Translation Theory and the Science of Bible translation - An Overview

English
The Science on Bible Translation and Translation Studies
Eberhard Werner (werner(a)forschungsinstitut.net)

Abstract
The science of Bible translation and translation sciences inspire each other. In the history of both sciences there are parallels, overlaps but also controversial developments. Bible translation, as part of applied translation science, is an important source of experience and inspiration due to its global significance. This short overview describes both branches of science in their historical relationship.

Historical reflections on language and ethnicity diversity
If one wanted to describe the meaning of translation, then one would not miss the origin of the variety of language. Where does "language" come from and how can diversities be explained? Here, anthropology plays a significant role. Humanity has always tried to structure itself in larger and smaller units. Lets look at an evolutionist theory approach. Therein the separation of animal and human worlds to environmental factors could be explained according to the principles of selection and mutation by giving chance or fate honour. To be fair this is purposeful chnce, which follows the rule of nature. Hoever, the systems of human sound and gesture formation display the most significant differences between animal and human. These can only be achieved by macromutations. Such developments are not detecfound yet, why you are in a speculative realm.
   Another approach would be traditional descriptions, such as the Biblical story of Creation, the Enuma Elish, the Gilgamesh epic or the Buddhist and Hindu scriptures. There the separation of the gods from the human world becomes a decisive factor. In this last model, the linguistic development is attributed to divine influences. Therein in the end, all languages ​​reflect a common or divine origin (eg, Genesis 1:26-27). At this point evolutionist theory and religious explanations are coming together. Both "believe" in a common origin. With regard to continental drift (displacement of the earth's plate into today's continents) and environmental changes due to ice- and hot-ages, meteor impacts etc., the ecological niché adjustments of people in both models play an important criterion for linguistic diversity. The example of African language policy in the pre-Christian era shows how quickly languages ​​can change, develop and become independent. In the so-called southern Saharan language belt (Sierra Leone, Liberia, Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Nigeria) local rulers have distinguished themselves by means of political linguistic segregation towards neighboring tribes and peoples. The local language quota of more than 600 languages was artificially created there. In conclusion languages ​​evolve because of environmental factors, political choices and migration processes. Culture and language shift are ongoing processes based on environmental adaption and power encounter with other social powers. Conversely, it is these factors that also contribute to language dying. The migration movements of human history brought about the enforcement of national or economic languages of wider community. These proved to be dominant (eg English in the USA and digital world). Repressive political systems use such languages ​​to suppress languages and marginalize them at the educational level (eg, Mandarin Chinese), the latter then became extinct, died out over time. or are under ongoing supression.
   What is "a people"?A people or a people group is based on: a) a common traditional origin or provenance theory (real, fabulous or religious), b) territorial limitation of a living space and c) a common linguistic articulation that can be determined phonetically, phonologically and grammatically. At least 6,900 languages ​​can be assigned to the more than 13,000 peoples of the world, not even including sign languages, artificial languages ​​or artistic phenomena.
The History of Science on Bible Translation and Translation Studies
1. History of Bible translation
Based on Orlinsky & Bratcher, several epochs of development can be identified (1991: v-xii, here in modified form),
    -Early Church (Germ. Urgemeinde) and their Greek writings in the Jewish Christian framework (up to the 4th century),
    -Catholic epoch of Latin writings (5th-15th c.),
    -Protestant epoch of European (mother) languages up ​​to the formation of a science of Bible translation (16th-19th c.)
    -modern ecumenical era as a "century of Bible translation and Christian development aid" in terms of a mother-tongue focus (since the 20th century).
Since the last century we face the most conspicuous progression in the area of ​​Bible translation in terms of developments, it can be regarded as the culmination of Bible translation.
1.1  The Formation of "the Canon "and Bible translation
These include the first six centuries after the era. This period is referred to as the "era of Bible translations in the ancient churches" and ended with the revision of the Old Syriac NT by Bishop Thomas of Heraclea in 616 AD (Lauche 2007: 131).
   The New Testament canon was preceded by the constitution of the Hebrew Bible (Roberts 1989:61). The history of the Hebrew canon is confused, especially since the terms "canon, canonical, holy, sacral" derive from patristic literature and therefore from Christian space (Anderson 1989: 114). Above all, Josephus described the sacred books of the Jewish people as "numerically limited and self-contained" (114). From studies of Talmudic and other Jewish literature, four principles can be derived, which also play a role in the canonization of the New Testament. Holy Books:
1.) have divine authority,
2.) are numerically limited,
3.) are due to a limited historical period, 
4.) have a text that is and must remain unchanged (: 116).
An important criterion here is the external idea of ​​purity, according to which such books should not come into contact with the profane. This includes impurement by physical damage such as unwashed hands, reading aids, or including other books that are not part of the canon (Mishna quoted in Anderson 1989: 114). Traditionally, with the standardization of the law by Rabbi Aqiba in the 1st century AD, the Hebrew canon is considered completed. A short time later, the Masoretic Text was derived from this, which served as the normative model for all other transcripts used as templates for the scribes (Roberts 1989:7).
   The early history of the church was marked by the development of a binding canon of Christian writings (Metzger 1993:12). In addition to the Hebrew Scriptures, which were already canonized in Hebrew script, which were also accessible in the Greek translations (known as the Septuagint / LXX) the canon of the New Testament developed (:13-14, 17, Bruggen 1984, 14; ). Words of Jesus in their traditionally oral form were gradually fixed in writing, especially by the Gospel writers, and supplemented by writings of the Apostles (Metzger 1993:13-14, Troeger 2005: 31, Bruggen 1985: 14-15). The translation variants of the so-called Septuagint served as a touchstone and measure of the conformity of New Testament writings with the Jewish scriptures of the Hebrew Bible.
   This slow but continuous process can not be traced to punctual events, as those are not mentioned in church history (: 11, Bruggen 1985: 14-15). During this process, the canonized books were tested for their apostolic authority. This led to a slow sacralization of the previously profane and primarily informative texts (Borg 2001: 28,). The development of the selective criteria for the Christian "canon", which also included the Old Testament writings and ended at the latest around 357 AD, provides information about ancient influences on Bible translation (Metzger 1993: 203-204).
1.1.1. Apokrypha
So-called "apocryphal writings" (since the Reformation "apocrypha") are from the interim period of the completion of the Hebrew Bible as well as the 1st and 2nd centuries AD. They are presented as Deuterocanonicals and Pseudepigraphes. They were added by Christian edifices and as  literature of church regulation (Schneemelcher 1989: 1, Kautzsch 1900: v-vi, Metzger 1993: 163, Rüger 1984: 57-62). They delineate and enrich the actual canon, based on the "oldest and most trustworthy" scriptures assembled by consens of the Church, "authentically referring to Jesus and the time of his beginnings (Berger & Nord 1999: 13-14; see also Butcher 1993: 28). "[1]

1.1.2. Apostolic Fathers
The "apostolic fathers", that is the patristic literature (about 95 AD to 150 AD), is based on apostolic teaching letters as a literary form that describes Christianity. This is the phase of constitution, when it began to "become an institution and the church leaders began to emphasize the church organization (Metzger 1993: 48)." The patristic period formed the basis for strengthening apostolic teaching and writing authority and is therefore important for the formation of the "canon".

