Luke's Unique Voice as a Writer
Click here for the original YouTube video by @magnity.
Luke's Unique Voice as a Writer
As exemplified in the GIF above, linguistic register refers to the type of language used in a particular situation. More formal settings often use "higher" registers, such as the way the gentleman speaks in the GIF above.
Register is not the only factor that affects language formation; writers and speakers also have their own unique style. That is, we each have particular grammatical structures, set phrases, and key words that tend to characterize how we communicate.
This brief email discusses why the register and style of biblical authors matter, and how we can "hear" the writer Luke on his own terms.
Why register and style matter
Register and style matter because they fundamentally influence what meaning we assign to communication. Meaning arises from the matrix of who says what to whom at what event and in what way. As shown in the bubble diagram beneath, register and style are connected to many more components of meaning than the bare semantic content of a statement:
For example, a lawyer is expected to speak in a legal register when presenting his client’s case. Good lawyers also speak in a compelling style as they present the semantic content of the case. Were the lawyer to use "street talk" when presenting the information, he would cease to sound like a lawyer.
The lawyer's legal register signals that he is (a) talking in an official setting, (b) before a judge, and (c) that he possesses legal expertise. More than speaking legalese, lawyers need to convince the judge and jury of their case, and so they need a compelling style.
Translations that focus on translating word-for-word (ESV, NASB, NKJV) often force themselves into mistranslating the original author's style and register. These seemingly small changes in language add up to big changes in meaning.
Maintaining the style and register differences in the original biblical text underlines the point that God used people from all social strata and walks of life to accomplish his purposes. Not only does the Bible tell stories that demonstrate this point, its very composition underscores this point. The Bible not only "talks the talk" of including everyone, its pages bear witness that God "walks the walk" by giving many different types of people a voice in Scripture.
Luke among the other synoptic authors
Three of the Gospel accounts, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, address Jesus' life from roughly the same angle. Though they cover similar semantic content, they each have quite different styles and registers. Consider the following comparisons:
- If the book of Mark was an existing English Bible translation, it would be more like the TNIV or the EASY English Bible. Mark's Greek is colloquial, not always "correct," and full of "street language" that erudite speakers usually avoided. Mark was also extremely vivid, frequently using the "narrative present," exaggerating, and (over) using the word "immediately."
- If the book of Matthew was a Bible translation, it would be something like the Complete Jewish Bible. Matthew was very concerned with Jesus's Jewishness, presenting Jesus both as the legitimate heir to David's throne and as a new Moses.
- If the book of Luke was a Bible translation, it would be something like the Christian Standard Bible. Luke intentionally wrote to the widest Greek speaking audience possible, tailoring his language to be acceptable to highly educated Greeks while also understandable to normal speakers of Greek (see my notes on Cadbury 1920 for more).
The next section outlines the major ways Luke's register and style could come out in a translation.
Letting Luke sound like Luke
Overall, Luke should sound like an educated writer addressing a cosmopolitan audience. Thus, translations that want to reflect Luke's register and style should capture the following four trends we find in Luke: 1. Luke used a wide variety of words. 2. Luke regularly "improved" the Greek from Mark's account. 3. Luke removed "foreign" sounding words and names. 4. Luke made people more polite.
In addition to those trends, translations can also treat Luke 1-2 a little differently from the rest of his writing. Luke 1-2 should sound especially "KJV"ish for a couple of reasons: 1. The Septuagint (often represented in Latin numerals as LXX) was the most commonly used translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) into Greek. It was translated over quite some time. The LXX was not always the most normal sounding Greek, nor did it, by the time that Luke wrote, use common words. For the Greeks of Luke's day, parts of the LXX sounded much like the KJV sounds to modern English speakers. 2. Luke intentionally emulates the style of the LXX in chapters 1-2 of his book, sending the signal that his story was a natural continuation of the holy histories found in the Hebrew canon. To get this effect in an English translation, we could make the first two chapters sound more like the KJV.
TL;DR
If the email was too long to read, here are the main points:
- Register and style are very important facets of meaning in communication.
- Each Gospel writer had a different register and style.
- Luke sounded like an educated writer addressing a cosmopolitan audience.
Challenge for You
Want to know more specific ways that Luke sounded educated? Read some of my notes! 1. Ten reasons Luke should sound like an educated and fairly polished writer, writing to a cosmopolitan audience 2. My notes on a classic work, The Style and Literary Method of Luke by Henry Joel Cadbury, 1920.
References
Cadbury, H. J. (1920). The style and literary method of Luke. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press. http://archive.org/details/cu31924008115481