study of the king james bible(钦印〈圣经〉研究)-第11章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
that there are not many more。 The King James version had； to be sure； the
benefit of all the earlier controversy。 The whole ground had been really
fought over in the centuries before； and most of the questions had been
discussed。 They frankly made use of all the earlier controversy。 They say
in their preface： 〃Truly； good Christian reader； we never thought from the
beginning that we should need to make a new translation； nor yet to make
a bad one a good one； but to make a good one better。 That hath been our
endeavor； that our work。〃 Also； they had the advantage of deliberation。
This was the first version that had been made which had such sanction that
they could take their time； and in which they had no reason to fear that the
results would endanger them。 They say in their preface that they had not
run over their work with that 〃posting haste〃 that had marked the
Septuagint； if the saying was true that they did it all in seventy…two days；
nor were they 〃barred and hindered from going over it again；〃 as Jerome
himself said he had been； since as soon as he wrote any part 〃it was
snatched away from him and published〃； nor were they 〃working in a new
field；〃 as Origen was when he wrote his first commentary on the Bible。
Both these thingstheir taking advantage of earlier controversies which
had cleared many differences； and their deliberationwere supplemented
41
… Page 42…
Study of the King James Bible
by a third which gave great accuracy to the version。 That was their
adoption of the principle of all early translators； perhaps worded best by
Purvey； who completed the Wiclif version： 〃The best translation is to
translate after the sentence； and not only after the words； so that the
sentence be as open in English as in Latin。〃 That makes for accuracy。 It is
quite impossible to put any language over； word for word； into another
without great inaccuracy。 But when the translators sought to take the
sentence of the Hebrew or the Greek and put it into an exactly equivalent
English sentence； they had larger play for their language and they had a
fairer field for accuracy。 These were the three great facts which made the
remarkable accuracy possible； and it may be interesting to note three
corresponding results which show the effort they made to be absolutely
accurate and fair in their translation。
The first of those results is visible in the italicized words which they
used。 In the King James version words in italics are a frank
acknowledgment that the Greek or the Hebrew cannot be put into English
literally。 These are English words which are put in because it seems
impossible to express the meaning originally intended without certain
additions which the reader must take into account in his understanding of
the version。 We need not think far to see how necessary that was。 The
arrangement of words in Greek； for example； is different from that in
English。 The Greek of the first verse of the Gospel of John reads that 〃God
was the Word；〃 but the English makes its sentences in a reversed form； and
it really means； 〃the Word was God。〃 So the Greek uses particles where
the English does not。 Often it would say 〃the God〃 where we would say
simply 〃God。〃 Those particles are ordinarily wisely omitted。 So the Greek
does not use verbs at some points where it is quite essential that the
English shall use them。 But it is only fair that in reading a version of the
Scripture we should know what words have been put in by translators in
their effort to make the version clear to us； and the italicized words of the
King James version are a frank effort to be accurate and yet fair。
The second result which shows their effort at accuracy is in the
marginal readings。 Most of these are optional readings； and are preceded
by the word 〃or；〃 which indicates that one may read what is in the text； or
42
… Page 43…
Study of the King James Bible
substitute for it what is in the margin with equal fairness to the original。
But sometimes； instead of that familiar 〃or；〃 occur letters which indicate
that the Hebrew or the Greek literally means something else than what is
given in the English text； and what it literally means is given in the margin。
The translators thereby say to the reader that if he can take that literal
meaning and put it into the text so that it is intelligible to him； here is his
chance。 As for them； they think that the whole context or meaning of the
sentence rather involves the use of the phrase which they put into the text。
But the marginal references are of great interest to most of us as showing
how these men were frank to say that there were some things they could
not settle。 They were rather blamed for it； chiefly by those who had
committed themselves to the Douai version； which has no marginal
readings； on the ground that the translation ought to be as authoritative as
the original。 The King James translators repudiate that theory and frankly
say that the reason they put these words in the margin was because they
were not sure what was the best reading。 In the margin of the epistle to the
Romans there are eighty… four such marginal readings； and the proportion
will hold throughout most of the version。 They were only trying to be
accurate and to give every one a chance to make up his own mind where
there was fair reason to question their results。
The third thing which shows their effort at accuracy is their explicit
avoidance of uniformity in translating the same word。 They tried to put the
meaning into English terms。 So； as they say； the one word might become
either 〃journeying〃 or 〃traveling〃； one word might be 〃thinking〃 or
〃supposing；〃 〃joy〃 or 〃gladness；〃 〃eternal〃 or 〃everlasting。〃 One of the
reasons they give for this is quaint enough to quote。 They said they did not
think it right to honor some words by giving them a place forever in the
Bible； while they virtually said to other equally good words： Get ye hence
and be banished forever。 They quote a 〃certaine great philosopher〃 who
said that those logs were happy which became images and were worshiped；
while； other logs as good as they were laid behind the fire to be burned。 So
they sought to use as many English words； familiar in speech and
commonly understood； as they might； lest they should impoverish the
language； and so lose out of use good words。 There is no doubt that in this
43
… Page 44…
Study of the King James Bible
effort both to save the language； and to represent accurately the meaning
of the original； they sometimes overdid that avoidance of uniformity。
There were times when it would have been well if the words had been
more consistently translated。 For example； in the epistle of James ii： 2； 3；
you have goodly 〃apparel；〃 vile 〃raiment；〃 and gay 〃clothing；〃 all
translating one Greek word。 Our revised versions have sought to correct
such inconsistencies。 But it was all done in the interest of an accuracy that
should yet not be a slavish uniformity。
This will be enough to illustrate what was meant in speaking of the
effort of the translators to achieve accuracy in their version。
III。 The third marked trait of the work as a version of the Scripture is
its striking blending of dignity and popularity in its language。 At any
period of a living language； there are three levels of speech。 There is an
upper level used by the clearest thinkers and most careful writers； always
correct according to the laws of the language； generally somewhat remote
from common lifethe habitual speech of the more intellectual。 There is
also the lower level used by the least intellectual； frequently incorrect
according to the laws of the language； rough； containing what we now call
〃slang；〃 the talk of a knot of men on the street corner waiting for a new
bulletin of a ball game； cheap in words； impoverished in synonyms； using
one word to express any number of ideas； as slang always does。 Those two
levels are really farther apart than we are apt to realize。 A book or an
article on the upper level will be uninteresting and unintelligible to the
people on the lower level。 And a book in the language of the lower level is
offensive and disgusting to those of the upper level。 That is not because
the ideas are so remote； but because the characteristic expressions are
almost unfamiliar to the people of the different levels。 The more
thoughtful people read the abler journals of the day； they read the
editorials or the more extended articles； they read also the great literature。
If they take up the sporting page of a newspaper to read the account of a
ball game written in the style of the lower level of thought； where words
are misused in disregard of the laws of the language； and where one word
is made to do duty for a great many ideas； they do it solely for amusement。
They could never think of finding their mental stimulus in that sort of
44
… Page 45…
Study of the King James Bible
thing。 On the other hand； there are people who find in that kind of reading
their real interest。 If they should take up a thoughtful editorial or a book of
essays； they would not know what the words mean in the connection in
which they are used。 They speak a good deal about the vividness of this
lower…level language； about its popularity； they speak with a sneer about
the stiffness and dignity of that upper level。
These are； however； only the two extremes； for there is