1.1.3 Use of the mother tongue
In this early Christian period falls a wave of translations of Holy Scripture (s) in the Middle East. The reason for this was the rapid spread of the Christian faith by all social classes of the ancient peoples settled in the Mediterranean area. In this time the Latin, Syriac and Coptic emerged. As early as the third century AD, several canonical models of Christian writings can be proved (Metzger 1993: 16-17).
    Bible translation was discovered as a way into the hearts of humans. It became a major tool in the dissemination and strengthening of biblical content among those interested and the believers of antiquity (Troeger 2005: 31). Studies and experiences with the Armenian, Gothic, Syriac and Coptic Churches indicate that where the Bible was available in the mother tongue, Christian communities were better able to survive critical periods. Where there was a lack of such translations, like in Asian and North African churches, for example, they were not well equipped to survive and closer on the edge of extinction (Latourette 1953: 255-258, Sanneh 2003: 10-11, 18-19, 2005: 208, 2007a, 2007b: 1-2, Tippet 1975: 14). ,

1.2. Early History and the Old Church - The Beginnings
The early history of the Bible translation was under the impressions,
    -of processing different types of literature described above,
    -of some of the most brutal local persecutions (Hauser 2007: 86, eg in the 3rd century AD under Decius, Valerian or Diocletian in Latourette 1953: 67, 178, Neill 1974: 33) and
    -simultaneous, inconceivable expansion (Neill 1974: 30; Sanneh 1992: 21-22, 56).

1.2.1. Fixing Church Structures
The young church was subject to two areas of tension. In its interior to the formation of an independent authoritative and literary tradition and teaching corpus (later the NT), which led to numerous divisions and council decisions. On the outside, on the one hand, the martyrdom due to local persecution and, on the other hand, simultaneous progression, which manifested itself in the development of ecclesiastical and political structures.
   Bible translation appeared in the wake of the unstoppable, barely perceptible expansion of the church, as it were in supportive indigenous contextualization (eg Armenian Church in the 4th century AD in Sanneh 1992: 67, Tucker 2007: 343).

1.2.2. Bible translation in the Early Church
The following missiological implications can be understood as to accompany the translation of the Bible:
   It was perceived as a divine mission as part of the Missio Dei. Bible translation was considered to be a natural progression of the alienation, condescension, and incarnation of Jesus of Nazareth (incarnation, condescencion and kenosis, see also Lauche 2007: 138-139, Nichols 1996) : 28, Tucker 2007: 343, Shaw & Van Engen 2003: 161, Sogaard 1993: 11). Theology, translation, ethnology, and linguistics merge in the translation of the Bible (see section 4.2). Translators or translator teams cover all these disciplines in one.
    It had an identity-creating effect through demarcation. Christian expansion led to national, ethnic churches (Mojola 2007: 142-143, eg the Goths in Schäferdiek 1978: 87), which were characterized by their own alphabets and literary forms (Latourette 1953: 255, 257, Luzbetak 1993: 90 ; sa Feldtkeller 2003: 7). Linguistic adaptations of Christian writings led to native forms of church life and thus to independence and empowerment. Church writings served the demarcation of the environment and other churches (Sanneh 1992: 67, own liturgy, tradition, catechumenate, etc.). They facilitated the spread of the Church through direct and indirect Christian development aid, the mission of which was anchored in it. While the New Testament was often the only written document of an ethnic group in ancient churches (Nichols 1996: 28), mother tonge and thus linguistics: 
- became the Transmitter of socio-cultural adaptation. Where a church existed but there was no Bible translation, sectarianism, apostasy, or long-term adoption by other religions happened (eg the Punic Church through Islam in Sanneh 1992: 69, Lauche 2007: 138).
- Bible translation preceded or emerged as a result of church-building developments. It was thus as precursor as well as a legitimation factor of Christian formations at the same time (Luzbetak 1993: 90, 93, 95).
-  It led to ever-growing target groups (Latourette 1953: 118). While the New Testament attributes to the Pentecost event a "mass conversion" of 3,000 people (Acts 2:41), the family (eg Acts 10: 2, 11:14, 16:34, etc., as a rule) or individual conversion (cf. For example, Saul's Acts 9: 5 or the Chamberlain Acts 8:36, etc.), partial mass movements developed under the influence of native Bible translation. This can be demonstrated in the case of the Armenians, whose conversion was carried out from top to bottom by the work of Tiridates and Gregory the Enlightened (Neill 1974: 40; sa Dil 1975: 196; Richter 2006: 25). The same applies to other peoples such as Slavs, Saxons (Schneider 1978: 241-242), Egyptians / Copts or Goths (Latourette 1953: 258). Here Bible translation was like a catalyst promising on the one hand education or identity and on the other hand progress and power.
- Because of the distinction between profane translation and interpreting, even in the beginnings of the translation of the Bible, the formation was based on independent literary and scientific forms, which later developed into science (see below).
These initial missiological trends were heightened in the course of the historical establishment of Bible translation and underpinned by additional developments.
1.3. Middle Ages - Consolidation of Biblical Traditions
During the Middle Ages, which is to be understood as the period from the 6th to the 15th century AD (von Padberg 1998: Foreword and 2003: 8-9, Kahl 1978: 11), the church and its translation tradition developed immensely. Independent principles of Bible translation, such as a literal tradition of sacral texts, for example, developed (Nichols 1996: 28). In addition, toward the High and Late Middle Ages, "lay translators" increasingly detached from the clerical structures of the official church. They attempted to cover the needs of regional languages ​​in Europe (eg Waldenser and Anabaptist movement in Audisio 2004: 20, beginning Pietism at Aland 1974: 7-8, 11; Hargraves 1989: 391; Oxbrow 2005: 3-5).

1.3.1. Medieval Influences on Bible translation
Christianity in the Middle Ages was marked by changes that significantly influenced Bible translation:
    The general Jewish, Greek and Roman educational ideal and school system of antiquity atrophied during the early Middle Ages was replaced by a sacral-oriented clergy and lay education (Roberts 1989: 48-49). The church took over the medieval education system in the form of the monastic movement, which became one its main pillars (Kahl 1978: 15-16), making Bible translation a church matter (Loewe 1989: 152). The translation tradition was based on the external and internal structures of the church. The Western Church incorporated the Vulgate of Jerome (390 AD) without any revision efforts (1979 first revision) into its liturgical structure and tolerated no other liturgical translations (Orlinsky & Bratcher 1991: xi, 15; Waard & Nida 1986: 52; see also Loewe 1982: 152; Smalley 1989: 199-200)[2]. The Church in the Middle East in conflict with Islam started a great deal of translating activity on the part of Christians, as a result of which numerous Bible translations and ongoing revision translations were produced (Lauche 2007: 131). Bible translation in the High Middle Ages moved between stagnation on the official level and fast progress in local translations. Influences:
  • Islam appeared on European soil as a religious entity since the 7th century. Before that time, the majority of the Church dealt with internal church controversies (eg Council decisions, Gnostic approaches, Marcion, Arianism, attitude to Judaism, etc.). After the cessation of external pressure by persecution, at least from the time of Emperor Theodosius I. on, it developed a hierarchical-political structure, which opposed Islam as a political entity or in close relationship to political powers. In addition to the threat of political seizure by Islam, as happened in Spain (711-1050 AD, Kemnitz 2002: 7-8), Malta and Sicily (870-1091 AD), a serious theological debate developed. 3] This culminated in apologetic (partly polemical) works on both sides (Schirrmacher 1992: 12-13). African, Asian and Middle Eastern churches subordinate themselves to Islam through second-class citizenship called dhimmi-state (Baumann 2005: 13). Local dissolutions of churches through forced or voluntary conversion were the result (: ibid.). For example, the weakness of the Byzantine Empire in the 11th century is considered by some observers as the cause of the conversion of an entire strata of the people to Islam, to which the existing liturgical Bible translations had nothing to oppose (Pikkert 2008: 19). Bible translation was latere to be discovered in the conflict with Islam as a strategic tool. It aimed to presenting the originality of biblical as opposed to Koranic texts (eg narratives on prophets, Jesus' death and passion story, divine trinity etc. in Lauche 2007: 131-139) and was undestood as a responsibility to unreached peoples (eg Nestorian and Catholic development aid in Asia at Reifler 2005: 158, see below).
  • In the context of extra-church movements, especially in the fervor of the 12th to 16th centuries, the importance of Bible translation for regional dialects and languages ​​was re-recognized and promoted (Audisio 2004: 10, 12, 21, Hargraves 1989: 391). To point out the ecclesiastical abuses by the official Church, the Waldenses, swarmers and Anabaptists used the translation of the Bible for the first time both as a means of spreading the Christian message (evangelization approach) as well as in a sense of a power-political internal church instrument (power approach). Fidelity to the text and form should convince the reader or listener that the message (the Bible) leads to truth (Nord 2002: 219) by developing its own evangelistic potential (: 254, Audisio 2004: 21). These movements could only do so in contrast to state and ecclesiastical structures that responded with persecution (Bosch 1991: 246).
    Towards the end of the Late Middle Ages Bible translation developed into a team-oriented activity
    eg the Wycliffe translation of the 14th century (Robinson 2002: 53-54 and Hargraves 1989: 387)
    the 16th century Lutheran Bible (Mühlen 1978: 90-97, Nuremberg 1987: 40, 49 and Ellingworth 2007: 111).

