My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Freemasonry English to English translations

Forthright

Registered User
I had a maybe a bit crazy idea I wanted to try out on folks and see what they thought.

We have all of these very old texts in the Fraternity (just to pick an example, Anderson's Constitutions) that contain very old language that's prone to misinterpretation. Arguably part of the fun of learning the ritual and the Fraternity is getting underneath of this meaning, but it also seems to me sometimes that the older language makes things inaccessible for newer brothers.

At an extreme, in another few hundred years we could be at the point where the Catholic Church was for a while, which did ritual in a language (Latin) that most of the lay people didn't even understand.

So there's got to be some give and take between the old, sometimes flowery & complex language, and the new language that's more accessible, but which might run the risk of diluting or losing meaning (as any translation can).

What would you think of an "English to English" translation of certain bits of key Masonic documents, to update them from 1700s British English to modern usage?
 

coachn

Coach John S. Nagy
Premium Member
re: What would you think of an "English to English" translation of certain bits of key Masonic documents, to update them from 1700s British English to modern usage?

Researching meanings made my travel within Freemasonry exciting and interesting. Having it handed to me would have prevented my translation muscles from developing. Those muscles have helped me elsewhere in ways I can't begin to explain.
 

TheThumbPuppy

Registered User
What would you think of an "English to English" translation of certain bits of key Masonic documents, to update them from 1700s British English to modern usage?

That would perhaps not be of much interest to someone like me. I like reading Shakespeare and Chaucer. Then again, I'm quite aware that I'm in a minority at the far end of the old-fart spectrum.

The question I read in your post is whether decoding a couple of thousand English verses from a few centuries ago should be a requirement for new (and existing) brothers.

My immediate reaction is, why should it be? A literary interest in the old language shouldn't be a barrier for good men to join and be actively involved.

One could think that our brothers in the 1700's did not have this problem, although the gap between written and spoken language was possibly wider back then than it is today. It is very possible that they also had to read the text a few times. Said that, the gap between written and spoken language today and that type of written language from the 1700's is probably far wider.

However one thought keeps gnawing at me. When I think of what Freemasonry means to me, words like quest, path, research, and reflection come to mind. There is no reason why quest, path, and reflection shouldn't be performed with a contemporary language. The only exception is the word research. By its own nature, research requires the patience to decode and decypher, analyse and synthesise. By translating the text, we would aim at removing one part of the research. But wouldn't that open the doors to individuals who are led to believe that research is not a requirement of Freemasonry? But perhaps that is just one of the meanings that I attach to Freemasonry and it isn't necessarily so for other brothers.

A problem that I see with making a translation into contemporary English – as you pointed out – is the amount of discourse that it would generate. First of all who's going to decide whether it should be contemporary British English or American English or ...? Who's going to decide which translation is the good translation? Who's going to prevent new translations from popping up all over the place? Pushing it to an extreme, this process may in fact generate a jungle of translations that would take a novice more time to navigate than reading the original text.

What I would appreciate, it's a set of notes to help explain words that have fallen in disuse, expressions that are used today with a different meaning than back then, or ways of saying things that are too rhetorically ornate to use today. Of course, as is often the case, the notes will be longer than the original text.
 
Last edited:

Forthright

Registered User
By translating the text, we would aim at removing one part of this research. But wouldn't that open the doors to individuals who are led to believe that research is not a requirement of Freemasonry?

I would not think so, no. Beyond the difficulty and modernity of the language, there are many other levels of research. Take for example the Holy Bible, which post-translation did not receive any less research than it might've if it had been kept in the original author's language. The difficulty of understanding the prose I think would be the least interesting article of research.

Pushing it to an extreme, this process may in fact generate a jungle of translations that would take a novice more time to navigate than reading the original text.

This is exactly the situation that we are already in. If one tries to find the Masonic "Book of Constitutions", what one discovers is a dozen different versions adapted in various ways for various jurisdictions, some more modern than others. There will never be any substitute for a jurisdiction pointing at authoritative versions of something. But the confusion over proliferations of different texts - that has already come about.
 

Forthright

Registered User
re: What would you think of an "English to English" translation of certain bits of key Masonic documents, to update them from 1700s British English to modern usage?

Researching meanings made my travel within Freemasonry exciting and interesting. Having it handed to me would have prevented my translation muscles from developing. Those muscles have helped me elsewhere in ways I can't begin to explain.

