45. Word, Logos, and the Problem of Translation

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Problem of Moving Words Across Languages and Time #

• Words change meaning over time and between languages
• Translators face a choice: preserve the original meaning or use a word whose modern sense fits the original context
• Example: logos in Greek originally meant “spoken word,” then “written word,” then evolved to mean “thought” or “reasoning principle”
• English word “word” has not moved in meaning the way Greek logos has, creating translation difficulties

The Gospel of John and Logos #

• John 1:1 (“In the beginning was the word”) presents a key translation problem
• The Greek logos in this passage means more than our English “word”—it refers to divine thought/reasoning
• English translations preserve “word” (keeping the original Greek term’s earliest sense) rather than translating semantically as “thought”
• Latin verbum (also meaning “word”) similarly preserves the surface meaning without fully capturing the philosophical depth of logos
• Cardinal Ratzinger noted that verbum relates to verbum (action/deed), connecting God’s word to action and event, not mere static utterance

Semantic Range and the Problem of Understanding #

• When we use a word in its later, evolved sense without understanding its earlier senses, we lose meaning
• We must either: (1) move the word in English to match the evolved sense, (2) go back to the original language and trace how it was moved, or (3) risk using words without knowing what they truly signify
• Example: Shakespeare’s use of “run” in Romeo and Juliet—“wisely and slow, they stumble that run fast”
  • First sense: running with one’s legs
  • Second sense: running/flowing as a metaphor for action generally
  • Third sense: running as applied to the act of reason itself (“let me run through this once more”)
  • The word “discourse” (from Latin discurrere, “to run”) carries this metaphorical sense in the definition of reason

The Hebrew Understanding of God’s Word #

• In Hebrew, particularly in the prophets, “the word of the Lord came to the prophets” literally means “the word of the Lord happened to the prophets”
• This reflects an understanding of God’s word as active, event-making, not merely linguistic utterance
• Connects to the theological understanding that God’s word is not static but performative and transformative

Contemporary Linguistic Degradation #

• Modern redefinition of words often aims to “muddy the water” rather than clarify meaning
• Example from computing: terms like “domain” and “server” have been adopted with new meanings that confuse rather than illuminate
• The contemporary problem differs from organic semantic evolution—it involves deliberate obscuration rather than natural linguistic development

Key Arguments #

• The Translation Dilemma: When translating logos in John 1:1, preserving “word” maintains the original Greek term’s first meaning while obscuring its evolved philosophical sense. A semantic translation (“thought”) would clarify meaning but lose the connection to the original language.

• Tracing Semantic Movement: Understanding a word requires tracing its semantic evolution from original to contemporary use. Without this genealogy, speakers use words without knowing their true significance.

• The Stoic Misunderstanding: Modern confusion about Stoic teaching regarding emotions partly stems from not understanding how Latin/Greek terms for emotion have shifted meaning over time.

Important Definitions #

• Logos (λόγος): Originally “spoken word”; later “written word”; philosophically evolved to mean “reasoning principle,” “divine thought,” or “the intelligible structure of reality.”

• Verbum (Latin): “Word” or “utterance”; in Thomistic theology, relates to verbum (action/deed), suggesting that God’s word is not merely utterance but creative action and event.

• Semantic Movement/Motion: The process by which a word’s meaning evolves or is extended metaphorically from one sense to another, requiring translation decisions about whether to preserve the original sense or adapt to current usage.

Examples & Illustrations #

Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet #

• Friar Lawrence’s “wisely and slow, they stumble that run fast” demonstrates three stages of semantic movement for “run”
• The word begins with literal motion, extends to action generally, and finally applies to the operation of reason
• English has not moved “run” as far as Latin moved discurrere, making direct translation awkward

The Gas Tank Anecdote #

• Berquist’s personal story of nearly running out of gas while distracted by beautiful fall foliage in New Brunswick illustrates how we mentally frame situations differently
• Shows how interpretation and imagination color our experience of events

Domain and Server (Computing Terminology) #

• Modern jargon from computing has introduced “domain” and “server” with technical meanings
• These terms confuse rather than clarify (e.g., “What’s your domain?” as a question about one’s home/territory)
• Illustrates deliberate or unintentional obscuration of meaning rather than organic semantic evolution

Questions Addressed #

Q: How should translators handle terms like logos that have evolved in meaning?

A: Translators face a genuine dilemma. Preserving “word” maintains connection to the original language but obscures the philosophical content. Translating semantically as “thought” clarifies meaning but loses the linguistic anchor. The ideal is to understand the evolution and help readers trace how the term moved from its original to its evolved sense.

Q: Why does understanding semantic movement matter philosophically?

A: Using a word in its later sense without understanding its earlier senses means your mind doesn’t know what it’s talking about. True understanding requires grasping the whole genealogy of a term’s meaning.

Q: What is the difference between organic semantic evolution and contemporary semantic degradation?

A: Organic evolution (like logos → verbum → extended theological meaning) clarifies understanding over time. Contemporary redefinition often deliberately muddies understanding rather than clarifying it, serving rhetorical rather than philosophical purposes.

Notable Quotes #

“Then you’re using the word in the latest sense without knowing the real sense.”

“Because otherwise you’re going to take a word in its later sense without going through the earlier senses and your mind doesn’t know what it’s talking about anymore.”

“[In the beginning was] a thought. A most unusual thought, it’s a good one to say, you know? But if you want to translate it, right? You have to say a thought because the English word word is not moved.”

“So you’ve got to be kind of sensitive to those things. So as Kami said you either have to move the English word or else you have to go back to the Greek word and see how that was moved.”

Theological Connections #

The discussion of logos in John 1:1 connects to Cardinal Ratzinger’s observation that God’s word, understood through verbum, is fundamentally active and performative—it is the action of God’s creative presence, not mere utterance. This relates to the Old Testament understanding that God’s word “happens” to the prophets, transforming them and events.

Pedagogical Aim #

Berquist emphasizes the importance of linguistic sensitivity for philosophical and theological study. Without understanding how terms have moved in meaning, students risk using sophisticated vocabulary without genuine comprehension, a particularly acute problem in contemporary discourse where deliberate semantic manipulation is commonplace.