This demonstrates the beginning of scientific activity in this discipline, which already proves to be intercultural and interdisciplinary in its beginnings (on Wycliffe and Luther, pp. Brandl 2007: 3-4).

1.3.2. Church and Bible translations
The Middle Ages were characterized by ecclesiastical translations into many European languages ​​and dialects. The Vulgate was used as a translation base, which is due to the monopolization of the Church and the claim to the sole interpretation of the Bible (Waard & Nida 1986: 52, Walls 2007). This monopoly was counteracted by the pre-Reformation Anabaptists and enthusiasts. At the same time, a lively translation activity was developing outside of Europe. This is mainly due to the movement of the Nestorians and the small orthodox Eastern Churches, of which little is known (Bosch 1991: 203, Gensichen 1976: 6-7, Neill 1974: 69-70, sa Antes 1988: 51), due to the fact that these churches have disappeared by external influences, namely Islamization, political persecution in Asia etc. (Antes 1988: 51; Hage 1978: 362-364, 370-371; Latourette 1953: 221; Markarian 2008: 12-13; Miller 2002: 39; Neill 1974: 100, 110-11; Walls 2007). Regional translations included both verbal and communicative elements. Bible translators of this time balanced the faithfulness of Scripture by approaches of formal transmissions of their Bibles and the communicative mediation of biblical contents in the context of translations.
1.3.3 Judeo-Christian Disputation since Scholasticism

Scholasticism between the 11th and the 13th century brought about an intense dispute between Jewish and Christian scholars (Orlinsky & Bratcher 1991: 23-26, sa Rosenthal 1989: 253) , 270-271). To this day, the Jewish exegesis of Rashi and Rashbam has found its way into the Western Bible translation tradition of the Franciscan Nicholas of Lyra (13th century) (: 25, 26). Influences of Jewish biblical interpretation lead via Luther to Tyndale. Their work was reinforced in comments and examples by Ibn Ezra and Kimhi, who offered theological-rabbinic interpretations in Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East (: 26). Philosophical and mystical approaches, including the Kabbalah, entered into Jewish exegesis with Maimonides (Rosenthal 1989: 274, 277). Western Bible translation tended at this time substantially to the Hebrew Bible and Jewish thinking ties (eg., the Institute Judaicum of Franckes Foundation; Sauer 2006: 216). [4]

1.4. Reformation to the Enlightenment

This period covers the 16th to the 19th century. The Reformation in the 16th century, was followed by Pietism and Orthodoxy. 16th century humanism continued in the explanation of the late 18th and 19th centuries. The 19th century with collateral colonialism, industrialization and political New Zealand has the most extensive changes in the natural sourced and natural sciences brought yourself. These developments were not only partly but also well known due to the Church's desire for greater enlargement and Bible translation, with a focus on architectural development and development.

1.4.1 Humanism and Reformation
The end of the Middle Ages, with the revival of ancient languages, the humanist ideal and native languages ​​led to the Reformation (Bouyer 1989: 504-505, Nida 1964: 14). Their main characteristic is to be found in native-language Bible translations, which were widely used because of the emerging mass-oriented art of printing (: 16-17, McQuail 2007: 26, Köster 1984: 17). Church break-ups underlie the rediscovery of biblical content by the common people. Although the church organization was carried out from top to bottom, the church people were more codetermination and clerical hurdles were restricted. Due to the new educational ideal and the social commitment of the church members, a "lay priesthood" emerged, which unfortunately could not prevail and, at the latest since Orthodoxy, had to give way to Protestant clerical structures (Luther quoted in Nuremberg 1987: 12-13, Bosch 1991: 469 ). This lay priesthood led to manifold translations into regional dialects.
1.4.2 Riots of the Roman Catholic Church (monasticism)
Parallel to the Protestant Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church seized an inner departure. Its predecessor is located in a rediscovery of the Bible in the 12th Century. Starting from Paris, probably in the abbey of Hugo St. Victor. KIn these days the study of biblical contents formed a new study of theology from the pulpit to the reading of Holy Scripture (Smalley 1989: 206, 212).
While the European Curia was focusing on demarcating and consolidating its structures and teachings against Protestantism, the world outside Europe became the focus of the Roman Catholic Church. Due to the discovery of distant continents, the need to build up local church structures grew (Latourette 1953: xx). Walls sees in the Crusades of the 11th - 14th century strtong harbingers of colonial aspirations, which find their climax in the discovery period of the 15th - 16th century. Both movements were based on ecclesiastical initiatives and led to modern colonialism, which only found its "official" end in the late 60s of the 20th century (2007).
    As in the Middle Ages, the mendicant fiars and the and the monastic orders (Augustinian since the 5th century, Benedictines since the 6th century, Franciscans and Dominicans since the 13th century, Cistercians and Carmelites) were prominent in this field (Leclercq 1989: 190-191; Loewe 1989: 152, Oxbrow 2005: 4, Schirrmacher 1992: 22). The foundation of the Franciscan Order by Francis of Assisi (1181/1182 - 1226 AD) marks the beginning of the Catholic tradition of religious piety under the premises of poverty and devotion. This resulted in the Counter-Reformation of the branch of the Jesuit order, which is globally oriented toward Christian development aid founded by Ignatius of Loyola (16th century). He was close friends with Francisco Javier (1506-1552), the founder of Christian development aid in the Far East. The Jesuit order was and is directly subordinated to the head of the Roman Catholic Church (Knauer on Ignatius of Loyola in Brockhaus 2009 multimedia).
   Monastic orders brought with them the best conditions for expansion on distant continents. Education, financial support, inner motivation to spread due to Christian charity and their widely diversified monastic structures formed an ideal basis (Feldtkeller 2003: 18-19, Neill 1974: 92, Smalley 1989: 200).
   Adaptation to the target culture was based on the principle of "accommodation" (Bosch 1991: 448, historical examples in Neill 1974: 92, 100, 113-115), which was also used by Pietist aid workers during this period (Luzbetak 1993: 96-96). 97). Bible translation was soloemly based on the text of the Vulgate, became a popular and necessary tool for approaching targeted populations socio-linguistically. In addition to the Middle East (Arabic translation in 1591-1592 Lauche 2007: 133-134), it was also the New World, in which the Roman Catholic Church operated. Bartholomew de Las Casas (1474-1566), the companion of Columbus and critic of the destruction of indigenous cultures in the newly discovered areas, is to be mentioned here as well as the so-called "Reducciones". These facilities consisted of self-responsible centers of the natives, who acted both politically-socially and ecclesiastically. Education, church and work were linked together and led to some Bible translations into the Indo-languages ​​(Luzbetak 1953: 93-95). Modern postcolonial studies criticize the paternalist approach of these "mission-stations". There was no long-term goal to ahnd these institutions over to local authorities but more a tendency to cooperate with economic and militarist colonial power thus becoming colonialist.
  Out of these departures, "Pope Gregory XV. In fact, in 1622, it created the Holy Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith, often simply called 'propaganda' (Neill 1974: 122-123)." The stated goal was to investigate and use Christian development aid strategies. For this purpose, detailed statistics and investigations were made in order to be able to make binding statements on how employees can be trained and where they were to be used (: 123).
It is no accident that the monastic movement of the Middle Ages is described as the forerunner of the century of Christian development aid and Bible translation (Pierson 1999: 262, 264, Sanneh 2003: 102, Troeger 2005: 35).

