예수의 재판에서 대제사장의 발언 (막 14:60하, 61하, 63하-64상) - 해석과 존대법 번역 문제
The High Priest's Speech in Jesus' Trial (Mk 14:60bc, 61b, 63b-64a) - A Study on the Interpretation and Translation into Honorifics -
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study deals with the difficulties faced when translating the high priest’s speech to Jesus (Mk 14:60b, 61b) before the Sanhedrin (vv. 63b-64a) into an honorific language. The difficulty lies in the fact that the translator’s selection of the addressee honorifics is indeterminable in the grammar and syntactic structure of the source text. In order to translate into the proper addressee honorifics, this study diachronically reviews the honorific phenomena in major Korean translations, and analyzes the biblical text with an established criteria and a theoretical framework for translating into honorifics. This paper will next evaluate the politeness of the high priest's speech and action and discuss possible selections of honorifics for a new Korean church translation. According to the analysis, the formal charge of the high priest is blasphemy and the rendering of the robes clearly shows this. The queries of the high priest to Jesus (v. 60bc, 61b), Ouvk avpokri,nh| ouvde.n ti, ou-toi, sou katamarturou/sinÈ Su. ei= o` Cristo.j o` ui`o.j tou/ euvloghtou/È are definitely impolite, and stress the tragic suffering of Jesus and the high priest's misunderstanding about Jesus' real identity. On the contrary, the speech of the high priest (vv. 63b-64a) to the entire Sanhedrin, Ti, e;ti crei,an e;comen martu,rwnÈ hvkou,sate th/j blasfhmi,aj\ ti, u`mi/n fai,netaiÈ is accepted as polite but intensifies the conspiracy against Jesus. Most Korean versions following the literal translation approach render the high priest’s speech into the formal non-deferential noh and hada forms regardless of his addresses. However, these renderings create a flat speech style and awkward sentences for the modern reader. The most appropriate forms for the high priest’s queries to Jesus (v. 60bc, 61b) are the formal limited non-deferential tangsin and hao forms which appropriately express the high priest's hostile intention, i.e. the scorn and insult toward Jesus. The high priest’s speech to the Sanhedrin (vv. 63b-64a) can be appropriately rendered as the formal deferential yeoreobun and hamnida forms. This is important since the forms are the only way to express the authority of Sanhedrin’s members as the judges in the formal trial situation. The selection of the addressee honorifics is thus based on the translator's exegetical research, such as the formality of the situation, the examination of the cultural expectation in the trial settings, the social relationship between the high priest and Jesus and the entire Sanhedrin, and the high priest’s intention as shown in his speech and action.
Abstract
This study deals with the difficulties faced when translating the high priest’s speech to Jesus (Mk 14:60b, 61b) before the Sanhedrin (vv. 63b-64a) into an honorific language. The difficulty lies in the fact that the translator’s selection of the addressee honorifics is indeterminable in the grammar and syntactic structure of the source text. In order to translate into the proper addressee honorifics, this study diachronically reviews the honorific phenomena in major Korean translations, and analyzes the biblical text with an established criteria and a theoretical framework for translating into honorifics. This paper will next evaluate the politeness of the high priest's speech and action and discuss possible selections of honorifics for a new Korean church translation. According to the analysis, the formal charge of the high priest is blasphemy and the rendering of the robes clearly shows this. The queries of the high priest to Jesus (v. 60bc, 61b), Ouvk avpokri,nh| ouvde.n ti, ou-toi, sou katamarturou/sinÈ Su. ei= o` Cristo.j o` ui`o.j tou/ euvloghtou/È are definitely impolite, and stress the tragic suffering of Jesus and the high priest's misunderstanding about Jesus' real identity. On the contrary, the speech of the high priest (vv. 63b-64a) to the entire Sanhedrin, Ti, e;ti crei,an e;comen martu,rwnÈ hvkou,sate th/j blasfhmi,aj\ ti, u`mi/n fai,netaiÈ is accepted as polite but intensifies the conspiracy against Jesus. Most Korean versions following the literal translation approach render the high priest’s speech into the formal non-deferential noh and hada forms regardless of his addresses. However, these renderings create a flat speech style and awkward sentences for the modern reader. The most appropriate forms for the high priest’s queries to Jesus (v. 60bc, 61b) are the formal limited non-deferential tangsin and hao forms which appropriately express the high priest's hostile intention, i.e. the scorn and insult toward Jesus. The high priest’s speech to the Sanhedrin (vv. 63b-64a) can be appropriately rendered as the formal deferential yeoreobun and hamnida forms. This is important since the forms are the only way to express the authority of Sanhedrin’s members as the judges in the formal trial situation. The selection of the addressee honorifics is thus based on the translator's exegetical research, such as the formality of the situation, the examination of the cultural expectation in the trial settings, the social relationship between the high priest and Jesus and the entire Sanhedrin, and the high priest’s intention as shown in his speech and action.
