# Does the Book of Mormon (book) sound archaic in other languages?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-book-of-mormon-book-sound-archaic-in-other-languages/645275>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [December 27, 2012, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-book-of-mormon-book-sound-archaic-in-other-languages/645275 "2012-12-27T13:56:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\
**Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-book-of-mormon-book-sound-archaic-in-other-languages/645275/21 "2012-12-31T18:32:55Z")

</div>

> [@Clark\_Cello](#):
>
> 🙂 I dug out an old CHinese Book of Mormon to check these out. “And it came to pass” was one that they did decide to basically leave out. It is sometimes translated with a “then” or something, and sometimes left out completely.
> 
> I looked up a few "Like Unto"s. Usually, it is translated as:
> 
> 像. . . 一樣 (xiang . . . yi yang)
> 
> Which basically means “Like . . . the same” and is a fairly standard Chinese phrasing (thought maybe not as common as is found in the BoM).

Thanks..as Mark Twain once remarked..if you took out all of the “like untos”, and “and it came to passes”, you would be left with just a few paragraphs.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Donnerwetter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b2d939/32.png) [@Donnerwetter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Donnerwetter)\
**Post date:** [December 31, 2012, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-book-of-mormon-book-sound-archaic-in-other-languages/645275/22 "2012-12-31T19:38:17Z")

</div>

I looked at a German translation of the Book of Mormon from 1902 and compared it to the 1912 revision of the Luther Bible. My impression is that the language in the Book of Mormon is much less “archaic” than the Bible. Actually, it feels surprisingly modern.

(This is a rather random, cursory judgement. Please take with a grain of salt.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\
**Post date:** [January 1, 2013, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-book-of-mormon-book-sound-archaic-in-other-languages/645275/23 "2013-01-01T02:27:39Z")

</div>

> [@Nava](#):
>
> But it’s a “another dialect” feeling, not an “archaic” one. Hearing _vos_ used without the rest of the signs that make up the Argentinian family of dialects sounds archaic to me; having it used with the rest of the dialect sounds\* ché\* - as well it should!

Yeah, archaic is not the right word. It has a special feel that’s more than simple “sounds like another country” because of the Bible/Priest thingy. Even today, after a couple of decades of using Latinamerican missals, some prayers are still Castillian in my head.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-the-book-of-mormon-book-sound-archaic-in-other-languages/645275.md?page=1)