1..4.3 Bible translation in Asia
Monks were also active in Asia. As early as the 13th century, Franciscans and Dominicans and, in the 16th century, Jesuits with translations of the Bible, for example, had their names. B. in Japanese and Chinese busy (Feldtkeller 2003: 18-19; Neill 1972: 100, 111-115, 119-123; Fiedler & Schirrmacher 1998: 12, 13a; Jenkins 2006: 60; Walls 2007). While the Protestant movement of Christian development aid is to be regarded as a lay movement, Catholic development aid was and remains a priestly movement in the area of ​​Bible translation (Luzbetak 1993: 102). Church requirements (see above) obliged the Catholic science of Bible translation until today to the literal translation model.
1..4.4 Pietism and Orthodoxy
Pietism is well known for the appearance of "Pia Desideria" by Philipp Jacob Spener at the Frankfurt Book Fair in 1675 (Aland 1974: 3). The Pietist emergence of the 17th century, in addition to the promotion of social projects in education and training (: 7), also led to an orientation towards educational Christian development aid in distant lands (Walls 2005: 214 and 2007; s.a. Nöh 1998: 31, 37; Pierson 1999 : 264; Vicedom 2002a: 124-125). Particularly noteworthy in this historical epoch is the striking activity in the area of ​​Bible translation (Haacker 2006: 37, Tucker highlights John Eliot's Bible translation for the Algonquin Indians 2007: 343). So for example, at least ten new translations of the New Testament in German were published from 1602 to 1736 alone and were in circulation (Aland 1974: 11).
   However, not only in the field of translation, but also in exegesis and textual criticism, enormous progress has been made. In the year 1702 John Fell published the first Greek NT, which as a text-critical edition made use of more than 100 Greek as well as the Coptic and Gothic models (19, Orlinsky & Bratcher 1991: 49-50, also Alexander Campbell, ibid .: 56-57).
   The zeal to the translation of the Bible in this epoch was equally applied to the language groups encountered by the Pietist development workers in their fields of application. The focus was on the unhindered access of the interested and the faithful to biblical contents in their mother tongue as well as the education and teaching of local staff in church as well as social life (eg Ziegenbalg at Reifler 2005: 177, Schwarz and Zinzendorf at Luzbetak 1993: 96-97).
1.4.5 Start of a Missiological-theological Discipline
The science of Bible translation developed in this time to a missiological-theological discipline. In doing so, Bible translation was accorded an inner power that was explained by the fact that the Church preaches the gospel only because it is true; it is not true because it is preached by the church. The gospel justifies the proclamation, but the proclamation does not justify the gospel, no matter how it appears (Sanneh 1992: 112).
This attitude can already be found in Luther, when he rejects the interpretation of Scripture solely by the church and the Scripture itself "inner clarity" (claritas interna) approves (Luther quoted in Nuremberg 1987: 7, 9).
The ground was laid for a strategic orientation of (Bible) translation in the context of Christian development aid. Although Francke's efforts led to the founding of the Pietist Canine Bible Institute, which made enormous contributions to dissemination, there was no missiological line of sight for Bible translation within the framework of this Bible organization (Köster 1984: 99, 133; Smalley 1991: 62). The experiences of the 16th and 17th centuries regarding the spread of the Bible led to the foundation of national Bible societies in the 19th century. 

1.5.1 Systematization by organization
Origins of the development of new translations are to be found in a steadily growing interest in Christian development aid in the 19th century, which was expressed in the founding of Bible societies and interdenominational organizations (Richter 2006: 51-52, in detail Smalley 1991: 62ff .; for Turkey at Zürcher 2004: 56). In 1804, the British and Foreign Bible Society began to systematically distribute bibles for the first time. In addition to spreading the Bible in its own cultural context (Europe and North America), in the twentieth century the idea of ​​making the Bible available to all peoples around the world developed (Miller 2002: 24-26). Here the texts from Rev. 5: 9 and 7: 9-10 played an essential role.
   This century was marked by a systematization of Christian development aid through international conferences. Introduced by William Carey's call and invitation to an international meeting of Christian development workers in 1806, the conference in New York in 1852 saw the breakthrough of this institution (Feldtkeller 2003: 18-19, Fiedler & Schirrmacher 1998: 83-84; Luzbetak 1993: 98; Smalley 1991: 43, 45, 47; Walls 2005: 53-54). Asia, Africa and the Near and Middle East came in  focus of development aid workers.
   The training for Christian development aid shifted away from university theological training to special seminars (Sauer 2006: 185, 187). This development also applied to the translation of the Bible. On the one hand it developed into an independent science, on the other hand it lost the connection to some degree the missiological theological training.
1.5.2 Lingua Franca and national language - Linguistic Considerations
The biggest challenge of the time was tackling linguistic hurdles. According to hegemonic principles of colonialist power claims, development workers also underestimated access through their mother tongue (Walls 2005: 228-231, Smalley 1991: 32, 245-247). The predominant thrust of strategies at the time was the introduction of classical educational ideals in the language of development workers, who had to approach the target groups (Blincoe 1998: 110, Livingstone 1993: 39-40, Nida 1990: 173, McGavran 1968: 3, Pikkert 2008: 25- 27, 40-41; o. V. 2008. Peter Pikkert on The Great Experiment; Vander Werff 1977: 108). This activity, focused on the language of Christian development workers, led on the one hand to the internationalization of English as a world language (lingua franca), due to the above-mentioned dominance of Anglophone employees (finally with the Conference of Christian Development Aides in Edinburgh 1910 at Walls 2005: 62). On the other hand, this approach brought about a concentration in the medical and educational field (Pikkert 2008: 101; Richter 2006: 62-63, 65). Typical expression of this development were the mission stations introduced by Carey (Luzbetak 1993: 98). However, as history has shown, they hindered a contextualized or indigenous approach by alienating locals from their culture and offering only a few of the respondents the opportunity to fully grasp the Christian message (ibid., McGavran 1968) : 30, 59, 65, 105; Tippett 1967: 25).
In the area of ​​Bible translation, the Bible organizations remained committed to traditional translations and focused on the cost-effective and broad distribution of Bibles or Bible parts in the commercial or national languages ​​of their destinations (effectiveness thinking). Translation took place only in the context of very large language groups or national organizations were promoted, which were active in it (eg Turkish translation, see Werner [2010]).
1.5.3 Akkomodation
The principle of accommodation was introduced by Roman Catholic institutions (see above, Jenkins 2006: 56-57). The idea was to deny own cultural "load" and to dive into the foreign culture so as to make it the own and participate fully therein. It rarely found favor with modern movements given the suspicion that denial of own cultural background raises suspicion and is never possible. Few exceptions such as Hudson Taylor (Taylor 1999, detailed by Franz 1998), Rufus Anderson (Pikkert 2008: 29, Luzbetak 1993: 98, 100), Temple Gairdner (Pikkert 2008: 94, 110, Reimer 2006a: 8, Terry 1996: 171) or William Carey (Walls 2006: 211; Tucker 2007: 343) set standards in terms of contextualized access to the target group. For some of them, they received heavy criticism (Walls 2005: 238-240, 251), but for a long time they became exemplary.
   Christian development aid can be reduced to five approaches to the target group: contextual (contextualization), confrontational (apologetic), traditional evangelical (christocentric, eg Samuel Zwemer (Pikkert 2008: 109-110, Livingstone 1993: 48), institutional (through social Facilities) and dialogical (Hansum 2008: 89). However, Terry has even ten approaches. In my opinion these can be reduced to the five described above (1996: 168-177).

