Ritröð Guðfræðistofnunar - 01.09.1990, Side 122

Jón Sveinbjömsson
3. There is disagreement conceming the use of the term semantics.
Philosophers, psychologists and linguists define semantics differently. The
following discussion will deal mainly with two issues: (1) the analysis of
words into components of meaning and (2) the arrangement of elements
of meaning into semantic domains. Two main trends in structural
semantics may be discemed. On the one hand, there is the view of the so-
called Ttibingen School, which reduces a given vocabulary to closed
classes on the basis of heuristic criteria, prior to the analysis and
classification of the elements of meaning. On the other hand, there is the
view of M.L. Samuels and Ch. J. Kay in Glasgow (Historical Thesaurus
of English), and of E. A. Nida and J. L. Louw, authors of the Greek-
English Lexicon. These scholars assume the vocabulary of the past and of
the present, along with its various nuances, as a basis for lexical analysis.
4. In connection with the compilation of a computerized
concordance for the 1981 Icelandic translation of the Bible, a semantic
analysis is being made of the vocabulary of the New Testament. As a
starting point, the 8th semantic domain of Louw and Nida, "Body, Body
Parts and Body Products", is taken. Icelandic equivalents are arranged
according to the semantic domains of Louw and Nida. At the same time,
special notice is taken of the "Body, Body Parts" classification of the
Historical Thesaums of English. When this is completed, the New
Testament vocabulary will be compared with with the vocabulary for the
body in the Icelandic Sagas and in certain Greek writings. The semantic
domain is the element of language which is least subject to change, while
the vocabulary within a semantic domain varies with time and context.
Because they are intersubjective, and independent of time and place,
semantic domains provide people with a common basis for
communication.
5. In preparing a new translation of the Bible into Icelandic, it is
necessary to take account of the fact that the majority of Icelanders view
the Bible as a religious text, and some parts of the old translation form
are important to their religious life. Semantic analysis of Body terms in
the Icelandic New Testament reveals, however, that too often Greek
temis have not been translated with Icelandic equivalents within the same
semantic domains, but literally. Any new translation of the Bible into
Icelandic should be based upon a semantic analysis of the texts of origin
and the language of reception. This project calls for the cooperation of
theologians, linguists, literary critics and social scientists.
120