A literal translation is certainly more than a word-for-word rendering of the original language of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. The corresponding English words need to be brought over according to English grammar and syntax, but the translation at the same time must be faithful to the original word or as much as possible, for the author may have used word order to emphasize or convey some meaning. In most cases, the translator simply renders the original-language word with the same corresponding English term each time it occurs. The translator has used his good judgment to select words in the English translation from the lexicon within the context of the original-language text. The translator remains faithful to this literal translation philosophy unless it has been determined that the rendering will be misunderstood or misinterpreted. The translator is not tasked with making the text easy to read but rather to make it as accurately faithful to the original as possible.

Removing the Outdated

• Passages with the Old English “thee’s” and “thou’s” etc. have been replaced with modern English.
• Many words and phrases that were extremely ambiguous or easily misunderstood since the 1901 ASV have been updated according to the best lexicons.
• Verses with difficult word order or vocabulary have been translated into correct English grammar and syntax, for easier reading. However, if the word order of the original conveyed meaning, it was kept.

More Accurate

• The last 110+ years have seen the discovery of far more manuscripts, especially the papyri, with many manuscripts dating within 100 years of the originals.
• While making more accurate translation choices, we have stayed true to the literal translation philosophy of the ASV, while other literal translations abandon the philosophy far too often.
• The translator seeks to render the Scriptures accurately without losing what the Bible author penned by changing what the author wrote, by distorting or embellishing through imposing what the translator believes the author meant into the original text.
• Accuracy in Bible translation is being faithful to what the original author wrote (the words that he used), as opposed to going beyond into the meaning, trying to determine what the author meant by his words. The latter is the reader’s job.
• The translator uses the most reliable, accurate critical texts (e.g., WH, NA, UBS, BHS) and the original language texts, versions, and other sources that will help him determine the original reading.

WE FOLLOW THESE RULES STRICTLY

We are producing a hyper-literal translation in the tradition of the 1901 American Standard Version and the UASV. Our philosophy is formal equivalence only — we translate the exact form and structure of the Hebrew or Greek whenever possible, using the most precise English equivalent for each word in context. We translate the exact form and structure of the Hebrew or Greek whenever possible. We do not smooth the text, we do not make it sound more natural in English, and we do not remove or soften idioms.

• Only suggest a change if the current 1901 ASV wording does not accurately represent the Hebrew or Greek words, word order, or grammar.
• Never suggest a change simply because it sounds better, is more modern, or is what other modern translations do.
• We retain all idioms and unusual literal expressions.
• We never capitalize pronouns referring to God.

Only flag something if it is genuinely inaccurate according to the original languages under a strict literal philosophy. Do not look for problems that are not there.

EXAMPLE OF STAYING LITERAL.

SOME WOULD SAY: Leviticus 1:10: change “he shall offer it a male without blemish” to “he shall offer a male without blemish.” The present wording is simply broken English.

OUR REPLY: The “it” comes straight from the Hebrew. The final word is yakribennu — literally “he shall offer him/it,” with a built-in masculine singular pronoun attached to the verb. It’s not extra; it’s there to refer back to the animal being offered. The 1901 ASV kept that literal structure, and so do we in the UASV. Some modern versions smooth it to “offer a male” for smoother English, but we’re staying as close to the original wording as possible.

Why the Need for Updated Translations?

• New manuscript discoveries
• Changes in the language
• A better understanding of the original languages
• Improved insight into Bible translation

Why We Do Not Capitalize Personal Pronouns Referring to God

Choosing to capitalize personal pronouns in Scripture creates unnecessary difficulties at times. Note what the Pharisees say when speaking to Jesus (in the NASB), “We wish to see a sign from You.” Thus, the meaning here would be that the Pharisees regarded Jesus as a deity when that is not the case. Some feel that it is honoring God to capitalize the personal pronouns. However, God has honor and authority purely because he is God. The Scriptures are filled with ways we are actually called to honor and worship God; we do not need to create others to show our reverence for God. We are not dishonoring God if personal pronouns referring to him are not capitalized. For those that decide to capitalize all personal pronouns referring to God, it is simply a matter of preference or style, not because the Scriptures obligate them to do so. Suppose we want to show respect, reverence, honor, and praise to God. In that case, it isn’t through capitalizing personal pronouns that refer to him, but rather by personal Bible study, obedience to the Word of God, our service, church attendance, and carrying out the great commission to make disciples. (Matt. 24:14; 28:19-20; Acts 1:8) When we look at the ancient manuscripts, there is no effort made to differentiate the personal pronouns that refer to God. Sir Frederic Kenyon, in his book Textual Criticism of the New Testament, says, “Capital letters, which are occasionally used in business documents to mark the beginning of a clause, do not occur in literary papyri . . .”[1] Some might not even be aware that the translators of the highly valued King James Version always capitalized personal pronouns referring to God. It is a bit ironic that those translations that capitalize the personal pronouns referring to God out of reverence and respect remove the Father’s personal name some 7,000 times in the Old Testament.

[1] Frederic G. Kenyon, Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament (London; New York: Macmillan and Co., 1901), 22.