file
> containing the text with an available translation if possible.
>
> thanks.
> with metta,
> _________________________________________________
>
> On 10/10/07, DC Wijeratna <dcwijeratna@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Dave,
> >
> > "wouldn't "gahapati-putta.m" mean householder's son rather than young
> > householder..."
> >
> > I agree with you. The Pali word for a young man is maanava or
maanavaka.
> >
> > I think this error is most probably caused not because the translator
> > didn't know the meaning. I think he elsewhere gives the meaning as
> > householder's son. So what I surmise is that he did it in order to
translate
> > it to "idiomatic English".
> >
> > But I think it is a grave error in translating ancient text to a
modern
> > language. Words have a meaning only within a context. And that
cannot be
> > reproduced today, especially in a different tongue.
> >
> > Take this example, gahapati, is a generic term by the Buddha to
indicate
> > what we might call head of a household, not even a householder.
> > Gahapatiputta really seem to distinguish between a monks and lay
people. It
> > really means only that he is a lay person who is not a head of a
household.
> > It is same as 'gihii'. In any case, there is no way to bring the word
> > 'young'; puttas also become old!!!
> >
> > These are some of my thoughts. I think the solution is to use an
agreed
> > term. See Ara.na <http://ara.na/> Vibhanga sutta.
> >
> > With mettaa,
> >
> > D. G. D. C. Wijeratna
> >
> > __________________________________________________________
> > Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
> > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>