Bounded method comparison

Source text and translation

How should a translated religious term remain connected to its documentary source and alternatives?

Evidence status

Cites 2 sources, none of which has been read

The sources are named, but none has been retrieved and read as part of building this page. Nothing here has been matched to a passage, so the citations show where a reader might look rather than what was checked.

Rely on this page for

Orientation: how the topic is organised, which terms matter, and where to start reading.

Do not rely on it for

A claim you intend to act on or repeat. Follow the cited material yourself first.

Documentary witness

Source wording

Preserves the wording attested in a named witness or edition.

Valid claim: This sequence is attested here.

Direct answer

  • How should a translated religious term remain connected to its documentary source and alternatives?

Mechanism and method

  • Bind translation to source.
  • Annotate consequential terms.
  • Show alternatives where conclusions change.

What is measured

  • Passage locator
  • Date and edition
  • Semantic function

Comparison: Source text and translation

  • Target words are not identical semantic containers.
  • A readable translation is not necessarily a critical edition.
  • Must not be read as: Do not build cross-tradition equivalence from matching English vocabulary alone.

Limitations

  • Target words are not identical semantic containers.
  • A readable translation is not necessarily a critical edition.

What this does not establish

  • Do not build cross-tradition equivalence from matching English vocabulary alone.

Related records

Attributed interpretive rendering

Translation

Makes a source accessible for a purpose and audience.

Valid claim: This translator rendered the source this way under these choices.

Direct answer

  • How should a translated religious term remain connected to its documentary source and alternatives?

Mechanism and method

  • Bind translation to source.
  • Annotate consequential terms.
  • Show alternatives where conclusions change.

What is measured

  • Passage locator
  • Date and edition
  • Semantic function

Comparison: Source text and translation

  • Target words are not identical semantic containers.
  • A readable translation is not necessarily a critical edition.
  • Must not be read as: Do not build cross-tradition equivalence from matching English vocabulary alone.

Limitations

  • Target words are not identical semantic containers.
  • A readable translation is not necessarily a critical edition.

What this does not establish

  • Do not build cross-tradition equivalence from matching English vocabulary alone.

Related records

Shared comparison axes

  • Passage locator
  • Date and edition
  • Semantic function

Non-equivalences to preserve

  • Target words are not identical semantic containers.
  • A readable translation is not necessarily a critical edition.

Comparison procedure

  1. 1.Bind translation to source.
  2. 2.Annotate consequential terms.
  3. 3.Show alternatives where conclusions change.

Prohibited inference

Do not build cross-tradition equivalence from matching English vocabulary alone.

Applied translation case

Tamil wording and the named Tiruvāymoḻi translation

The classical Tamil cluster keeps the electronic Tamil editions, Kausalya Hart’s English translation, commentarial identities, and historical interpretation in separate evidence frames.

Inspect the applied comparison →

Forty-eight worked cases

See the distinction survive real questions

The Tamil source atlas makes the evidence frame and exact locator visible on every answer, including cases where the English description is scholarship rather than a translation of the Tamil line.

Open the source atlas →

Connected concepts and sources

  1. TEI P5 Chapter 13: Critical Apparatus · Text Encoding Initiative Consortium
  2. Multilingualism and Linguistic Diversity · UNESCO