1.5.4 Ecumenism
International conferences led to a desire within the theologically different churches to unite and join forces in Christian development aid (Sauer 2006: 196). This was the basis for the universal orientation of Christian development aid within the framework of an all-church movement known as "ecumenism" (Bosch 1991: 301-302). John Raleigh Mott may be considered a master builder of ecumenism (Feldtkeller 2003: 19; Reifler 2005: 242, 244, 263-264, 268, 270).
    In the area of ​​Bible translation, this idea led to the founding of SIL (1942) and UBS (1946), which are committed to the principle of non-denominational cooperation. A rethinking of the Roman Catholic Church took place with the Second Vatican Council. Now, in the context of liturgical use, national languages ​​should be officially allowed, and at the same time the call to the use and reading of the Bible (1962) was made. The doors of cooperation between UBS and the World Catholic Federation for the Biblical Apostolate were opened (1968). This resulted in an ecumenical coexistence in the translation of the Bible (Spindler quoted in Miller 2002: 26, Betz 1998: 3-4, s.a Steiner 1966: 127; Escobar 1990: 88-89 and Smalley 1991: 30).
   Critical voices on ecumenism continue to criticize the one-sided focus on the neutral area of ​​social projects or diaconia in order to avoid theological discrepancies (Kasdorf 1976: 89, 92; Baumann 2007b: 113, 127; Brandl 2002: 20; Vicedom 2002a: 121).
   Ecumenical aspirations of this time helped the Jewish-Christian dialogue to new beginnings. In the Western world, attention was paid to the importance of the Septuagint as a Jewish product and the Jewish-Christian disputations of scholasticism . There were Jewish-oriented translations into almost all major European languages ​​(Orlinsky & Bratcher 1991: 124). The Hebrew Bible was thereby revalued in exegesis and translation.

1.5.5 Bible translation, Linguistics and Anthropology
To overcome linguistic hurdles, linguistics and ethnology were discovered as helpful auxiliary disciplines. Both faculties have firmly established themselves within the framework of Christian development aid (Bruggen 1985: 37-38). William Carey's emerging branch of Bible translation (Smalley 1991: 43, 45, Tucker 2007: 343) provided the platform for integrating these auxiliary disciplines. The mutual integration of these three disciplines is based on the fact that interdependencies can still be ascertained to this day (see section 2.3).

1.5.6 Science of Bible translation
The twentieth century, in contrast to the nineteenth century, in which the spread of the Bible was a priority, became the century of the "science of Bible translation" (on content and concep). At the core of this development stood 
*the linking scientific disciplines in the translation of the Bible (see above, eg. linguistics). This led to revision translations of all kinds. There were at least four such revisions in the English-speaking world (New International Version, New American Standard Bible, New King James Version, New World Translation by Orlinsky & Bratcher 1991: 208, 217, 279). The same can also be said in German-speaking countries with a slight time lag (eg revisions of the Luther 1975 and 1984, Einheitsübersetzung, Good News Bible, Revised Elberfelder, Hofnung für Alle etc.).
*A concentration on unreached people groups who were eligible for Christian development aid as target groups (eg Turks in Zurich 2004: 2004: 56). 
*Missiologically oriented facilities, which developed strategies and models to reach those by contextualized Christian teaching (eg Fuller Seminar / Pasadena, Institute of Missiology and Religious Studies / Friborg etc.). The language and culture of these target groups became the focus of research. Contextualization replaced accommodation and the native speakers came to the fore (on the criticism of the cultural religion resulting from accommodation, see Vicedom 2002a: 121).
*The position of the Christian development worker changed from a translator to a trainer or a manager of projects (eg language oriented projects). Maurice Leenhardt, who lived among the Canaks of New Caledonia and led a translation with the help of "participatory observation" (Smalley 1991: 53-56, 239), can be regarded as the pioneer of this movement. The Christian workers are nowadays undestood as cultural mediators bringing one socio-linguisticak context into their own.
*Rediscovery and development of communication models in the fields of information technology and other scientific disciplines, namely (neuro) linguistics, the social sciences and the sciences of communication and translation. The translation of the Bible proves to be the catalyst of such models because of its global appearance and the associated social applications.
*Internationalization and increasing interdisciplinarity of scientific disciplines and institutions in the context of globalization (Kapteina 2002: 13, generally Wilss 1984: 21 especially for translation: 22). 
*Western dominance gives way to growing eastern presence in the context of Christian development aid (Park 2002: 55-56, 60), focusing mainly on the 10/40 window (Reifler 2005: 30; Wiher 1995: 1-3).

The academic branch of Bible translation proves to be a fruitful tool of missiological endeavor in this epoch, since it addressed target groups that until then had been out of the focus of Christian development aid (Miller 2002: 27). Therefore, Bible translation has a significant role in the Christian aim to "reach all the peoples of the world" (Mt 28: 19-20).
1.6. Summary
In addition to numerous historical reviews, the history of Bible translation appears rather as a rarity. Although existing works refer to the production and background of the creation of a Bible translation, there is a lack of representations of Bible translation as an institution and science.
The history of the translation of the Bible makes clear that until today Christianity has derived its mandate for Bible translation out of the example of its namesake (Acts 11:26). Incarnation, condescension and kenosis of the divine person became her standard for the transmission of biblical content. The Churchs' eyes fell on peoples and persons with whom Christendom had been confronted since its founding (Acts 2: 9-10) and who were not able to understand the Greek records, the apostolic contributions or the Hebrew Bible.

The apostolic - or written in the authority of the apostles by co-workers - writings have been interpreted since the 1st century as a unit and summarized in one "canon". However "the canon" never became finalized or ratified. This is well demonstarted by its christocentric context and the apostolic authority, which stand in contrast to the in- or exclusion of the deuterokanonical or pseudepigraphic works, in the Protestant area better known as Apocrypha. The canon thus becomes a denominational question based on the scale of selection. At this stage, Bible translation was discovered as a basic missiological apporach - through the mother tongue - into people's hearts, but was not not systematized at this point. Unconsciously, in this process, the incarnation principle was transferred into Bible translation.

In the Middle Ages, this development continued, however, broader education and teaching was mainly neglected, which is where the importance of the translation of the Bible as a work of the clerical comes from.  Also education and Christian training based on reading the Bible was reserved for the educated clerical upper class. Only monasticism and the monastic movement as internationally acting institutions continued the dissemination of biblical contents in the ecclesiastical context and also into non-Christianized areas. Here, the tendency to translate the Bible can be seen as a strategic tool. It is obvious from history that where native Bible translations have arisen, indigenous forms of Christianity have also emerged. Only in the heyday of scholasticism in the 12th century, the entire Western Church devoted itself in particular to the Bible.
Once again in the pre-Reformation period (14th century) and finally with its breakthrough, the importance of the translation of the Bible came again into the church's field of vision. In the framework of Pietism and the break through of Christian development aid, extra-curricular training seminars were formed, dealing exegetically and philologically with the ancient languages ​​of the Bible and foreign cultures. During this time, the founding of Bible Societies (BFBS / ABS) evolved, whose goal are the spread of the Bible in as many languages ​​as possible.

During the Enlightenment, the Church of the East and the West united for a universal strategy of disseminating biblical content. Background of this development is to be sought in a reorientation of the Western Church. While the Nestorian Church in the Asian world was also active in the area of ​​Bible translation, the Western Church was only now focusing on this strategic tool.

The unification of Western and Eastern forces in Christian development aid has been helped and promoted by individuals such as Carey, Taylor, Anderson, and others. The century of Bible translation generated ecumenical endeavors, which paved the way for future global translator coverage of all languages. Through international conferences and internationally operating societies in the area of ​​Bible translation, the goal was to make the Bible, parts of the Bible or the access to biblical content possible to all peoples in the native language. Again, institutions and scientific disciplines, which were necessary for the realization of this goal, formed only slowly.

