Type of translation affect meanings , thus doctrine

[John of Japan]

so the correct understanding is one 'ereb bôqer applies to the entire vision of 300 days. So it means more than evening and mourning for a day but complete or total vision

No, 2,300 'ereb bôqer (plural) refers to 2,300 'ereb bôqer (plural. There are occasionally renderings where as a translator I must first interpret. This is not one of them.

When you say that "it means more than evening and mourning (sic) for a day but complete and total vision," that is an interpretation, not a translation. You OP was about translation. Please make it clear: Are you talking about translation or interpretation on this thread?

Your OP (emphasis added):
Type of translation affect meanings , thus doctrine

If you want to talk about "type of translation" as per your OP, we can talk: literal, essentially literal, optimal equivalence, dynamic equivalence, etc. Otherwise, I don't see the point.

 

[loDebar]

I agree with you.
i just see the problem.

I think this is a translation problem if the meaning is not conveyed to the reader as was given in original. I think interruption by man is a major problem, as different denomination have translated version to fit their doctrine

The translator should not develop an interruption before offering a translation.

We know it says 'ereb bôqer but it applies to the vision, (v 14, 26) the subject of the verses, not individual days, as evening and morning suggests being used in Gen. 1 Perhaps not "evening and the morning" but "beginning to end"
I understand these are the only verses where 'ereb bôqer are used together as one adjective.
Does the usage together suggests a different interruption? does the translation? That is why I normally like a literal translation but this case I have to question that stance .

If the 'ereb bôqer is "beginning and end" as you suggest, then yowm can be more than a single 24 hr " day"

Just as we change the meaning of yowm perhaps we do not have right usage of 'ereb bôqer

 

[John of Japan]

If the 'ereb bôqer is "beginning and end" as you suggest, then yowm can be more than a single 24 hr " day"

No, I did NOT suggest this. Please pay attention. I believe Daniel 8:14 refers to a literal 2,300 evenings and mornings, and should be translated that way.

Just as we change the meaning of yowm perhaps we do not have right usage of 'ereb bôqer

You can only prove this to a translator (linguistically) if you show contemporary usage (contemporary to Daniel) of the meaning you are suggesting. That's how linguists and translators do semantics ("the study of meaning"). You have not done that.

"Keil and Delitszch" is still the most trusted OT commentary on the Hebrew. (I have the set, but you can access it through e-sword). Here is what they say (agreeing with me; note their reference to contemporary usage):

"In the answer, עַד is to be interpreted as in the question: till 2300 evening-mornings have been, or have passed, thus: 2300 evening-mornings long, so (=then) the sanctuary is brought into its right state. צָדַק primarily means to be just, whence the meaning is derived to justify, which is not here suitable, for it must be followed by, from the defilement of the desolation. The restoration of the temple to its right condition is, it is true, at the same time a justification of it from its desolation, and it includes in it the restoration of the permanent worship.

"The interpretation of the period of time, 2300 evening-mornings, named by the angel is beset with difficulty. And first the verbal import of בֹּקֶר עֶרֶב is doubtful. Among recent interpreters, Berth., Häv., v. Leng., Maur., and Horm. (Weiss. u. Erf. p. 295) understand by its days consisting of morning and evening (twenty-four hours); others, as Bleek, Kirmss, Ewald, Hitzig, Wieseler (who, however, in his treatise, Die 70 Wochen, u.s.w., p. 115ff., defends the first explanation), Kran., and Delitzsch, are of opinion that evening-morning is particularly reckoned with reference to the offering of a morning and an evening sacrifice each day, so that 2300 evening-mornings make only 1150 whole days. But there is no exegetical foundation for this latter opinion. It is derived only from a comparison, or rather an identification, of this passage with Dan_7:25; Dan_12:11., and Dan_9:27; and therewith it is proved that, according to 1 Macc. 1:54, 59, cf. 4:52, the desolation of the sanctuary by the worship of idols under Antiochus Epiphanes lasted not longer than three years and ten days, and that from Dan_12:11 it extends only to 1290 days."

 

[loDebar]

John , I am not disagreeing with you . I cannot find anything that suggests as I submit. I even checked the old Rabbi's notes

The direct translation, imo, does not show the correct usage of the expression, Daniels vision was not of 2300 individual evenings and mornings but one vision, in total beginning to end.

