 | |
|
翻译 - 其他语种-英语 - ×× × ×ž×–×¨×¢× ×“×™×•×¡×£ ×§× ××ª×™× × ×“×œ× ×©×œ×˜× ×‘×™×” ...当前状态 翻译
讨论区 日常生活  本翻译"仅需意译"。 | ×× × ×ž×–×¨×¢× ×“×™×•×¡×£ ×§× ××ª×™× × ×“×œ× ×©×œ×˜× ×‘×™×” ... | | 源语言: 其他语种
×× × ×ž×–×¨×¢× ×“×™×•×¡×£ ×§× ××ª×™× × ×“×œ× ×©×œ×˜× ×‘×™×” ×¢×™× × ×‘×™×©× ×‘×Ÿ פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין
| | Es una cita sin embargo yo no hablo el idioma
<edit> Before edit : "Ana Mizar-a de Yosef kaatina delo shalta be ena bisha Ben Porat Yosef ben porat ale ayin.."</edit> Thanks to Jairhaas who provided us with a version in Hebrew characters and added the following remark about this text : This text is taken from the Talmudic tractate of Brachot (= Blessings)folio 20, page 1, and combines Talmudic Aramaic with a verse from the Book of Genesis in Hebrew.
SOURCE TEXT IS ANCIENT HEBREW COMBINED WITH ARAMAIC, THIS IS WHY I SWITCHED THE FLAG OF HEBREW LANGUAGE WITH THE OTHER LANGUAGES ONE |
|
| | | 目的语言: 英语
I am a descendant of the seed of Joseph over whom the Evil Eye has no power: "A son of fertility is Joseph, a son of fertility above the eye". | | literally "above the eye" should be translated "upon the fountain", but there is a wordplay here between eye and fountain (both "ayin" in Hebrew), and since the verse is used as evidence for the foregoing statement, it should be translated as "eye" in this particular text. There is also a connection between 'eye' and 'spring' because the great sages of Judaism say that an eye is like a pure spring.
Another translation / interpretation for the second part that is widely used is
"Joseph is a fruitful bough, A fruitful bough by a spring"
(Genesis 49:22)
This is followed by "whose branches run over the wall", meaning that Joseph was the father of two tribes, not just one. Yet another meaning of the same part is that Joseph's very handsome (everyone stares at him). |
|
由 Lein认可或编辑 - 2011年 八月 19日 17:27
最近发帖 | | | | |
2011年 八月 12日 19:19 | | | Hi milkman,
As the source text will come up as 'other languages', I am not expecting any votes. Could you have a look at this translation please?
Thanks!  CC: milkman | | |
2011年 八月 12日 21:16 | | | ×× ×™ מזרעו של יוסף בו ×œ× ×©×•×œ×˜×ª עין הרע. בין פורת יוסף בין פורת עלי עין. | | |
2011年 八月 13日 10:47 | | | Hi Lein,
The first half of the sentence is good.
The official translation of the second half should be:
"Joseph is a fruitful bough, A fruitful bough by a spring"
(Genesis 49:22) | | |
2011年 八月 15日 13:46 | | | I talked with my grandmother, who knows a bit of Aramaic. She said that כרמל's translation is a good one. She also said that the last part of the sentence, בן פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין, has two meanings. The first one is that Joseph's very handsome (everyone stares at him). The second one is a fruitful bough near a spring that strays all over (meaning that Joseph was the father of two tribes, not only one). There's also a connection between eye and spring because the great sages of Jeudism say that an eye is like a pure spring. | | |
2011年 八月 19日 13:10 | | | Hi Jair 
Would you agree with the comments above? Can I edit using milkman's suggestion, adding the following comment? I think in this case, as this seems to be a citation from the Bible, it makes sense to use the translation as it is in the Bible. The King James Bible has here:
Joseph is a fruitfull bough, euen a fruitfull bough by a well, whose branches run over the wall.
My suggested comment would be something like:
bough = branch (of a tree); as for 'by a spring', this is a wordplay on the Evil Eye mentioned earlier. The Hebrew word for 'fountain' or 'spring' and that for 'eye' is the same word (ayin).
I would also like to add Sharar's comments as these too add to the meaning of the sentence.
Let me know whether you agree with my suggestions | | |
2011年 八月 19日 16:01 | | | Hi Lein, the translation should be contextual, that is to say, the biblical verse should be translated the way it was understood by the Talmudic sages in this context. all talk about "official" translations doen't make much sense to me, since every translation is an interpretation. the Hebrew Bible is open and has been subject to many different translations and interpretations over thousands of years, all of them legitimate. There is no justification for following slavishly the King James which was made thousand of years after the Talmud. This is my learned opinion as a scholar of Jewish Literature who has published widely on those subjects.
jair | | |
2011年 八月 19日 16:39 | | | Hi Jair,
ok, I can see your point. Could you check what I wrote in the comments section and let me know if that is ok? I think it would be good to explain the text as otherwise the meaning gets lost.
Thanks! | | |
2011年 八月 19日 17:22 | | | what you wrote is splendid | | |
2011年 八月 19日 17:27 | | | Great! Thanks |
|
| |
|
收藏列单
