As James Barr aptly demonstrated almost fifty years ago, a binary between literal and free is not a helpful lens through which to view Septuagint Translation Technique since a translation can be both literal and free at the same time, but in different ways (James Barr, The Typology of Literalism in Ancient Biblical Translations, MSU 15 [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979]). Since Barr’s seminal work, Septuagint scholars have tended to categorize translation techniques into quantitative and qualitative criteria (Bénédicte Lemmelijn, “Two Methodological Trails in Recent Studies on Translation Technique of the Septuagint,” in Helsinki Perspectives on the Translation Technique of the Septuagint, ed. Raija Sollamo and Seppo Sipilä [Helsinki: The Finnish Exegetical Society, 2001]). While studies along these lines have helped analyze and explain the approaches the Septuagint translators took to their work, the majority of analyses have examined language at the sentence level and below. However, the linguistic field of Discourse Analysis has demonstrated that meaning is impacted (sometimes greatly) by considerations above the clause and sentence level. Therefore, Discourse Analysis can and should be fruitfully applied to analyzing Septuagint translation technique.
It is surprising that Discourse Analysis has not been more fully integrated since Albert Pietersma noted almost twenty years ago that it could be a helpful tool to analyze translation techniques (Albert Pietersma, “LXX and DTS: A New Archimedean Point for Septuagint Studies?,” BIOSCS 39 [2006]: 1–11). From some of the literature over the last twenty years, it appears evident that scholars have taken Pietersma’s call to utilize Descriptive Translation Studies; however, his call to employ discourse analysis seems to have gone largely unheeded. Chris Fresch suggests four for this lapse: (1) no standardized linguistic terminology, (2) the argument that the LXX translators had a narrow focus and ignored linguistic context, (3) the assumptions of the Interlinear Paradigm, and (4) the inadequacy of the literal-free spectrum in TT to describe discourse features (Christopher J. Fresch, “The Septuagint and Discourse Grammar,” in T&T Clark Handbook of Septuagint Research, ed. William A. Ross and W. Edward Glenny, T&T Clark Handbooks [New York: T&T Clark, 2021], 83–85). To his list should be added the claim that modern linguistic frameworks and methods were unknown to the ancient translators and, therefore, should not be utilized.
The present paper will advocate for utilizing Discourse Analysis to understand Septuagint Translation Technique. First, a brief overview of the quantitative and qualitative criteria will be given. The five objections listed above will then be addressed. Finally, an example from OG Isaiah will be considered to illustrate how Discourse Analysis aids in understanding the translator’s working methods.