In 'How to render gender in Scripture' (August EN) Wayne Grudem reported on a proposed set of 'guidelines for translation of gender-related language in Scripture'.
Although some of the guidelines from the Colorado Springs meeting seem eminently sensible, I believe, as an academic linguist, that others are flawed. I do not wish to defend the withdrawn 'inclusive language' NIV (NIVI). Though I believe that some parts of it are an improvement on the NIV, some passages trouble me (e.g. its apparent embarrassment with the maleness of Jesus, as in John 10:33).
In my judgement, the Colorado Springs group fails to take account of the genuine difficulty associated with the use of masculine terminology in today's English to convey mixed sex meanings. Consider the word 'brother', for example. Guideline B.1 states that: 'Brother' (adelphos) and 'brothers' (adelphoi) should not be changed to 'brother(s) and sister(s)'. There can be no doubt that English 'brother(s)' and words like it, did operate in this way in the past. But do they still?