Only in this century of Christian development aid and Bible translation did global strategies and models unfold to realize this goal. From science, new insights into communication and translation provided expansive models to help translate the Bible into its disciplinary discipline. At the center of this development was the target audience, to whom the Bible should be made intelligible. This resulted in the shortest possible time in a broad distribution of biblical content, which in turn was perceived church-strengthening or strengthening. The science of Bible translation thus became the bridgehead of Missiology. It combines the forces of ethnology and linguistics and opens the dialogue with the sciences for communication and translation.

After historical connections of the Bible translation have become clear, the question arises, which explicit or implicit elements justify their sending or their mandate.

2.1. Training-relevant models
On the linguistic side, alternative models and proposals for translation have been available since the seventies of the last century. These include,
  •     the functional discourse-oriented grammar, developed by Halliday (1975; 1985),
  •     the functional translation model of Nord (1997, 2001, 2003),
  •     the Skopos theory by Reiß & Vermeer (1984),
  •     the culture approach of Katan (1999),
  •     the model of mass communication by Maletzke (1978) and McQuail (2005),
  •     the intercultural communication approach of Neuliep (2006),
  •     the development of the equivalence model (Nida 1964 and Nida & Taber 1969) according to Larson (1984), Beekman (1974) and Waard & Nida (1986),
  •     the literal translation models of Nabokov (1964), Turner (2001) and Forrest (2003), as well as the literal (linguistic) philosophical approaches (justified, inter alia, by Derrida, Benjamin, Wittgenstein),
  •     the literary models of Jin (2003) and Wendland (2003; 2006),
  •     and the relevance-theoretical approach of Gutt (1991, 2000), which is based on the relevance theory (RT) by Sperber & Wilson (1986). [1]
These models sometimes lead to fundamentally different approaches to translation than was the case in the code model. This inevitably leads to a different practice of translation. However, the impact of these new or advanced models remained small. This means questioning the theoretical and translation-technical foundations of training institutes. At a meeting of instructors in translation in 1999, it became clear that in the current education and practice of Bible translation, only the communication and translation model proposed by Nida & Taber and later by Waard & Nida plays a significant role in comparison to literal tranhslation styles (Wilt 2003a: ix). However, the knowledge gained by other attempts are enormous and are important to understnd the process of tranhslation better.
2.2. Translation intent - Revision, New Translation or First Translation
Translation intentions have basic functions in the science of translation (based on the Lasswell formula, see section 2.3.5.1). The division into revision, new translations, and first translations as it is done in the recent literature, proves to be helpful (Aland 1974: 11, Smalley 1991: 107, Haacker 2006: 36). [1] New translations are following new translation theories or new exegetical insights in contexts wehre there are existing Bible translations on which they depend or which they refuse. First or missiological Bible tranhslations are in contexts wehre there is no existing Bible translation in this language.
While revision and new translations can look back on a long tradition of translation, mainly in Europe and the English-speaking world, the term retranslation includes first translations among isolated, that is, unexplored or orally transmitted ethnic groups [2] (Willebrands 1987). Revision translations include modern and new translation principles (examples in Orlinsky & Bratcher 1991: 145, 150, 207, 279). They refer to several existing Bible translations of different traditions in the target language (: 279).
Haacker describes the field of tension that results from the distinction of translations in this way. In his opinion, there is a lack of a clear distinction between these traditions within the debate, which is in some cases heated and controversial in German-speaking countries (2006: 36). His division into Reformation and missionary Bible translations is based on the intention / motivation of the translation activity (: ibid.). Effects are shown not only in the orientation towards the target group (see above), but also in case of revisions in their linguistic and theological "obligation to the impact story" of the underlying source texts (: ibid, also Vries 2007: 275-276 [3]) , This is particularly evident in the criticism of the Luther revision 1975 in which innovations were criticized in favor of traditional patterns (Hennig 1979: 260-272) and the Christmas story and the praise of love rejected. Such led to the reintroduction of terms that were already used in the revision of 1912 (Luther Bible 1984: Foreword). Haacker sees a revision, as a structure that is "between science and art" to settle. This would result from the claim of the western world to use language experts, theologians, missiologists and different test persons for their production (2004: 211).

In terms of new translations, the intention is to "turn to the people of today in their language world" (Haacker 2006: 36). [4] In summary, this means that a revision and or new Bible translation is committed to an already existing audience, while the first translation targets at an audience whose reaction is unpredictable, leading either to acceptance or rejection. [5]

2.2. Science of translation - young and cross-cultural
In contrast to the science of communication, which focuses on the act of communication, translation science is concerned with "translation from one language to another", "from one culture to another" (Carrithers 1992: 22-23, Article : "Anthropology"). It deals with the subject / product of the translation (text), the process of translation, the function of translation, the special form of interpreting, the translator and their specialization on Bible translation (Holmes quoted in Toury 1995: 11, 21, sa Wilss 1982: 58; see item). These areas should be discussed for different reasons.
It is a very young branch of science (Meurer 1978: 8). This is due, among other things, to the fact that "translation" is not considered or has become a science (Baker 2006: 2-4, see Steiner 2004: 129, Svejcer quoted in Wilss 1982: 52). [1] In 1972, Holmes uses the term Translation Studies at a conference in Copenhagen (Holmes 1972: 67). He summarizes in this way the hitherto common Terms, science of translating (Nida 1964), science of translation (eg Wilss 1982: 114) or translatology (Goffin quoted in Holmes 1994: 69) together in a new term (in detail at Hermans 1999: 30, Arduini 2007 : 185; Toury 1995: 9-14). [2] It is also he who develops a structure for this branch of science and divides it into a practical (descriptive) and theoretical part (Holmes quoted in Toury 1995: 11-21, there also own further development of Toury). This classification has meanwhile prevailed.
Koller describes the science of translation as a collective phenomenon. He rates them as "all research and translation-related research activities (Koller quoted in Holmes 1994: 10-11, as well as Mojola & Wendland 2003: 11)." [3] According to Koller's definition, it is not about communication per se, but to focus on ddetailed processes, especially in "translation" and "transmission". A closer illumination of these terms should clarify this.
At present, science is associated with translation and the discipline of interpreting applied linguistics and there with pragmatics (Reiß & Vermeer 1991: 1).

2.2.1. Translation and translation
The terms "translation" and "translate" are sometimes misunderstood as synonymous, used. In this thesis, it is argued that it is within different contexts that terms to be examined individually.
It must be distinguished between the object, the product [4] and the activity [5] (see above) as expressed in the linguistic approachHolmes cited in Toury 1995: 9-12 ). The separation of these three factors as "Descriptive Translation Studies" of science for translation made possible a practice-oriented discussion (ibid.).
One problem is the qualitative assessment of a translation. Apart from computer translation, uniform criteria do not seem possible. Pym therefore proposes the distinction between binary and non-binary errors for the evaluation of translation. "Falsely correct" assessments fell under the former, while "quantitatively described" errors were to be assessed as the latter (quoted in Kußmaul 2007: 66). Nord approached the problem of quality assurance in its functional approach.
If translation, in agreement with other researchers, is understood as a process of approximation, then there can never be complete agreement between the original and the translate (Tirkkonen-Condit 1997: 78, Steiner 2004: 319, Kußmaul 2007: 61). In addition, the "axiom of translatability" (Humboldt quoted in Berger & Nord 1999: 19; Newmark 1988a: 6; Chafe 2003: 1) must be fulfilled, since it is the presupposition of science for translation and is based on the assumption that in each language everything that can be meant to be express is possible to do. This means that all content can be transferred by voice. Even if the linguistic factors are in the foreground in this axiom, and in certain - very rare - cases the translatability can be questioned (eg Gutt 1991: 94-99). Given this assumption, serves as a working basis. [6]

