The Root” Again - Glenn Conjurske
“The Root” Again
I affirmed in a previous note that in English we must say either “the root of all evil” or “a root of all evil,” and of the two “the root” is by all means the better—-indeed, that it would require a profound lack of scholarship to render it “a root.” An esteemed correspondent has pointed out to me that Martin Luther does just that, the common Lutheran version reading Geiz ist EINE Wurzel alles Uebels. Do I then accuse Martin Luther of a profound lack of scholarship? Far be it from me. Yet after examining the whole matter, I am compelled to stand by what I have written. I must yet maintain that it requires a profound lack of scholarship to translate “a root of all evil” in English. This is the work of men who have never grasped the properties of their own tongue. I do not accuse Luther of any lack of scholarship. I do accuse him of writing in German. I am well aware that German and English are sister languages—-or at any rate half sisters—-but still they have each their own properties and peculiarities, and they are certainly not equivalent in their usage of definite and indefinite articles. I do not pretend to understand much of the usage of articles in German. I only affirm that it is different from its usage in English. I give a few examples which will confirm this:
One of the old proverbs to which I referred in my former article says in English, “The good is the enemy of the best.” The German form of a similar proverb is Das Bessere ist EIN Fiend des Guten, that is, “The better is an enemy of the good.” Such a form, we grant, is intelligible in English, and gives a sense entirely acceptable, but it is anemic. It lacks the force and vigor of “The good is the enemy of the best.” And since the latter is the actual form of the English proverb, it is a plain enough demonstration of the common and proper manner of expression in English. And the comparison of the English proverb with the German indicates plainly enough also that what is natural in the German is not so in the English. And let it be observed that “enemy” in this proverb is the predicate nominative, as “root” is in “the root of all evil.” So also in the examples which follow.
Another excellent German proverb says poetically, Mittelweg ein sicher Steg, literally, “Middle way [is] a safe path.” Yet Bohn properly translates this into English as, “The middle path is the safe path.” To say “a safe path” in English gives a good sense, but it is anemic, and not our common mode of expression. German and English evidently differ in this matter.
Once more, in I John 1:5 Luther’s first edition (1522) reads, Gott eyn liecht ist, “God is a light.” His last edition reads just the same, Gott ein Liecht ist, the only differences being in orthography. And so it stands in Lutheran Bibles to this day (though some modern editions drop ein). This example may prove nothing about the German language, but it may illustrate something concerning Luther’s preferences. We certainly would not want “a light” in English. I cannot pretend to know much about German. I do know that it is not English, and the examples which I have given may serve to demonstrate that the indefinite article is acceptable with predicate nominatives in German, where it is weak and unnatural in English.
Turning to “the root of all evil” in other German Bibles, we find a variety of renderings.
De Wette has Denn Wurzel alles Bösen ist die Habsucht, with no article at all before “root.” We cannot do so in English.
Codex Teplensis has Wan di geitikait ist AIN wurrzel aller ubeln dinge—-that is, “a root of every evil thing.”
Of greatest interest to us, however, is the work of John Nelson Darby, who translated the New Testament into both German and English. His Elberfeld New Testament reads in German, Denn die Geldliebe ist EINE Wurzel alles Bösen, “a root of all evil,” while his English New Testament reads, “For the love of money is [the] root of every evil.” The article is in brackets because Darby brackets every added word in his version. On the word “root” he adds a footnote saying, “Not that there is no other root, but the love of money is characterized by being that.” Plainly, then, in saying “the root of all evil” Darby did not mean the only root, any more than Tyndale or the King James translators did. His note indicates that he was aware that it could be taken that way, but this did not deter him from so translating it. It is plain also that Darby (who wrote and preached in both languages) judged “a root” acceptable in the German, while he rejected it for the English.
Glenn Conjurske