The NIV-2011 is certainly going to be a big deal. For the record, I like the New International Version (henceforth NIV-1984). I know my language 'purist' friends may be offended by that, but I've found the NIV-1984 to be a wonderful mid-point on the literal/paraphrase translation scale. It is readable, understandable, and lends itself to memorization. If it were not for the ESV I would most certainly be using the NIV-1984 on a daily basis.
That is, of course, before they came out with the atrocious TNIV. While I am sympathetic to elements of that translation philosophy, it was (to be frank) an experiment in unbridled feminism. It was rightly dumped (but only after major public outcry).
After hearing that Zondervan was re-translating the NIV, many of us feared it would merely be TNIV 2.0. Like the Democrats who still insist on making Pelosi the new Minority Leader, the executives at Zondervan simply have not learned their lesson.
Follow this link for a chart that compares the NIV-2011 to the NIV-1984 and the TNIV. If the chart is accurate, you can see that the translators consistently followed the TNIV text.
NIV-2011? No, more like TNIV 2.0.
HT: Jeff Peterson