2.2.2. Ethnological Approach
From an ethnological point of view, "translation" is understood as a descriptive process whose purpose is "to make the foreign familiar" (Carrithers 1992: 22). This includes interpreting foreign cultural elements into one's own culture. The intercultural transfer process takes place in the understanding of the stranger in and through culture and language. A retrospective effect on the translated foreign culture can be observed but not presupposed (Toury 1995: 166). [8]
2.2.3 Linguistic approach
The understanding of translation from a linguistic point of view reflects a range that includes an "interplay between literal translation and unlimited freedom" (Jin 2003: 33). Jin expresses that translation is both mechanical and intuitive. [1] Hatim & Munday see this similar and do not want to restrict "translation" in any direction (2004: 224). Restrictions would set process and product in a particular direction, which would be detrimental to the actual content of the terminology. There is also the possibility of "untranslatability" of certain texts, since their form is not transferable to the appropriate extent in the target language. These give priority to content over form, since the reverse would lead to the "pedantic form of literal translation" (:14). Communicative reasons can also prevent translation (Gutt 1991: 94-99).
Holmes delimits three functions which appear in literature, but which are sometimes insufficiently distinguished:
  •     the process. What happens when "translating" the source text? [2]
  •     the product. The analysis of the target text is at the center (Bell 1991: 13).
  •     the function. How does the target text work in a particular context (Holmes quoted in Hatim & Munday 2004: 3-4, 222, 224, Toury 1995: 26-27, similar to Reiß & Vermeer 1991: 2)? [3]
This tripartite division has implications for another question, namely whether 'translation' is a 'literary genre' (genre) or 'translation' is the subject of that activity genre busy. The product of the translation process is a literary genre (pamphlet, bible text, prose, poetry, etc.), but at the same time the freedom of the translator is in interpretation and the generators of literary genres (Hatim 2001: 140-147). This means that "translation" both produces a genre and also takes over the function of a genre.
In addition to these considerations, Wilts' definition, which due to its accuracy serves as a reference point in the search for a comprehensive description for translation, is: "Translation is the attempt to produce in one language a text that was produced in another language (or other languages) (2003: 233) "[5].

2.2.4. Cognitive Approach
Similar to Fabbro's communication and language approach, Bell's approach to translation provides a cognitive model description for "translation". This is in his opinion,
    a part of the human information process,
    settled there in the psychological area,
    by coding devices in the source and target languages ​​that allow a non-linguistic semantic mapping, anchored in the short-term and long-term memory of the brain activity,
    a process that takes place in multi-level and interactive operations, which do not have to be completed before the next analysis or synthesis takes place (Bell 1991: 229).
Bell describes the process of translation here, but does not mention a distinction between product and function.

In cognitive linguistics it is emphasized that the translator translates not "words but meanings" (Kussmaul 2007: 24). "Proper understanding of" translating "includes not only understanding the words (semantic level), but also capturing the text in the overall context Transferring its meaning into the target language (pragmatic level) (on the relationship between pragmatics and semantics see Grice).

2.2.5. Functional approach and understood strangeness
The functional approaches to translation criticism focus on special aspects of translation. Reiß, whose definition forms the basis of the so-called Skopos theory, understands by translation,
"The target-language version of a source text whose principal aim is to reproduce the original text according to the type of text, its internal language instructions and the non-linguistic determinants in the target language that are effective (Reiß 1971: 91)."
This is similar to North. It follows Reiß and defines "translation" as a communicative action that transcends language and cultural boundaries (see Gutt's third entry) (Nord 2003: 31). It concerns the "production of a functionally correct target text in a different specified connection to an existing source text (Nord 2003: 31) depending on the desired or required function of the target text (Translatskopos)". North settles translation in action between preservation and change. Increasing conservation activity causes decreasing change in translation and vice versa (2003: 33).
Burgess advocates in his article "against the ruthless demand for general comprehensibility and for the preservation of strangeness". He wants to preserve that sacral understanding especially of sacred texts (Thiede 1993: 3). The term "salutary strangeness" is also used by other critics of communicative translation (Wick 2004: 14 and 2007, Felber 2006: 2, Berger & Nord 1999: 22-23). Instead of strangeness, the otherness of the Bible is emphasized in the same sense (Nichols 1996: ii, against religious terminology or alienation, inter alia, Nida & Taber 1969: 108).

2.2..6. Three main directions - Attempt to Classification
Gutt works out three definition lines of "translation". On the one hand, one simply starts from the fact of the existence of such a process, "without attempting to define it in a systematic way (Gutt 2000: 5)." On the other hand, one has a confusing multiplicity by limiting and restricting the contents created by definitions. Finally, one argues with a blanket "cultural access" [6], whose thesis is loud, "Translation is what makes a culture out of it (eg, eg Bascom 2003: 81, Katan 1999: 86, Lovill 1988 :1)". All three accesses fall short of Gutt's opinion.
The first shows the lack of a "scientific basis" of the translation. This includes the dynamic equivalence model which he describes as a deficient working hypothesis. B. is represented by Larson and Dil. Larson defines the translator's goal, ie "translation", as making a translation
"Text referring to the language of the recipient (a translation) that is idiomatic; So a text that has the same meaning as the source text, but is expressed in natural form in the recipient language. The meaning, not the form, is preserved (Larson 1984: 16). "[7]
She and Dil describe the product of the translation based on Nida, but not the process and function of the translation (Dil 1975: 33).
The second limits translation beyond measure by "implicating and defining a norm, thereby excluding all phenomena which do not meet the criteria of that definition (Gutt 2000: 5)." The third approach suppresses the intercultural prerequisites of translation by: it is based on one-sided cultural assumptions (Gutt 2000: 4-7, criticism of Nida at Gutt 2000: 5).

2.2.7 Translating
So far, it has been shown that there is not enough clear distinction between the process, the product and the function in translation. University curricula point to this separation. "Translation Studies" is taught either as part of other disciplines (linguistics, German studies, Anglicistics, etc.) or as an independent discipline, with little approach to other disciplines. This already begins in normal school life, where according to the motto "as true as possible, as free as necessary (Berger & Nord 1999: 18)" is translated. The translator's intuition is not provided with translation criteria other than the reproduction of verbal units of meaning to verify the learned vocabulary and grammatical form. Here the form comes before the content, which seems questionable, since the content-related understanding of the source text, in the opinion of many translation scientists, comes too short (: 18). "Translating" is understood as action and effect.
While the definitions examined so far had the "translation", ie the product in view, Snell-Hornby comes from the concept of "translation". It differentiates into "literary translation" and "secular specialized translation". Developments in these areas mean that the term "translate" is understood differently (1986: 11-12). [8]

"Semiotic units" (see section 1.2) are transformed into "different equivalent conditions with semiotic codes ... into others". The conditions are determined by "pragmatic action and general communicative conditions" (Hatim & Mason 1990: 105, see also Nida 1964 and Greenberg 1968). Hatim & Mason investigate "translate" from the point of view of discourse, that is, textanalytical emphases. This understanding of "translation" aims at equivalency of the source (AT) to the target text (ZT). Diskurstechnische means form the auxiliary tool. Such a semantic or semiotic approach reveals knowledge about the process, not the function of "translating".

Gutts initially mentioned criticism seems justified. The understanding of translation as a "communicative act" is taken up in these definitions, but not finally clarified. Before a definitive summary is possible, a special form of translation, interpreting, should be illuminated in order to stimulate understanding of the subject.

2.2.8. Translating versus interpreting
The science of communication and translation refers to the separation of "interpreting" [9] and "translating" (Snell & Hornby 1998: 37, Wilss 1992: 125, Nida 2001: 9, Haacker 1993: 26-27; Nord 1999: 18 refer to Schleiermacher 1813: 47; Reiß & Vermeer 1991: 8, 11). At the same time, there is an emphasis on the similarities that I think should outweigh and need to be considered.

