What is dynamic equivalence in Bible translation?

Answer

Dynamic equivalence is a Bible translation method that aims to convey the original text of Scripture using contemporary language and expressions to convey the message of the Bible. When translating a verse, dynamic equivalent translation is more focused on conveying the fundamental message of that verse rather than providing an exact English word for each word in the original text. Taking into account the original context, culture, figures of speech, and other linguistic nuances, dynamic equivalence strives for today’s Bible readers to comprehend the text in a manner similar to those to whom it was initially addressed.

Among the numerous Bible translations, most can be categorized into one of two groups: literal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Literal translations are essentially word-for-word translations, aiming to match each word of the original text with an equivalent English word as closely as possible. Literal translations adhere to formal equivalence, a translation approach that aims for a rendition of the original text that is as literal as feasible. Examples of formal equivalence or literal translations include the English Standard Version (ESV), New American Standard Bible (NASB), New King James Version (NKJV), King James Version (KJV), New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), and Revised Standard Version (RSV).

Unlike literal (word-for-word) translations, a thought-for-thought, meaning-driven translation method is employed to achieve dynamic equivalence. In recent years, the term functional equivalence has also been used to describe dynamic or thought-for-thought translations. Instead of striving for an exact translation of the text, the dynamic or functional translation philosophy focuses on conveying the broader meaning of the original text. As it departs from a formal, word-for-word translation approach, the dynamic equivalence method is inherently designed to avoid duplication of content.

When it comes to paraphrasing, the aim is to recreate the same impactful message for the current audience. The New International Readers Version (NIrV), Revised English Bible (REB), Good News Translation (GNT), New Living Translation (NLT), and Contemporary English Version (CEV) are considered dynamic (or functionally equivalent) translations.

Most Bible translators strive to stay true to the original meaning of the text (if not the exact words), using language that is easily understood and relatable to modern readers, similar to how the original text resonated with its initial audience. Neither translation method is superior to the other; the distinction lies in which language is prioritized—either the original or the contemporary one.

Literal translations aim to make the original language clear but may sound awkward to modern ears, necessitating further clarification. On the other hand, dynamic translations are generally more accessible to modern readers but might overlook or lose some ancient elements like cultural references, wordplays, allusions, and figurative language. Despite their differing approaches, both translation philosophies strive to honor the original text.

Here are a couple of examples illustrating the contrast between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence in translation:

John 3:16

Very literal: “For God did so love the world, that His Son—the only begotten—He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during.”

Young’s Literal Translation (YLT)

Formal equivalence: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

New King James Version (NKJV)

Dynamic equivalence: “For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.”

Have eternal life.”

New Living Translation (NLT)

Psalm 23:1

Formal equivalence: “The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not want.”

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Dynamic equivalence: “The LORD is my shepherd; I have everything I need.”

Good News Translation (GNT)

A drawback of the dynamic equivalence method of translation is that it can lead to interpretive decisions that sometimes miss the essence of the original text and introduce foreign concepts. If translators take too many liberties with the text, interpretive errors may hinder a faithful communication of God’s Word. Some subjectivity naturally exists within dynamic equivalence, resulting in widely varying versions of the same text. For instance, consider the significant differences between these two translations of 2 Corinthians 5:8, both using the dynamic equivalence method:

“Yes, we are fully confident, and we would rather be away from these earthly bodies, for then we will be at home with the Lord.”

NLT

“There is no doubt that we live with a daring passion, but in the end we prefer to be done from this body so that we can be at home with the Lord.”

The Voice

Idioms and other figures of speech that are unique to the culture provide the most vivid comparisons between dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence in translations. For example, when Moses throws the tree into the bitter waters of Marah in Exodus 15:25, the NASB, a literal translation, says that “the waters became sweet.” On the other hand, the dynamic NIV says that “the water became fit to drink.” What is literally “sweet” in the Hebrew language stays “sweet” in formal equivalence but becomes “fit to drink” in dynamic equivalence. Both translations are accurate in their own way. The water became potable, whether it is called “sweet” water or simply “fit to drink” water.

A third philosophy of Bible translations seeks a combined approach, using word-for-word, literal translation whenever possible and

A thought-for-thought, dynamic translation when necessary. This mixed method has also been called “optimal equivalence.” Proponents of this approach believe it produces the best balance of accuracy and readability. The New International Version (NIV) is considered a combined translation, placing an emphasis on dynamic equivalence while at the same time consistently seeking formal equivalence. The New English Translation (NET), Christian Standard Bible (CSB), and New Century Bible (NCV) are all combinations of formal and dynamic equivalence.

A wise approach to Bible study and the reading of Scripture is to use a mix of several different translations including literal, dynamic, and combined translations. By comparing the texts against each other, serious Bible readers will best understand the true and full meaning of God’s Word.