The term that is transliterated as “Nebuchadnezzar” in English is translated in American Sign Language with the signs for “king” and one signifying a wavy beard, referring to the common way of wearing a beard in Mesopotamia (see here ). (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Nebuchadnezzar” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
In Spanish Sign Language it is translated with a sign depicting “idol in my image,” referring to Daniel 3:1. (Source: Steve Parkhurst)
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Daniel 1:18:
Kupsabiny: “When the day came for the young men to be taken where the king was as that king had said, that chief leader brought all the young men before Nebuchadnezzar.” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “Three years later on the day that the king had decided to bring them before him, the chief official brought them to king Nebuchadnezzar.” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “After three years of teaching them according to [what] King Nebuchadnezzar had-instructed, Ashpenaz brought them to him.” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “When those three years that the king had set for training us young men from Judah were ended, Ashpenaz brought all of us to King Nebuchadnezzar.” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Some languages do not have a concept of kingship and therefore no immediate equivalent for the Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as “king” in English. Here are some (back-) translations:
Ninia Yali: “big brother with the uplifted name” (source: Daud Soesilio in Noss 2007, p. 175)
Nyamwezi: mutemi: generic word for ruler, by specifying the city or nation it becomes clear what kind of ruler (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
Ghomála’: Fo (“The word Fo refers to the paramount ruler in the kingdoms of West Cameroon. He holds administrative, political, and religious power over his own people, who are divided into two categories: princes (descendants of royalty) and servants (everyone else).” (Source: Michel Kenmogne in Theologizing in Context: An Example from the Study of a Ghomala’ Christian Hymn))
Faye Edgerton retells how the term in Navajo (Dinė) was determined:
“[This term was] easily expressed in the language of Biblical culture, which had kings and noblemen with their brilliant trappings and their position of honor and praise. But leadership among the Navajos is not accompanied by any such titles or distinctions of dress. Those most respected, especially in earlier days, were their headmen, who were the leaders in raids, and the shaman, who was able to serve the people by appealing for them to the gods, or by exorcising evil spirits. Neither of these made any outward show. Neither held his position by political intrigue or heredity. If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior. If the shaman failed many times in his healing ceremonies, it was considered that he was making mistakes in the chants, or had lost favor with the gods, and another was sought. The term Navajos use for headman is derived from a verb meaning ‘to move the head from side to side as in making an oration.’ The headman must be a good orator, able to move the people to go to war, or to follow him in any important decision. This word is naat’áanii which now means ‘one who rules or bosses.’ It is employed now for a foreman or boss of any kind of labor, as well as for the chairman of the tribal council. So in order to show that the king is not just a common boss but the highest ruler, the word ‘aláahgo, which expresses the superlative degree, was put before naat’áanii, and so ‘aláahgo naat’áanii ‘anyone-more-than-being around-he-moves-his-head-the-one-who’ means ‘the highest ruler.’ Naat’áanii was used for governor as the context usually shows that the person was a ruler of a country or associated with kings.”
At the end of the time: the translation should make it clear that this refers not to the period of ten days mentioned in verses 12, 14, and 15, but rather to the period of three years fixed by King Nebuchadnezzar in verse 5. So it may be advisable to make this clear, as is done in Good News Translation.
That they should be brought in: the third person plural pronoun, they, is at best ambiguous. It may refer to the four young men on whom the story has focused from verse 6 to this point; or it may refer to all the young men selected earlier in the story (verses 3-5). But here it refers to the whole group, as is made clear in verse 19. For this reason some translators may want to follow the Good News Translation model in saying “all the young men.”
The chief of the eunuchs: see verses 3, 7, 8, 9.
Brought them in: Good News Translation avoids the repetition of this phrase, and this may be advisable in many other languages.
Before Nebuchadnezzar: if the name of the king is mentioned at the beginning of the verse with regard to the time period, then it will probably be a bit strange to use it again here. In that case translators are advised to say simply “the king.”
Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.