Fabbro emphasizes that interpreting is the "most complex process of multilingual people". While listening to content in a source language, the interpreter translates it into a target language. He calls this "simultaneous interpretation" (Fabbro 1999: 202) and distinguishes between passive and active interpretation (: 203). [10] Simultaneous translation, in his opinion, is subject to "semantic" or "literal" principles, comparable to the principles of written translation methods (: 204; see above). Fabbro indicates here that the literal method is not the natural form of interpreting. While simultaneous translation refers to short, mostly sentence-level content, professional translators value large text units. This type of translation Fabbro calls "consecutive translation". For this purpose, the translator makes use of entire text units, makes notes and then tries to reproduce the text content up to 10 minutes long (: 204). [11]
The main difference, unlike translation, is the lack of interpretation time (Snell-Hornby 1998: 37). It is also described as a "special case of translation" (Nord 2003: 7). "At the same time and in the same place, they communicate via the same medium, ... a functionally equal determined text", but the cultural background of "source text recipient, translator and target recipient" differs (Nord 2003: 7). As in the field of translation, intercultural access (see Gutt) plays a key role between speaker and performer.
The job description of the "interpreter" is limited to "oral texts" (Schmitt 1998: 1-2,. Fulfillment of its purpose, in particular rapid apprehension and reproduction of the content, comes to the fore in interpreting (: 1-2).
These differences are contrasted by the common basis of "interpreting" and "translating". In both, the specific socio-cultural background of the source and target text is transferred. This is done by a translator who is subject to his own specific sociocultural background (Nida 1990: 53 and 2001: 9, see Figure 7). Therefore, the formal separation in two disciplines seems more theoretical than practical.

2.2.9. Summary
The examination of the term "translation" leads to the following definition:
In the case of Bible translation, it relies on the model of the incarnation, condescension and kenosis of Jesus.
    Translation describes both an intercultural process, the product as well as a function (meeting at least two cultures), which can definitely carry power-political traits (colonialism).
    It deals with various literary genres and produces such.
    As a cognitive process, it is realized by linking different memory systems in the brain and transferring semiotic signs from one system to another.
    In contrast to interpreting, it focuses on the preserving function of texts and requires corresponding periods of time.

In short, the goal of "translating" is "translation". This "translation" involves the systematic development of a textual content and its transfer to another voice / communication system without losing valuable content. The translator is the performer.
References

Anderson, George W. [1970] 1989. Canonical and Non-Canonical, in Ackroyd, Peter R. & Evans, Christopher F. (eds.): The Cambridge History of the Bible: From the Beginnings to Jerome, Vol. 1, 113-158. Reprint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Audisio, Gabriel 2004. Die Waldenser - Die Geschichte einer religiösen Bewegung. Augsburg: Weltbild.

Berger, Klaus & Nord, Christiane 1999. Das Neue Testament und frühchristliche Schriften. Frankfurt am Main: Insel. [Engl.: The New Testament and early Christian Writings.].

Borg, Marcus J. 2001. Reading the Bible Again for the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously but Not Literally. San Francisco: Harper.Bruggen, Jakob van 1976. The Ancient Text of the New Testament. Winnipeg: Premier Printing.

Bruggen, Jakob van 1978. The Future of the Bible. New York: Nelson.

Butcher, Andy [oJ.]. Radical Missionary Approach Produces 'Messianic Muslims' Who Claim to Retain their Islamic Identity. Online im Internet: www.beliefnet.com [Stand: 16.7.2011].

Hargraves, Henry [1969] 1989. The Wycliffite Versions, in Lampe, Geoffrey W. H. (ed.): The Cambridge History of the Bible: The West from the Fathers to the Reformation, Vol. 2, 387-415. Reprint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hauser, Albrecht 2007. Die missionarische Herausforderung der Gegenwart - Christsein in der Be­gegnung mit Säkularismus und Islam, in Müller, Klaus W. (Hg.): Mission im Islam, 82-91. Nürnberg: VTR.

Kautzsch, E. 1900. Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Lauche, Gerald 2007. Die Geschichte der arabischen Bibelübersetzung, in Müller, Klaus W. (Hg.): Mission im Islam, 129-139. Nürnberg: VTR.

Metzger, Bruce M. 1993. Der Kanon des Neuen Testament - Entstehung, Entwicklung, Bedeutung. Düsseldorf: Patmos. [engl. Original 1987. The Canon of the New Testament. Oxford: Ox­ford University Press. übersetzt von Röttgers, Hans-M.].

Neill, Stephen [1964] 1990. Geschichte der christlichen Missionen. Herausgegeben und ergänzt von Niehls-Peter Moritzen. 2. ergänzte Auflage. Erlangen: Verlag der evangelisch-lutherischen Mission. (Englisches Original: Christian Missions. Harmandsworth: Penguin.).

Orlinsky, Harry M. & Bratcher, Robert G. 1991. A history of Bible translation and the North American contribution. Atlanta: Scholars Press.Roberts, C. H. [1970] 1989. Books in the Graeco-Roman World and in the New Testament, in Ackroyd, Peter R. & Evans, Christopher F. (eds.): The Cambridge History of the Bible: From the Beginnings to Jerome, Vol. 1, 48-66. Reprint. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxbrow, Mark 2005. Emerging Mission in Oxbrow, Mark & Garow, Emma (eds.): Emerging Mission: Reporting on a Consultation. Bangalore/India (November), 1-8. London: Indian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.

Roberts, Bleddyn J. [1969] 1989. The Old Testament: Manuscripts, Text and Versions, in Ackroyd, Peter R. & Evans, Christopher F. (eds.): The Cambridge History of the Bible: From the Begin­nings to Jerome, Vol. 2, 1-26. Reprint. Cambridge: Cam­bridge University Press.

Rüger, Hans Peter 1985. Was übersetzen wir? Fragen zur Textbasis, die sich aus der Traditions- und Kanonsgeschichte ergeben, in Gnilka, Joachim & Rüger, Hans Peter (Hgg.): Die Übersetzung der Bibel: Aufgabe der Theologie. TAzB 2, 57-64. Bielefeld: Luther-Verlag. [Engl.: What are we translating? Questions about the Textual Basis, which evolve out of the Tradition- and Canon History, in Gnilka, Joachim & Rüger, Hans Peter (eds.): The Translation of the Bible: Responsibility of Theology, 57-64. Bielefeld: Luther-Publishing House].

Sanneh, Lamin [1989] 1992. Translating the Message: The Missionary Impact on Culture. 4th ed. Maryknoll: Orbis.

Sanneh, Lamin 1990. Gospel and Culture: Ramifying effects of scriptural translation, in Stine, Philip C. (Hg.): Bible Translation and the Spread of the Church: The last 200 Years, 1-23. Leiden: Brill.

Sanneh, Lamin 1991. Christliche Mission und westliche Schuldkomplexe. ZfM XVII/3, 146-152. Stuttgart: Evangelischer Missionsverlag.

Sanneh, Lamin 2003. Whose Religion is Christianity? The Gospel beyond the West. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Sanneh, Lamin 2005. The Current Transformation of Christianity, in Sanneh, Lamin & Car­pen­ter, Joel A. (Hgg.): The Changing Face of Christianity, 213-224. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sanneh, Lamin 2007. Bible Translation and Scripture Use in Christian History. Lectures at Euro­pean Training Programme (etp). 11th - 23rd June. Horsleys Green. [unveröffent­lich­te Mitschrift].

Sanneh, Lamin & Carpenter, Joel A. (Hgg.) 2005. The Changing Face of Christianity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schneemelcher, Wilhelm 1989. Neutestamentliche Apokryphen. 2. Bde. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Tippett, Alan R. 1967. Salomon Islands Christianity: A Study in Growth and Obstruction. 2nd printing. Pasadena: William Carey. (ursprünglich: London: Lutterworth Press).

Tippett, Alan R. 1970. Church Growth and the Word of God: The Biblical Basis of the Church Growth Viewpoint. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Tippett, Alan R. 1976. Introduction to Missiology. Passadena: William Carey.

Troeger, Eberhard 2005. Der Griff des Islam nach Europa. Vortrag vom 11.02.2005 Working Paper. Gießen: Freie Theologische Hochschule.[unpublished]. [Engl.: The Grasp of Islam at Europe. Lecture on the 11th February 2005.].