Translation:She does not eat meat and does not eat chicken either.
In Jordan, too. I was puzzled to discover that: in Italian we make a (rather obvious) distinction between fish and meat, but meat includes everything from chicken to lamb to beef to pork. My Jordanian friends only used لحم for red meet, minus pork obviously, and chicken was "dajaj". Go figure... :)
This is a great question, and yes this sentence seems very odd to me since I think we all consider chicken to be meat. For kashrut chicken is meat, much to my husband’s frustration (“come on, everyone knows the chicken didn’t have a lactating mother so why can’t you eat it with dairy!”). And then fish doesn’t count as meat. I don’t know why.
The fact that chicken (and all poultry, in fact) is considered to be בשרי, meat, in terms of כשרות is not a biblical ordinance but a rabbinic one (שולחן ערוך יורה דעה 87:3).
For more information on the laws of כשרות pertaining to בשר וחלב see https://www.star-k.org/articles/kashrus-kurrents/706/meat-and-dairy-a-kosher-consumers-handbook/#:~:text=8.,Shulchan%20Aruch%20YD%2087%3A3.&text=Fleishig%20means%20meat.,before%20he%20may%20eat%20dairy.
I don't that there is a "comfortable" way to translate this phrase, since as far as I can think of, I've never been want to phrase any such sentence this way, even when one does not eat either of two distinct foods (but perhaps that's just me). But for an easier and more natural flow of sentence, without compromising the equivalent word order, I think "nor" would be an appealing word choice. Normally it would be "neither/nor," but the context provides a pretty strong implication for "neither."
"She does not eat meat, nor does she eat chicken."
This is acceptable as well. I just answered that way myself. They are just saying it's more natural in English to use either at the end of the sentence instead of also at the beginning. (And as a native American English speaker, I agree with that opinion). But I'm learning Hebrew too, so I went with be literal instead of the natural.
Question... If I was talking to a friend, I would say this sentence as: “she doesn’t eat either meat or chicken.” Could I say the same in Hebrew or would it sound odd? I was thinking: היא לא אוכלת בשר וגם עוף. Could I say it like that in Hebrew? Or am I better off saying the whole thing?
I'm just a learner, but I think "neither...nor" in Hebrew is done with לא twice and you don't have to repeat the verb. I don't think you can use the construction לא ...וגם for "neither...nor." My understanding is that double לא is obligatory for "neither...nor." The "either...or" construction can use או twice (formally) or just have one או with the second element (colloquially). Sources: Esther Raizen, Modern Hebrew for Beginners: A Multimedia Program... (Second edition; Univ of Texas, 2015), 109-110; Glinert, Modern Hebrew: An Essential Grammar, 157. There may be variations we can learn about from a Hebrew speaker.
All the following can work:
- היא לא אוכלת לא בשר ולא עוף
- היא לא אוכלת בשר ולא עוף
- היא לא אוכלת בשר או עוף
- היא לא אוכלת בשר ועוף
(Of course some of them have a different English sentence that would be a closer literal translation.)
I agree with IngeborgHa that the first sounds the best and clearest, but all of them sound to me reasonably natural and clear.
Well, the last one works only given the lower likelihood of the interpretation "she does not eat meat-with-chicken". Compare היא לא אוכלת בשר וחלב, which would surely be interpreted as "she does not eat them together, but would eat them separately". (Same in English "She does not eat meat and chicken", I think.)
And, well, the third could be used in another meaning: you start with the assertion היא לא אוכלת בשר, and then you lose confidence about the thing she doesn't eat, so you add או עוף - that is, she avoids one of the two, you're not sure which. But in a normal intonation, the only reasonable interpretation is neither-nor. (Same in English "She does not eat meat or chicken", I think)