The term that is transliterated as “Daniel” in English is translated in American Sign Language with the sign for the letter D and for “lion,” referring to the story in Daniel 6. (Source: Ruth Anna Spooner, Ron Lawer)
“Daniel” in American Sign Language, source: Deaf Harbor
In Swiss-German Sign Language it is translated with the sign for “prayer” that illustrates Daniel’s close relationship with God.
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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”
Some Hebrew manuscripts of this verse have “continued there,” that is, in the court of the king, and this is probably what is meant even without the explicit addition. This will probably need to be made clear in the translation as has been done in most modern English versions.
Continued: the verb used here is actually the ordinary verb “to be” in Hebrew. In a number of languages it will be impossible to translate this literally, since it will have no meaning at all; or it may be understood to mean “continued to live” (this, in fact, is how Moffatt has understood it). The meaning, however, seems to be that he continued in the service of the king. The immediate context (verses 19-20) clearly favors this interpretation. An American Translation has “retained his position.”
Until the first year of King Cyrus: some commentators think that the mention of the first year of King Cyrus—that is, the first year of his rule over a conquered Babylonia—refers to the texts in 2 Chr 36.22-23 and Ezra 1.1-3, and supposes that Daniel took advantage of the circumstances to return to Israel in 538 B.C. But since that would contradict 10.1 (the third year of the reign of Cyrus), these commentators are forced to conclude that chapters 1 and 10 come from two different traditions regarding Daniel. However, the preposition until does not necessarily mean that Daniel could not have continued further beyond the time mentioned, although this is strongly implied. Since Cyrus was king of Persia for some time before conquering Babylonia, Good News Translation has included that information in the text. But in view of the uncertainties at this point, it may be better to translate simply “Daniel continued to serve the king until the time when Cyrus became king” or “Daniel remained in his job in the royal court until King Cyrus took over.”
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.