Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Rolf Furuli" <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Dave,

Your words below are your interpretation, and it is your privilege to make 
one. I would let the reader make his or her interpretation, and therefore I 
find "time indefinite" fitting.


Best regards

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave Washburn" <dwashbur AT nyx.net>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 6:16 PM
Subject: [b-hebrew] Eccl 1:4 was Re: Daniel 6:27 (time indefinite)


> On Monday 14 November 2005 10:25, Rolf Furuli wrote:
> > Dear Peter,
> [snip]
> > Translators using the idiomatic method all the time make decisions in
> > behalf of the readers, and the readers have no part in the translation
> > process. Translators of the literal translation make as few decisions as
> > possible in behalf of the readers, and therefore the readers can have a
> > part in the very translation process.  This is one way to interpret the
> > term
> > "semi-translation".
> >
> > A good example is Ecclesiastes 1:4.
> > NIV: Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains for ever.
> > NWT: A generation is going and a generation is coming; but the earth is
> > standing even to time indefinite.
> >
> > An important question here is: Who is going to decide whether the writer
> > implies that the earth may stand a long time and then be destroyed, or
> > whether the meaning is that the earth will continue to stand without an
> > end? The translator or the reader?
> [snip]
>
> Actually, this is the wrong question.  A more important and pertinent 
> question
> is context: is this a theological statement at all?  The answer is a
> resounding "no."  The whole book repeatedly uses statements like "as I 
> have
> seen," "man under the sun," and so forth.  Neither the author nor the
> narrator is making any kind of theological statement in this verse.  He's
> saying "From what I've seen, nothing ever changes.  Generations rise and
> fall, the earth is always there."  From this kind of POV, and in such a
> context, "forever" is a much better rendering because it conveys the
> perspective of the observer making the statement.  Whether it is
> theologically in accord with the rest of the Hebrew Bible is irrelevant,
> because that's not where this narrator is coming from.  From his earthly,
> somewhat despairing viewpoint, the earth does indeed continue forever.  So 
> if
> we're going to be true to the intent of the text, this is how we ought to
> render it.
>
> --
> Dave Washburn
> http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
> "Maybe I'll trade it for a new hat."
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew