"The Book" or A Special Place in Hell for Bad Translators

[C_K_Dexter_Haven]

Doesn’t the question hinge of the purpose of the reader?

If you want to treat the work as great poetic literature, then you would probably consider the KJV to be the “original” and spurn any “translations.” In this case, you’re reading for poetry.

If you want to treat the work as the literal word of God, dictated letter-for-letter (at least the first five books), then you need to use the original Hebrew. In this case, you’re reading for accuracy.

If you want to treat the work as a tool for converting the heathen or preaching to the congregation, then you would use whatever strikes the right chord. (“Am I my brother’s keeper” has become a proverb, frequently cited, so you wouldn’t change that, for instance. But a sentence full of “thou sayest” or “happeneth”, you’d want to modernize.) In this case, you’re citing for effectiveness.

If you want to teach the stories to your kids, you’d use whatever language they can understand, and probably a version with pretty pictures.

If you want to use the work as a prop, to balance the wobbly leg on a table, or to press wildflowers, then you’d go for weight. I ain’t gonna mention depth.

[Edited by C K Dexter Haven on 01-30-2001 at 08:12 AM]

[flodnak]

*Originally posted by Fretful Porpentine *
Clearly you can have a beautiful translation in simple language – witness the KJV, which was written in the everyday language of its time.

Not really. It was written to be understood by literate people of the day, but the style was intentionally old-fashioned and grandiose. The preacher might have spoken that way in the pulpit on Sunday, but two farmers dickering over the price of a horse definitely would not. Not even two well-to-do farmers.

Also remember that a far smaller percentage of the population could read and write in James’ day than can today.

[Fretful_Porpentine]

Intentionally old-fashioned and grandiose style, late sixteenth century:

It was in the time that the earth begins to put on her new apparel against the approach of her lover, and that the sun, running a most even course, becomes an indifferent arbiter between the night and the day, when the hopeless shepherd Strephon was come to the sands, which lie against the isle of Cithera; where viewing the place with a heavy kind of delight, and sometimes casting his eyes to the isleward, he called his friendly rival the pastor Claius unto him; and setting first down in his darkened countenance a doleful copy of what he would speak, “O my Claius,” said he, “hither we are come to pay the rent, for which we are so called unto by over-busy remembrance, remembrance, restless remembrance…”

King James Bible style:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good, and God divided the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

I rest my case.

As for literacy rates in James’ day, they were low by modern-day standards, but not that low. Parish records suggest that as many as 72 percent of Londoners could read and write. Illiteracy was much more prevalent in the countryside, but there were still many rural parishes where at least half of the residents were literate. These people included some farmers, servants, and laborers. In general, bibles and devotional works were the books most widely purchased and read during this period. People from all walks of life could, and did, read the KJV.

(Source: Keith Wrightson, English Society 1580-1680.)

[tracer]

C K Dexter Haven wrote:

If you want to treat the work as a tool for converting the heathen or preaching to the congregation, then you would use whatever strikes the right chord. (“Am I my brother’s keeper” has become a proverb, frequently cited, so you wouldn’t change that, for instance. But a sentence full of “thou sayest” or “happeneth”, you’d want to modernize.)

Hence, the New King James Version.

[RTFirefly]

*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly *
The difference between “The Book” and “The Bible”

Since you’ve drawn this comparison twice now, SPOOFE, I feel compelled to point out that no mortal alive today has a copy of “The Bible.”