Chaldean

The name that is transliterated as “Chaldean” in English is translated in Libras (Brazilian Sign Language) with the sign that combines “Mesopotamia” (see here) and “spreading out,” since the Chaldeans originated in southern Mesopotamia and spread out from there. (Source: Missão Kophós )


“Chaldean” in Libras (source )

More information about Chaldea .

king

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:

(Click or tap here to see details)

  • Piro: “a great one”
  • Highland Totonac: “the big boss”
  • Huichol: “the one who commanded” (source for this and above: Bratcher / Nida)
  • Ekari: “the one who holds the country” (source: Reiling / Swellengrebel)
  • Una: weik sienyi: “big headman” (source: Kroneman 2004, p. 407)
  • Pass Valley Yali: “Big Man” (source: Daud Soesilo)
  • 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 If the headman failed consistently in raids, he was superceded by a better warrior.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.”

(Source: Faye Edgerton in The Bible Translator 1962, p. 25ff. )

See also king (Japanese honorifics).

Translation commentary on Daniel 5:30

That very night: in some languages it will be more natural to say “During the night that followed.” This indicates that Belshazzar’s death took place after he had gone to bed and immediately following the events described in this chapter. It does not necessarily mean that the banquet itself took place or started after dark (see comments on the Good News Translation rendering of 1.1).

Chaldean: or “Babylonian.” The Aramaic word used here is to be taken in its geographical sense as in 1.4, and not in its cultural sense as in 2.2.

Was slain: the agent of this passive form is not clear. In some languages it will be better to say simply “died.” But it is also possible to say “someone killed” or “they (impersonal) killed.” What is important is not the identity of the assassin but the fact that what Daniel predicted actually did happen.

We know from ancient history that the city of Babylon was conquered in the night of October 11 in the year 539 B.C. It was probably during the course of the taking of this city that King Belshazzar died.

At the time when the Aramaic text was divided into chapters and verses, between the 13th and 16th centuries A.D., the following verse was unfortunately attached to the story of chapter 6 and became verse 1 of that chapter. But because it is a part of the account of Belshazzar’s Feast, most English versions follow another ancient tradition of chapter and verse division and include it as verse 31 of this chapter. Note, however, that New Jerusalem Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New American Bible follow the numbering system of the Aramaic text.

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 .