참고문헌 (50)
- 1980, , ~
- A.W.F. Blunt, "The Gospel According to Saint Mark: in the Revised Version, with Introduction and Commentary", pp.255~ (1939), The Clarendon press
- B.Witherington, "The Gospel of Mark:A Socio-rhetorical Commentary", pp.383~ (2001), Eerdmans Publishing Company
- Blunt, Saint Mark, "A Translator’s Guide to the Gospel of Mark", pp.202~ (1981), United Bible Societies
- "Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism and the Final Examination of Jesus, 15", ~
- "Bratcher and Nida, ATranslator’s Handbook, 467", ~
- C.A. Evans, "In What Sense ‘Blasphemy?’ Jesus before Caiaphas in Mark 14:61-64", SBLSP, pp.217~ (1991)
- C.A.Evans, "Mark 8:27-16:20", pp.443~ (2001), Thomas Nelson Publishers
- C.S.Mann, "Mark:A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary", pp.627~ (1986), Doubleday
- D. Flusser, "A Literary Approach to the Trial of Jesus", Judaism, 20, pp.34~ (1971)
- D.H.Juel, "The Gospel of Mark", pp.151~ (1999), Abingdon
- D.L.Bock, "Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism and the Final Examination of Jesus:A Philological-historical Study of the Key Jewish Themes Impacting Mark 14:61-64", pp.26~ (1998), Mohr Siebeck
- E.K. Broadhead, "Prophet, Son, Messiah: Narrative Form and Function in Mark 14-16", pp.136~ (1999), Sheffield Academic Press
- E.M. Smallwood, "High Priests and Politics in Roman Palestine", JTS, 16 (1962)
- E.P.Sanders, "Jesus and Judaism", pp.312~ (1985), SCM Press
- "Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, 449; Mann, Mark, 625; Gundry, Mark, 886", ~
- H.Boers, "Who was Jesus? The Historical Jesus and the Synoptic Gospels", pp.66~ (1989), Harper & Row, Publishers
- H. Cohn, "Reflections on the Trial of Jesus", Judaism, 20(1), pp.15~ (1971)
- "Hooker, A Commentary on the Gospel according to St. Mark, 362", ~
- J. Blinzler, "Der Prozess Jesu, 4th ed", pp.158~159 (1969), Verlag Friedrich Pustet
- J.C.O’Neill, "Who Did Jesus Think He Was?" (1995), Brill
- J.E.Hartley, "Leviticus", pp.408~ (1992), Word
- J.R.Edwards, "The Gospel According to Mark", pp.443~ (2002), Apollos
- Lane, "Gospel According to Mark, 531; B. Witherington, The Gospel of Mark: A Socio-rhetorical", pp.383~ (2001), Eerdmans Publishing Company
- M. Hengel, "‘Sit at My Right Hand!’: The Enthronement of Christ and the Right Hand of God, Studies in Early Christology", pp.187~ (1995), T.&T.Clark
- M.D.Hooker, "ACommentary on the Gospel according to St.Mark", pp.362~ (1991), A & C Black
- O. Betz, "Probleme des Prozesses Jesu, In Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt, vol. II. 25", pp.639~ (1981), Walter de Gruyter
- P. Brown, "Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use, 2nd ed", pp.86~ (1987), Cambridge University Press
- P. Winter, "The Meeting Place of the Sanhedrin and Mark’s Nocturnal Session", ZNW, 50, pp.221~225 (1959)
- R. Brown, "Pronouns of Power and Solidarit, in yLanguage and Social Context", pp.252~282 (1972), Penguin
- R.E.Brown, "The Death of the Messiah" (1994), Doubleday
- R.G.Bratcher, "A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of Mark", pp.466~ (1961), E.J.Brill
- R.T.France, "The Gospel of Mark:A Commentary on the Greek Text", pp.601~ (2002), W.B.Eerdmans
- R.T. Lakoff, "The Logic of Politeness", Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 9, pp.292~305 (1972)
- R.T.Lakoff, "Talking Power:the Politics of Language in Our Lives", pp.296~ (1990), Basic
- Taylor, "The Gospel According to St. Mark, 567, in (Das) Evangelíum des Markus", pp.328~ (1967), Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
- V. Taylor, "The Gospel according to St. Mark: the Greek text with Introduction, Notes, and Indexes", pp.570~ (1952), Macmillan & Co Ltd.
- W.L. Lane, "The Gospel according to Mark: the English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes", pp.538~ (1974), Eerdmans Publishing Company
- "Witherington, The Gospel of Mark, 385; Evans, Mark 8:27-16:20, 453", ~
- "공동번역 신약" (1971)
- "공동번역 신약전서" (1971)
- "대법원 법원행정처 이용구 판사가 연구 보고서를 통해 “법정에서의 반말 사용은 어떤 경우에도 받아들이기 어려우며 상대방에 따른 적절한 경어의 선택이 필요하다", 매일경제, ~ (2005)
- 서정수, "존대법의 연구:현행 대우법의 체계와 문제점", pp.55~ (1984), 한신문화사
- 성기철, "19세기 국어의 청자 대우법: 화계를 중심으로", 한글, 249, pp.176~178 (2000)
- "셩경젼셔, 개역개정판" (1998)
- "셩경젼셔, 개역한글판" (1952)
- "셩경젼셔" (1911)
- "신약전서 새번역" (1967)
- 조지윤, "산헤드린에서 진행된 예수의 재판(막 14:61하, 62하)", 신약연구, pp.625~626 (2008)
- 한길, "국어종결어미연구", pp.34~ (1991), 강원대학교출판부