If you translate it as "beginning and end," you take the ambiguity out. A literal "evening and morning" allows the reader to interpret it as a literal statement or a metaphor (an interpretation I disagree with here). In other words, "beginning and end" is more explicit to me than "morning and evening." So "beginning and end" would be a functional equivalence rendering.

 

[John of Japan]

John , I am not disagreeing with you . I cannot find anything that suggests as I submit. I even checked the old Rabbi's notes

The direct translation, imo, does not show the correct usage of the expression, Daniels vision was not of 2300 individual evenings and mornings but one vision, in total beginning to end.

And for the last time, that is an interpretation, not a translation. The translation must be "2,300 evenings and mornings," or the numeral is meaningless. Show me one single translation--just one--that translates "beginning and end" there. If you have none, then you are essentially saying that you are wiser than all the Hebrew scholars.

Next time, please don't title your OP about translation if you are going to interpret and not translate.

 

[loDebar]

It is a correct translation. , my op was comparing the yowm translation, As we know has many different definitions . From partial day to year to age. The interruption has been dependent of the translations ,. which we do not know the intention.

Although we know the translation is correct the interpretation is meaningless unless Daniel say every day evening and mourning in the vision of "2,300 evenings and mornings," .

 

[loDebar]

in a different vain, did you by chance know Brantley and Helen Knight longtime missionaries to Japan?

 

[John of Japan]

in a different vain, did you by chance know Brantley and Helen Knight longtime missionaries to Japan?

Sorry, didn't know them. We were way up on the northern island of Hokkaido most of our career there.

 

[John of Japan]

In a fascinating serendipity, our pastor preached & taught on Dan. 8 today. I asked my son (our Hebrew & OT prof) about the 2,300 days, and he said it probably referred to the time of Judas Macabee and his fight against Antiochus Epiphanes, who profaned the temple with a pig sacrifice and a statue of Jupiter. That was right at the midpoint of the literal 2,300 days, and he was a prophetic type of the Antichrist and his abomination of desolation. At the end of the 2,300 days, our pastor taught, Antiochus died a horrible death with his bowels falling out. The time period of the prophecy was literal.

P.S. And that is why the Jews celebrate Hannukuh today--the victory of the Macabees.

 

[Rippon]

If you want to talk about "type of translation" as per your OP, we can talk: literal,

No such thing as a 'literal' translation.

essentially literal,

Modified.

optimal equivalence,

Merely a marketing gimmick. All translations/ translators would insist that they are employing optimal equivalence.

dynamic equivalence

Yes, or functional equivalence.

, etc.

Free.

Right in the middle of all of the above are mediating translations.

 

[loDebar]

There are literal translations try the Young's.

But this is not a translation issue. not interpretation . This is not understanding of a saying.

In English in sports, there is an old saying. It ain't over til the fat lady sings? This has been a colloquialism from opera stating a game is not complete and a team behind still has a chance. Translated to another language and interpreted literally has nothing to do with a ballgame. Literal translators would insist there is ft opera singer at ball games, because the words translate so.
I believe that "the evening and the morning" ereb bôqer is the same "colloquialism" as in these few instances from Gen 1 and Daniel 8.

In Daniel, it means the vision is complete or perhaps from beginning to end , all revealed. as we now know some.

ereb bôqer in Gen 1 shows the yom is the same, time complete, We have derived the yom "day" is ONE day by the misunderstanding substituting the 24vhr day evening and morning definition for ereb bôqer, instead of the use of the terms to show completeness as in Daniel.

Why is this evident in that , as we discussed on another thread, Lucifer and others had to be cast into darkness and shouted at the creation of Light in v3.? This period of darkness, to hold the "light bearer", an immortal being, had to be longer than one day.

yom is an indeterminate age as in some uses and ereb bôqer marks the end of that age to another, the first to show the next age.

God was influencing the sinners in the darkness for a period of time.

After all He did not need 6 days for creation, He could have created all here in an instant

 

[loDebar]

As I thought on this example I looked for others,

This is one, the translation might be correct, the interruption correct but we do not understand unless we have an explanation as in this verse
Rth 4:7
Now this was the manner in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning changing, for to confirm all things; a man plucked off his shoe, and gave itto his neighbour: and this was a testimony in Israel.

Now we can understand the culture.