Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Daniel 6:27 (time indefinite) II

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Daniel 6:27 (time indefinite) II
  • Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 02:02:15 +0000

On 16/11/2005 14:55, Rolf Furuli wrote:

...

You turn the issue upside down because you look at it from your theoretical
background as a translator; i.e., you look at it from the point of view of
idiomatic translation. The discussion started when I said that "time
indefinite" was an excellent rendering for (WLM in a literal translation,
because a consistent use of this expression would help the readers to decide
when the reference
was a period without end and when it had an end. Then Kelton said, "I am
having a hard time understanding your view of OLAM and the NWT". So the
issue has been whether "time indefinite" is an adequate redering for Hebrew
(WLM and whether this rendering is helpful for the target group of a literal
translation such as NWT.


I accept that if in your translation theory ""meaningfulness in English" is not a requirement", i.e. it is unimportant and unnecessary for the target language word, as generally used, to have any resemblance in meaning to the source language word, there is no reason to criticise this rendering. To put it another way, if you don't care that translation means the same as the original, but only about consistency, you can just choose a word or phrase at random as your consistent rendering of each original word.

...

Once again I will remind the list-members that you should not criticize the
choices of English words in a literal translation from an idiomatic point of
view. But you must criticize the literal translation on the basis of its own
principles and procedures. ...


Fair enough, but it is also quite reasonable to criticise your theory of literal translation. This could of course be considered off topic for this list, but then so could any discussion of the precise wording of any individual translation.

... One basic procedure is to find one single English
word to represent each Hebrew word where this is possible. This English word
should represent the core meaning of the Hebrew concept, and the target
group should, on the basis of the use of this word in the Bible, be able to
clothe this word "with flesh," exactly what was necessary in the case of
Luther and the KJV. Given the principles of a literal translation, it is a
blind alley to ask what "time indefinite" means for the average English
speaker and whether it is regularly used in daily speech (but it was of
course proper for Kelton to ask about its meaning). The question is whether
it adequately can represent the core meaning of the Hebrew word (WLM, and
whether it effectively can be used by the English target group to get some
idea of the Hebrew concept behind (WLM. My answer is Yes! ...


This is fair enough as a question. And my answer, as a native speaker of English, is No! For the core meaning of the Hebrew word is something like "eternity", and the phrase "to time indefinite" does not adequately represent this, because it suggests simply a time whose length is unknown, not one which is everlasting or even necessarily very long.

... BTW, I personally
think the reference of Ecc 1:4 is eternality, but I think "to time
indefinite" is the best rendeering inthis verse.


Why? Is this because you think, incorrectly, that "to time indefinite" conveys the idea of eternity? Or is it because of the principle of consistency?

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page