Could you explain why it would prevent a person from researching meaning? I see that one form of research is to divine the meanings of particular old words and their sentence structure, but isn't that the least of the meaning research we do with these texts? A brother could for example take an old description of the usage of a working tool, update that to modern usage of English, and spend the rest of his life thinking & researching the use & application of this tool to his life.

One might on the other hand take the position that it's supposed to be hard. For example, in the mouth-to-ear learning method, arguably the effort required of the brother is part of the point. Perhaps struggling with the understanding of the words is part of the method and shouldn't be made easy. Is this what you mean?
 

Elexir

Registered User
I had a maybe a bit crazy idea I wanted to try out on folks and see what they thought.

We have all of these very old texts in the Fraternity (just to pick an example, Anderson's Constitutions) that contain very old language that's prone to misinterpretation. Arguably part of the fun of learning the ritual and the Fraternity is getting underneath of this meaning, but it also seems to me sometimes that the older language makes things inaccessible for newer brothers.

At an extreme, in another few hundred years we could be at the point where the Catholic Church was for a while, which did ritual in a language (Latin) that most of the lay people didn't even understand.

So there's got to be some give and take between the old, sometimes flowery & complex language, and the new language that's more accessible, but which might run the risk of diluting or losing meaning (as any translation can).

What would you think of an "English to English" translation of certain bits of key Masonic documents, to update them from 1700s British English to modern usage?

I would say that instead of rewording everything the GLs should focus on making sure that younger brothers understand. Make sure that the GLs lodge of reserch is pushed to the forefront and let publish material.
 

coachn

Coach John S. Nagy
Premium Member
Could you explain why it would prevent a person from researching meaning?
It wouldn't. However, if it's all spelled out with nothing to investigate, where's the motive?
I see that one form of research is to divine the meanings of particular old words and their sentence structure, but isn't that the least of the meaning research we do with these texts? A brother could for example take an old description of the usage of a working tool, update that to modern usage of English, and spend the rest of his life thinking & researching the use & application of this tool to his life.
Perhaps the simplest-straight forward-direct, but not the least. Developing interpretive muscles start by realizing what's before us is not what it may appear.
One might on the other hand take the position that it's supposed to be hard. For example, in the mouth-to-ear learning method, arguably the effort required of the brother is part of the point. Perhaps struggling with the understanding of the words is part of the method and shouldn't be made easy. Is this what you mean?
Not hard; just different enough to be catalyst for cultivation and transformation. That doesn't occur without investment; it doesn't have to be a struggle. It is a challenge though; one that requires a prompt or two ;-)
 

Forthright

Registered User
Who is qualified to translate such texts into modern English?

This is a fascinating question that goes into what translation is and does. On one level, the obvious answer is "no one".

On a broader level though, this book was particularly influential to me in how to think about what translation is and does. The book takes a single, playful French poem and translates it dozens of different ways just to explore the space. The gist of the whole thing is that there can't really be one authoritative translation of anything, rather the way to look at it is that translations maintain and embody different elements of the source text. The source text for example might have an air of formality, or a certain meter, or tone. But it also has a specific meaning. But it also has a cultural context, and uses turns of phrase that would have meant something to a person of that time. So the more interesting question is what do we seek to preserve when we make a translation and what are we willing to give up?

I think most reasonable people would concede that it's not possible to preserve everything in a translation. And if someone were to do a translation of some Masonic text to modern English, it'd be fair to criticize it on the basis of whatever it lost (it would inevitably lose something). And there could be many translations of the same text, each seeking to preserve some aspect at the cost of another.

Also - surely this issue is a matter of degree and age? Again with the example I gave of the Holy Bible, would we agree that this source text would be inappropriately inaccessible if left in its original (various) languages? And of course generations of biblical scholarship indicate that most definitely we did lose things in translation. Those are the realities. Ultimately with important texts, is it not the case that we should have our cake and eat it too? Making the original language texts available to everyone who wants them, while at the same time making available more accessible translations?

Note that this is a separate issue from what any Masonic authority would recommend as the "best" or "default" edition. That's destined to be jurisdictional no matter what anyone does.
 
Last edited:

coachn

Coach John S. Nagy
Premium Member
6-9.jpg
1. Truth: There exist infinite interpretations.
2. Caveat to Truth: There exist finite optimal interpretations that actually do apply that are inline with what was originally intended.
3. Challenge: Filtering out the Bogus Specifics ie. like stopping at "1." believing it is THE truth and a truth that trumps all others.
 
Top