24Then King Nebuchadnezzar was astonished and rose up quickly. He said to his counselors, “Was it not three men that we threw bound into the fire?” They answered the king, “True, O king.”
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)
Many languages distinguish between inclusive and exclusive first-person plural pronouns (“we”). (Click or tap here to see more details)
The inclusive “we” specifically includes the addressee (“you and I and possibly others”), while the exclusive “we” specifically excludes the addressee (“he/she/they and I, but not you”). This grammatical distinction is called “clusivity.” While Semitic languages such as Hebrew or most Indo-European languages such as Greek or English do not make that distinction, translators of languages with that distinction have to make a choice every time they encounter “we” or a form thereof (in English: “we,” “our,” or “us”).
For this verse, the Jarai and the Adamawa Fulfulde translation both use the inclusive pronoun, including the king and his counselors.
Following are a number of back-translations as well as a sample translation for translators of Daniel 3:24:
Kupsabiny: “Soon after, Nebuchadnezzar jumped/stood up in fear/wonder and said, ‘Hey, were those people who were tied up and thrown into the fire not three?’ His people replied to the king, ‘Certainly, that is how it was, your majesty!’” (Source: Kupsabiny Back Translation)
Newari: “King Nebuchadnezzar, being amazed, suddenly stood up and asked his counsellors, "What! It was only three men that we bound and threw into the fire, wasn’t it?" They answered, "Yes, Great King."” (Source: Newari Back Translation)
Hiligaynon: “While watching King Nebuchadnezzar immediately stood-up in much amazement. He asked his officials, ‘Were not just three men that we (incl.) tied-up and thrown into the fire?’ They answered, ‘Yes, Beloved King.’” (Source: Hiligaynon Back Translation)
English: “But as Nebuchadnezzar was watching, he was amazed. He suddenly jumped up and shouted to his advisors, ‘Did we tie up three men and throw them into the flames, or not?’ They replied, ‘Yes, O king, we did.’” (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 of appropriate suffix title referred to as keishō (敬称) as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017 by using –sama. Here, ō-sama (王様) “king” is a combination of the nominal title ō “king” and the suffix title –sama.
Then: the choice of a transition word here will depend somewhat on the way the rest of the verse is rendered. But the context seems to require something stronger than a simple time connection. The account is made more vivid in Good News Translation by the use of “Suddenly,” and this marks an abrupt change in the rhythm of the narrative.
Was astonished and rose up in haste: these two phrases joined by the conjunction and are very closely related and should perhaps be translated by a single phrase in some languages. It is because of the king’s astonishment that he got to his feet quickly. Some possible models are “was so amazed that he jumped up” or “sprang to his feet in amazement” (New Jerusalem Bible).
Counselors: the corresponding Aramaic term refers to important people in the royal court, highly placed government officials, or personal advisors to the king. It seems to carry the meaning of “companions (or friends) of the king.” It will be noted that royal advisors were sometimes referred to as “friends” of the king (see 2 Sam 16.16). Revised English Bible renders the term here as “courtiers.” The term is of Persian origin and does not correspond exactly to any of those listed in 3.2-3. It occurs only in the Book of Daniel (3.27; 4.36; and 6.7, as well as here). It is probably best to translate it “advisers” (New Jerusalem Bible and New International Version) or “companions” (New Jerusalem Bible).
Said: since this verb introduces a question, it may be better to render it “asked.”
Did we not cast three men bound into the fire?: neither the king nor his advisors personally took part in the binding and throwing of the three condemned men into the fire. In English and some other languages, the first person plural pronoun we can be used generally in a context like this; but if its use presents problems for the translator, this should be restructured in such a way as to avoid misunderstanding. If passive forms are possible, we may consider “How many men did we have tied up and thrown into the fire? Wasn’t it three?” Or it is possible to use the indefinite “they,” or something like “my servants” in the following: “How many men did my servants tie up and throw into the fire? Wasn’t it three?”
True, O king: some other ways of saying this are “That is correct, Your Majesty,” “It was indeed three men, sir,” or “Sir, what you say is absolutely right.”
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.