BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//ceres.rub.de//events//
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-TIMEZONE:UTC
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Research Field 3
DTSTART:20110502T161500Z
DTEND:20110502T174500Z
DTSTAMP:20260415T044553Z
UID:RF_3_020511-91@ceres.rub.de
CATEGORIES:
DESCRIPTION:RESEARCH FOCUS "RELIGIOUS LANGUAGES"\nAll members and fellows 
 of the consortium are invited to the meeting:\n1. Introduction to the rese
 arch focus (see below)\n2. Lecture of Nadia Al-Bagdadi: The scandal of tr
 anslation: a case study  in the politics of religious language (see below
 )\n \n1. Religious Language – an introduction\nby Lucian Hölscher\nIn 
 Research Field 3 one of the main discussions concerning the   emergence\, 
 change and transfer of religious concepts is about the   character of reli
 gious languages: Can „religion“ be described by certain   concepts\, i
 dioms or ways of communication\, which may be called   exclusively religio
 us? Is religious language something distinct from   secular language? When
  and how did it emerge and disappear in certain   societies? Is there a tr
 ansfer of religious concepts or languages   between different societies an
 d how was this described by contemporary   observers?\nThe discussion of s
 uch questions has covered much of the last two   years. In a basic contrib
 ution of December 2010 the Frankfurt   philosopher Gesche Linde has discus
 sed several approaches to the   definition of religious languages: by defi
 ning words\, texts and other   sets of linguistic units\, situations of co
 mmunication and the speech of   religious groups as being “religious”\
 , looking from the side of the   speaker and of the hearer to the understa
 nding of religion. Summing up   she observed that what we call “religiou
 s” in such activities depends   very much on those who participate in su
 ch speech acts. The act of   defining them as being religious is part of t
 he game and hence part of   the object which we as scientific observers in
 vestigate.\nIn an earlier paper Lucian Hölscher analysed the dictionary o
 f the   German lexicographer Johann Christoph Adelung (Wörterbuch der   h
 ochdeutschen Mundart\, 1st ed. 1777\, 2nd ed. 1793)   looking for religiou
 s identifiers in the semantic description of  words.  As he found out\, on
 ly very few words (such as God\, devil\,  church) were  characterised as b
 eing religious exclusively\; most entries  combine  religious with secular
  meanings. What may be described as a  religious  vocabulary seems either 
 to represent an earlier\, already by  the end of  the 18th century old-fas
 hioned state of language  (as it was  used in the Lutheran translation of 
 the Bible)\; or it  becomes religious  in a given discourse only by referr
 ing to exclusively  religious  key-words.\nIn the research year 2011/12 th
 e debate will go on with contributions   on Bible translations (Nadia Al B
 agdadi) and to the definition of   religious vocabularies in the Near and 
 Far East. A first step in this   direction was made by Stefan Reichmuth in
  a paper on “Religion und   Sprache im islamischen religiösen Feld zwis
 chen Deutschland und Nahost”   (2010) and a presentation on the definiti
 on of religious concepts in an   English dictionary of the 19th century. W
 e look forward to further contributions to this field of research.\nBochum
 \, April 21st\, 2011\n \n2. Against the background of Arab modernity and 
 of the nahda\,   I  shall discuss the two competing\, first modern transla
 tions of the   Bible  into modern Arabic. Faris al-Shidyaq’s translation
 \, produced in    Cambridge\, England (around 1850)\,and Butrus al-Bustani
 ’s\, produced in    Beirut\, Lebanon (1860) demarcate a defining moment 
 of modern    confessionalization processes and an illustrious example of t
 he uses and    abuses of religious language.
URL:https://khk.ceres.rub.de/en/events/RF_3_020511/
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR