11 dead in French satirical magazine shooting

[Razgovory]

Because when I hear about a tragedy, my first instinct is to wonder how it will affect the local elections.

Psycho.

Much as I dislike defending Grallon (and I'm not really), but in the face of a tragedy we often grasp at straws.  We look for things we can discuss and control, instead of the unexplicable horror that has just happened.

When Edmonton's 9-person homicide was first announced, I felt guilty that my first or second thought was 'gee, I wonder who is going to get that file'.

But while that reaction is fairly normal, common decency doesn't means not looking quite so gleeful about multiple murders.

Common decency also doesn't mean we should advocate genocide, but that's grallon for you.

[Norgy]

But while that reaction is fairly normal, common decency doesn't means not looking quite so gleeful about multiple murders.

You really are a voice of reason.
And I mean that.

[Valmy]

Ok, I want to make a commitment. I will read the whole Quran.

From what I understand you have to read it in Arabic. Translations aren't considered to really be the word or Allah.

I find that perspective rather humorous.  That is like saying one must read the New Testament in the original Greek, you know what Jesus spoke.

And there's something to that - it would avoid all of the fights over translations that have happened over the centuries.

Well the decision to restrict the Quran to one dialect of Arabic happened after a civil war so yeah it was developed to solve the same problem.

[Syt]

Here is what Wikipedia, mother of all knowledge, has to say on the matter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran_translations

Translation of the Qur'an has always been a problematic and difficult issue in Islamic theology. Since Muslims revere the Qur'an as miraculous and inimitable (i'jaz al-Qur'an), they argue that the Qur'anic text should not be isolated from its true form to another language or form, at least not without keeping the arabic text alongwith. Furthermore, an Arabic word, like a Hebrew or Aramaic word, may have a range of meanings depending on the context - a feature present in all Semitic languages, when compared to the moderately analytic English, Latin, and Romance languages - making an accurate translation even more difficult.[1]

According to modern Islamic theology, the Qur'an is a revelation very specifically in Arabic, and so it should only be recited in the Arabic language. Translations into other languages are necessarily the work of humans and so, according to Muslims, no longer possess the uniquely sacred character of the Arabic original. Since these translations necessarily subtly change the meaning, they are often called "interpretations"[2] or "translation(s) of the meanings" (with "meanings" being ambiguous between the meanings of the various passages and the multiple possible meanings with which each word taken in isolation can be associated, and with the latter connotation amounting to an acknowledgement that the so-called translation is but one possible interpretation and is not claimed to be the full equivalent of the original). For instance, Pickthall called his translation The Meaning of the Glorious Koran rather than simply The Koran.

The task of translation is not an easy one; some native Arab-speakers will confirm that some Qur'anic passages are difficult to understand even in the original Arabic. A part of this is the innate difficulty of any translation; in Arabic, as in other languages, a single word can have a variety of meanings.[2] There is always an element of human judgement involved in understanding and translating a text. This factor is made more complex by the fact that the usage of words has changed a great deal between classical and modern Arabic. As a result, even Qur'anic verses which seem perfectly clear to native speakers accustomed to modern vocabulary and usage may not represent the original meaning of the verse.

The original meaning of a Qur'anic passage will also be dependent on the historical circumstances of the prophet Muhammad's life and early community in which it originated. Investigating that context usually requires a detailed knowledge of hadith and sirah, which are themselves vast and complex texts. This introduces an additional element of uncertainty which cannot be eliminated by any linguistic rules of translation.

[Viking]

Ok, I want to make a commitment. I will read the whole Quran.

From what I understand you have to read it in Arabic. Translations aren't considered to really be the word or Allah.

I find that perspective rather humorous.  That is like saying one must read the New Testament in the original Greek, you know what Jesus spoke.

You really do need to read it in Greek to get the puns, like the one about being born again vs being born from above, which is only a joke in Greek, not Aramaic.

[Valmy]

Here is what Wikipedia, mother of all knowledge, has to say on the matter:

Yes I am aware of the Islamic tradition on this but the problem is that the Quran already has that problem, there being many dialects of Arabic.  When the Quran was first written down it lacked the vowel markings, for example.  Eventually the Umayyads decreed that only a specific dialect of Arabic should be used and all the versions were translated into that dialect.  So if you are really worried about translations fucking up the purity of it you are a bit late.  Might as well just read a translation.

[Valmy]

Ok, I want to make a commitment. I will read the whole Quran.

From what I understand you have to read it in Arabic. Translations aren't considered to really be the word or Allah.

I find that perspective rather humorous.  That is like saying one must read the New Testament in the original Greek, you know what Jesus spoke.

You really do need to read it in Greek to get the puns, like the one about being born again vs being born from above, which is only a joke in Greek, not Aramaic.

By the time of the Gospel of John they were pretty removed from the Aramaic Jewish origins.  Jesus talks like a Greek Philosopher most of the time.

[Admiral Yi]

Weren't most of the Gospels written in Aramaic?  I thought I read once that Luke was noticeable among the disciples for writing in Greek, taken as evidence of his education.

[Valmy]

Weren't most of the Gospels written in Aramaic?  I thought I read once that Luke was noticeable among the disciples for writing in Greek, taken as evidence of his education.

All the gospels were written in Greek.  Now there was some controversy over Matthew but most people now agree it was originally Greek as well.

[Syt]

A Latin/Classical Greek Professor once told us that it's Greek with a strong Hebrew/Jewish accent, because it was written in the common verbiage of the target audience, and not in the stilted language that many translations have since provided.

[Norgy]

I wrote my Gospel in Arameic and nobody gave a shit.

- Tomas

[Sheilbh]

Weren't most of the Gospels written in Aramaic?  I thought I read once that Luke was noticeable among the disciples for writing in Greek, taken as evidence of his education.

No they're all Greek.

I believe Luke is noticeable in the New Testaments for clearly writing for a Greek audience and for being a bit of a stylist. I think the same goes for Paul. The others, from my understanding, are a bit more ploddingly Aramaic-ish and far more Jewish in content (especially Matthew).

[Viking]

Weren't most of the Gospels written in Aramaic?  I thought I read once that Luke was noticeable among the disciples for writing in Greek, taken as evidence of his education.

They were all written in Greek. All the original and older documents are in greek. The earliest versions are all in greek. Some people argue that some of the gospels may have been written in aramaic, this is in part due to their attributition (the attribution is almost certainly false) to people who spoke aramaeic and probably did not speak greek. All the archeological and linguistic evidence is consistent with greek origins to the gospels.

[Valmy]

Weren't most of the Gospels written in Aramaic?  I thought I read once that Luke was noticeable among the disciples for writing in Greek, taken as evidence of his education.

No they're all Greek.

I believe Luke is noticeable in the New Testaments for clearly writing for a Greek audience and for being a bit of a stylist. I think the same goes for Paul. The others, from my understanding, are a bit more ploddingly Aramaic-ish and far more Jewish in content (especially Matthew).

Yep.  This is why there was some thought for awhile that Matthew had originally been in Aramaic.

[Liep]

Twitter is mobilising: