Jots and Tittles
Punctuation is translation.
October, 2017
Modern languages almost all use punctuation marks. Simply put, these are symbols used to clarify the meaning of a written sentence. For the most part, punctuation is not pronounced. A person reading the sentence aloud is not intended to make any noticeable sounds corresponding to those particular symbols. However, the symbols do affect where the person pauses, and what vocal inflections they use. This can have a significant impact on the meaning of a sentence. A humorous example of this, in English, are these words:
I love hunting my family cooking children and my cat you see
Since modern English does use punctuation, seeing this without any commas is bizarre. If we place commas in the "wrong" spots, or assume them, this sentence can become disturbing:
I love hunting my family, cooking children and my cat, you see
Adding punctuation in the correct places clears up the misunderstanding:
I love hunting, my family, cooking, children and my cat. You see?
English is especially dependent on punctuation in part because each word is greatly affected by the other words around it. Knowing which terms are meant to be together, and which are separate, makes an enormous difference in the meaning of a written sentence. For example:
"Let's eat grandma" vs "Let's eat, grandma."
Earlier languages, such as ancient Greek and Hebrew, were structured such that they were much less dependent on non-pronounced punctuation marks. In those tongues, the context is partly indicted by the word itself, and is less dependent on where it is placed in the sentence. Languages other than English generally have specific cases, genders, and forms which make it much easier to know how words are meant to be connected. In a vague sense, phrases in these tongues act as their own form of "virtual" punctuation.
In fact, ancient Greek was not only written without punctuation, but also without spaces or lower-case letters. Hebrew put spaces between words, but used no punctuation. This sounds terribly confusing, but for a native speaker, it's not as hard to understand as one might think. Here's an English example of how ancient Greek texts were written:
THISISHOWGREEKMANUSCRIPTSLOOKEDWHENTHEYWEREWRITTENDOESTHATMAKESENSE
If you're fluent in English, you can probably tell that sentence contains two separate thoughts, and the last is a question. This is true, even though English, as a modern language, is heavily dependent on punctuation in most cases. Even so, in the sentence above, the form of the words makes the meaning relatively clear. This is even more the case with the Greek and Hebrew texts from which we translate the Bible. Those languages were originally written without a dependence on punctuation marks.
In other words, punctuation makes understanding written language quicker and easier, but it's not strictly necessary. For the most part, the structure of ancient Greek and Hebrew sentences explain what kind of modern punctuation should be used.
In some cases, there is no crystal-clear answer for how to punctuate. However, in these situations, the fact that it's hard to tell is usually because there is little difference between the options.
As an example, Matthew 8:7, in the original Greek, has no punctuation marks. There is no "?" (question mark) in the ancient text. In theory, a person could be confused as to whether Jesus is asking a question, or making a statement. However, this verse uses the verb elthōn, which means, "I will come." No other words are needed for Jesus to state this. And yet, the verse also uses the word Egō, which means, "I". If all Jesus intended to say was, "I will come," then all He needed to use was elthōn. And, since nobody else is being asked to perform the healing, there's no reason for Him to specify that He will be doing this personally.
Jesus could very well be making an emphatic statement: "I will come Myself and heal him." This is a bit awkward in the Greek, but it's one way to interpret the phrase. Most modern Bible versions use this translation. However, if this is taken to be the question "I, Myself, will come and heal him?" then the flow of the Greek is much better. Including the term Egō makes sense as a question. And, of course, it makes much more sense when we read the very next statement in the very next verse. Some translations, like the NIV, make this choice.
Either way, the conversation and meaning are the same. There is no dramatic difference in the passage, based on which one a person chooses. So, even though there are no punctuation marks in the original, it is possible to add them in the modern language without extreme difficulty.
It is true, of course, that this makes punctuation part of the translation process. Punctuation does affect meaning, so where commas and sentence breaks occur is meaningful. A classic example is Luke 23:43, where moving the comma changes the timing of both Jesus' and the thief's arrival in Heaven. Another example is Ephesians 1:4–5, where, in the original Greek, everything in verses 3 through 14 is part of one long sentence. This text is less prone to misinterpretation, but where one places sentence breaks can affect how it's applied.
For the most part, these concerns are not severe. That is, they don't occur in places which have enormous theological consequences. This is especially true when dealing with the Bible, a collection of books that provides plenty of context for interpreting various separate passages. Translators deeply familiar with the original language can use the same "sense" the original writers used in order to determine which thoughts are separate, and which are connected.
-- Editor
