 |  |
translate such words literally, so that the etymology of the word could be reproduced,
would in cases like the above, and in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, not be
translating at all. We are not concerned with the `word' that our author has used so much
as we are concerned with his `meaning', and his meaning is not settled by the etymology
of the word, but its accepted usage at the time when it was spoken or written. How easy
it is to arrange a word for word literal translation of any book but how misleading its
results! One writer of foreign nationality wrote `his provisions were disappointed'.
While the etymology of `foresight' and provision' are the same both meaning `to see
beforehand' in usage they are far apart.
Language has its value and currency only by the agreement of speakers and
hearers"--Whitney.
This leads us to the next great principle that underlies all true interpretation: usus
loquendi or `common usage'. The following hints may help the reader in seeking to
apply the rule of `common usage'.
(1) The writer may have defined the word himself. Take the word `prize' as found in
Phil. 3: 14. In I Cor. 9: 24 - 10: 12 the Apostle has used the word `prize' in such a way
as to preclude the idea of gift in grace. The context speaks of a race to be run, and the
historic example of the failure of many of Israel renders his meaning certain. If Paul has
so used the word `prize', and if Phil. 3: reproduces the imagery of the race with its
eager contestants; if like I Cor. 10:, he introduces those whose example must be shunned,
then the interpreter is bound by all the laws of thought, honesty and impartiality, to use
words that will give the same atmosphere and colouring as is found in the Apostle's own
contexts.
It has been well said by one writer, whose name we have forgotten:
"We may, with the help of a Lexicon, put together a set of words in one language
corresponding to a set of words in another. But the correspondence will not necessarily
be such that the meaning expressed by the translator shall be the meaning intended by the
author. The meaning of words is purely conventional. Their connection with notions is
to be discovered only by usage."
In prosecuting this search for the usage, we should ask:
"What notion was affixed by persons in general who spoke the language in question at
the time? If there should be several senses attached to the word, we should be at pains to
discover what notion attached to the word in a particular connection."
Then we should remember:
"That a particular application may depend upon a particular situation of the person to
whom the word is immediately addressed. We should seek to discover what meaning
would be affixed to any particular word by those for whom the author immediately
wrote." For example what would `Pentecost' mean to the "Jews out of every nation
under heaven" (Acts 2:)?