Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Grammar questions which are not related to any specific text.
James Spinti
Posts: 103
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 6:01 pm
Location: Red Wing MN
Contact:

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by James Spinti »

First off, I misspelled Rahlfs; I forgot the "s" at the end (an unfortunate habit of mine).

Rahlfs-Hanhart has συντέλεια. Here's the full verse:

καὶ ἐκ τῶν συνιέντων διανοηθήσονται εἰς τὸ καθαρίσαι ἑαυτοὺς καὶ εἰς τὸ ἐκλεγῆναι καὶ εἰς τὸ καθαρισθῆναι ἕως καιροῦ συντελείας· ἔτι γὰρ καιρὸς εἰς ὥρας.

Theodotian is on the bottom half of the page in Daniel, and it has πέρας. I hadn't noticed that earlier, so that must be where Swete gets it, which is strange, because Theodotian is a later recension.
Proofreading and copyediting of ancient Near Eastern and biblical studies monographs
WStroupe
Posts: 34
Joined: March 19th, 2012, 4:18 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by WStroupe »

Regarding Theodotion, from Wikipedia:
Theodotion's translation was so widely copied in the Early Christian church that its version of the Book of Daniel virtually superseded the Septuagint's. The Septuagint Daniel survives in only two known manuscripts, Codex Chisianus 88 (rediscovered in the 1770s), and Papyrus 967 (discovered 1931). Jerome, in his preface to Daniel (407 CE), records the rejection of the Septuagint version of that book in Christian usage: "I ... wish to emphasize to the reader the fact that it was not according to the Septuagint version but according to the version of Theodotion himself that the churches publicly read Daniel."[3] Jerome's preface also mentions that the Hexapla had notations in it, indicating several major differences in content between the Theodotion Daniel and the earlier versions in Greek and Hebrew. However, Theodotion's Daniel is closer to the surviving Hebrew Masoretic Text version, the text which is the basis for most modern translations. Theodotion's Daniel is also the one embodied in the authorised edition of the Septuagint published by Sixtus V in 1587.
I kinda' like this guy Theodotion! It seems he especially took care in how he translated Daniel into Greek. And he used πέρας instead of συντελείας at Dan. 11:35.
William J. Stroupe

"God's Word is alive and exerts power..." Hebrews 4:12
James Spinti
Posts: 103
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 6:01 pm
Location: Red Wing MN
Contact:

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by James Spinti »

You need to bear in mind that the later recensions generally revised the Greek toward a more literalistic, word-for-word translation. In some cases, such as the kaige, even to the point of being bad Greek. To use a modern example, a friend of mine calls the American Standard Version (the ancestor of the NASB) the greatest translation never made.

Remember, every translation involves choice. And, recalling my illustration of the cloud of meaning, every translation means excluding some aspects of the source language's vocabulary. Which, again brings me back to Hendel's comment about the variants in texts being a blessing from God.

And then throw in the fact that there were variant textual traditions current in the Hebrew tradition that differ from the MT—in some cases dramatically (Jeremiah). This was brought home with the discovery and publication of the DSS.

I guess what I'm saying is that translation is complicated! Every translator wants to make clear what they understand the source language to be saying. Some seem a bit looser in "literalness," but they still are faithful to what the source is saying as they understand it based on the text they have in front of them.
Proofreading and copyediting of ancient Near Eastern and biblical studies monographs
WStroupe
Posts: 34
Joined: March 19th, 2012, 4:18 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by WStroupe »

James said: You need to bear in mind that the later recensions generally revised the Greek toward a more literalistic, word-for-word translation.
Yes - I see that, and that has real value in the kind of investigation I am engaged in here.
James also said: I guess what I'm saying is that translation is complicated! Every translator wants to make clear what they understand the source language to be saying. Some seem a bit looser in "literalness," but they still are faithful to what the source is saying as they understand it based on the text they have in front of them.
Your comments here are very realistic and true, whereas I tend to be idealistic and 'black vs white' in these matters when investigating the true underlying, fundamental meaning attached to Hebrew and Greek words - in this 'down in the weeds' mode I favor literalness over the poetic and the colorful.

But God is not just literal, not just an equation in physics, he is also greatly poetic and colorful - otherwise we might as well worship a computer that's got everything programmed into it and there'd be no place for the free will and creativity he's gifted us with.

This is just to explain the mode I'm operating in in this investigation. In reality I'm a very emotional and open-hearted person, though I always strive to think primarily with my intellect and secondarily with my emotions.

James, I really appreciate your comments and cautions - I do take them to heart.
William J. Stroupe

"God's Word is alive and exerts power..." Hebrews 4:12
WStroupe
Posts: 34
Joined: March 19th, 2012, 4:18 pm
Location: Colorado, USA

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by WStroupe »

More thoughts:

I believe wholeheartedly that in the inspired Scriptures, the writers chose their words carefully and with intent to convey what they were being inspired to convey. I believe the same is true with the grammar they used. So, in an investigation such as this I am trying very hard to discern the writer's real intent, by virtue of the words he chose. Once I am confident that I do understand his intent, then I am better able to understand and appreciate his message at a higher level.

Of course, when we're talking about translations of those Scriptures, then none of the translators was inspired. But I can still seek to discern the translator's real intent by the words and grammar he employs in his translation - so the investigation rules I'm using can still apply for the most part.
William J. Stroupe

"God's Word is alive and exerts power..." Hebrews 4:12
James Spinti
Posts: 103
Joined: June 1st, 2011, 6:01 pm
Location: Red Wing MN
Contact:

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by James Spinti »

The variation in translations (and original language texts) is the reason I suggest you read Hendel's article. Here' the link to a version of it:
https://www.academia.edu/29482523/The_D ... ern_Europe

James
Proofreading and copyediting of ancient Near Eastern and biblical studies monographs
Devenios Doulenios
Posts: 230
Joined: May 31st, 2011, 5:11 pm
Location: Carlisle, Arkansas, USA
Contact:

Re: Septuagint translation of Daniel 11:35

Post by Devenios Doulenios »

There is no question that the Biblical authors chose their words carefully, for maximum effect and to communicate and teach.

It is easier to discern the possible reasons for those choices when you really know the languages as languages. The old "tools for exegesis" model, while valid to a point, fails to due adequate justice to the way real languages function. It is like only looking at shades of gray when a whole palette of vibrant, glorious color is available.

Interlinears are misleading for that reason. They tend to gave the user a false sense of security. Among other problems, they fail to let the reader see the nuances created by word order choices (which tend to differ from language to language) that vary from English. Yet one key way meaning is created, and literary effect is accomplished, is with word order. Also, the user is left with the false impression in many cases that a Greek or Hebrew term only has one or two meanings in all of its uses. In reality, most original-language terms have ranges of meaning. Resources like Louw and Nida can help highlight these, as well as the standard lexicons. It is also useful to do concordance searches, preferably Greek to Greek ones. Reading the search terms in their full contexts--settings in sentences, paragraphs, and larger units--helps to see the various nuances quite handily.
Dewayne Dulaney
Δεβένιος Δουλένιος

Blog: https://letancientvoicesspeak.wordpress.com/

"Ὁδοὶ δύο εἰσί, μία τῆς ζωῆς καὶ μία τοῦ θανάτου."--Διδαχή Α, α'
Post Reply

Return to “Grammar Questions”