45just as you saw that a stone was cut from the mountain not by hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold. The great God has informed the king what shall be hereafter. The dream is certain and its interpretation trustworthy.”
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Daniel 2:45:
Kupsabiny: “You saw the stone that uprooted itself from the hill side in a mysterious/amazing way and how it crushed that shaped thing (statue) made out of iron, bronze, clay, silver and gold. The God of authority has revealed to you what will happen in the days to come. I have truly narrated to you how your dreams were and what shall happen as I have shown to you.’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “You have seen the rock which broke loose from the mountain without having been touched by human hand by which the iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold were pulverized. By that Great God has shown the King what all is about to take place. "The dream is sure and its meaning is trustworthy."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “Just as you (sing.) have-seen the rock which cut/chipped from the mountain (but was- not -cut by man) that smashed/crushed the statue of iron, bronze, clay, silver, and gold. ‘Beloved King, the powerful God has-shown you (sing.) what will-happen in the future. That was your (sing.) dream and its meaning. All that I said is very true.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “That is the meaning of the rock that something cut from the mountain, the rock that will crush to tiny bits the statue that is made of iron, bronze, silver, and gold. O king, the great God has shown you what will truly happen in the future. And you can trust what I told you about the meaning of the dream.’” (Source: Translation for Translators)
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God or a person or persons to be greatly honored, the honorific prefix go- (御 or ご) can be used, as in go-ran (ご覧), a combination of “behold / see” (ran) and the honorific prefix go-.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way Japanese shows different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morpheme rare (られ) is affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, tsuge-rare-ru (告げられる) or “tell” is used.
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.”
Just as you saw …: in many languages it will be clearer to start this verse with something like “That is the meaning of the stone you saw…” (New American Bible) or “This is the meaning of the vision of the rock…” (New International Version).
A stone was cut from a mountain …: see verse 34.
The iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold: here again the order of the elements has been changed. But this time the order seems to be random. Some Greek versions have the same order here as in verses 32-33, but this is probably due to a deliberate correction of the original text. The modified order should probably be retained, unless the translator’s language has strong reasons for requiring something different. Compare verse 35.
A great God: the Revised Standard Version rendering reflects the Aramaic original in that there is no definite article here. However, the context (“the God of heaven” in verse 44) justifies the use of the definite article, which almost all other English versions adopt. In some languages, however, there are no definite articles, and translators may say “God, who is great….”
To the king: that is, “to you” or “to your majesty.” See verse 7.
The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure: the theme of the content and the meaning of the dream is maintained here. Anchor Bible renders these words “this is certainly the dream and its interpretation is trustworthy.” Another way of saying this in some languages may be “This is exactly what you dreamed, and you can be sure that this (what I have told you) is its meaning.” The emphasis is on the absolute certainty of both the form and the meaning of the king’s dream.
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.