[Milton-L] Biblical terminology

Christopher Baker Christopher.Baker at armstrong.edu
Wed Sep 12 19:38:13 EDT 2007


To stray just a bit from the topic of translations, but still pertinent to the Bible, is there a list of "approved" adjectival forms for the books of the Bible -- e.g., Levitican for Leviticus, Marcan for Mark, Johannine for John, Lucan for Luke, etc.?  Some books appear to have no such form (Genesis), and some are a mouthful (Deuteronomical).  I am interested specifically in the term for the  book of Jeremiah (Jeremihan?). 
Thanks,
Chris Baker 

>>> <milton-l-request at lists.richmond.edu> 09/12/07 6:07 PM >>>
Send Milton-L mailing list submissions to
	milton-l at lists.richmond.edu

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	milton-l-request at lists.richmond.edu

You can reach the person managing the list at
	milton-l-owner at lists.richmond.edu

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Milton-L digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Bible translations (Jeffrey Shoulson)
   2. Re: Bible translations (HANNIBAL HAMLIN)
   3. Re: Bible translations (James Rovira)
   4. RE: Bible translations (Christine  Gilmore)
   5. Re: Bible translations (Fr M J (Mike) Logsdon)
   6. Re: AV/KJV (Patrick Scott)
   7. Re: Bible translations (Nancy Charlton)
   8. Re: Re: AV/KJV (Horace Jeffery Hodges)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:14:44 -0400
From: Jeffrey Shoulson <jshoulson at miami.edu>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Bible translations
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID: <BEFE4754-EDA5-404A-87E0-FBFE24204D57 at miami.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

It's a misnomer since it was never actually, officially, authorized.   
I don't see anything wrong with KJV.

On Sep 12, 2007, at 1:53 PM, bill hilton wrote:

> On a side note - and I'm probably going to reveal some shocking  
> ignorance here - when I was a kid the Reverend King, my Religious  
> Studies teacher, only gave me a half mark for a test answer about  
> the King James Bible. The question was something like "what was the  
> name of the famous Bible published in 1611?"
>
> The answer I wrote was "The King James Version". When I asked why  
> he hadn't given me a full mark he responded - thunderously - that  
> it wasn't acceptable to use the name KJV in an academic context,  
> and that the text should properly be referred to as the Authorized  
> Version.
>
> Did he mislead me?
> _______________________________________________
> Milton-L mailing list
> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
> Manage your list membership and access list archives at http:// 
> lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:20:13 -0400
From: HANNIBAL HAMLIN <hamlin.22 at osu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Bible translations
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID: <346e619346f2d4.346f2d4346e619 at osu.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20070912/c577489a/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Milton-L mailing list
Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
Manage your list membership and access list archives at http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:56:27 -0400
From: "James Rovira" <jamesrovira at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Bible translations
To: "John Milton Discussion List" <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID:
	<411af8540709121156j37901cb5ha17cc62a181226ba at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

If you open the title page of a King James Bible you'll generally see
the words "Authorized Version" or "Authorized King James Version."
That's properly the title of the book, so the prof. was not misleading
you to insist upon it.  Of course, this is an issue separate from
regular practice both in mass culture and in published scholarship.
If professional journals accept "King James Version" then it's
acceptable.  Best practice is to check the style guides recommended by
the journals themselves.

I appreciate the responses to my question.  Translations of any OT
texts aren't sufficient to establish knowledge of Hebrew, as he could
have translated from the Vulgate, but of course a comparison of the
Hebrew and Latin to Milton's English would reveal his source.

My other question was methodological: how meaningful or necessary is
it to teach from the available English translations of Milton's day,
or the English translations he may have used or preferred, if he knew
the original languages?  For example, if I want to consider William
Blake's use of the Bhagavad-Gita I should read it in Wilkins's
translation from 1785, not in a contemporary translation.  Is this
practice meaningful in Milton's case?

I suppose the issue would be a matter of determining his regular
practice: did Milton usually read the Greek text, or did he usually
read, say, the Geneva Bible, only referring to the Greek and Hebrew
when he had a point to make?  Or do we know?

Jim R


------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 12:28:45 -0700
From: "Christine  Gilmore" <pamphilia at earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: [Milton-L] Bible translations
To: "'John Milton Discussion List'" <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID:
	<!&!AAAAAAAAAAAYAAAAAAAAAF/AvBzGBzxChLAN3PbVvfnCgAAAEAAAAMo+y1xDzp5IhY0kyE7KkUABAAAAAA==@earthlink.net>
	
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

I use the Revised Standard Version (basically, the New Oxford Annotated
Bible) in the classroom. It has terrific notes. I think it is a good
classroom bible, but I've always also used to my advantage any other
versions of the Bible the students brought to class (I don't require that
everyone buy the RSV version). The differences among the versions is usually
something new to students.

Christine Gilmore, MFA, MA, PhD
pamphilia at earthlink.net




  _____  

avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com> : Outbound message clean. 


Virus Database (VPS): 000774-3, 09/11/2007
Tested on: 9/12/2007 12:28:45 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2007 ALWIL Software.





------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 13:38:09 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
From: "Fr M J (Mike) Logsdon" <mjl at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Bible translations
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID:
	<33066286.1189629489408.JavaMail.root at elwamui-lapwing.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

>>>It's a misnomer since it was never actually, officially, authorized.   
I don't see anything wrong with KJV.<<<

"Authorised" by whom?  Surely, by the Church of England, who did the "authorising".


------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:24:06 -0400
From: "Patrick Scott" <SCOTTP at gwm.sc.edu>
Subject: [Milton-L] Re: AV/KJV
To: <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID: <s6e820bf.038 at SUNNY.CSD.SC.EDU>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

The title-page of the AV/KJV reads "Newly translated . . . . & . . .
diligently compared and revised by his Majesties speciall Comandement.
Appointed to be read in Churches" (I just checked editions from 1611 and
1764).

The convention in Britain is to refer to the Authorized Version (or
AV); in my experience, the usual reference in the U.S. has been to the
King James Version (or KJV).  

The catalogue Printing and the Mind of Man asserts that despite the
1611 title-page "no record remains of its authorization by King,
Parliament, or Convocation."  Darlow and Moule, Historical Catalogue of
Printed Editions of  Holy Scriptue, I, 133-134, writes of "The editio
princeps of King James' Bible, commonly known as the 'Authorised'
Version" (p. 133) that "No evidence exists that King James' version
received any definite ecclesiastical or legislative sanction" (p. 134).



Patrick Scott
Director of Special Collections, 
Thomas Cooper Library,
& Professor of English,
University of South Carolina,
Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
Tel: 803-777-1275
Fax: 803-777-4661, attn Dr Scott
E-mail: scottp at gwm.sc.edu
 


------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:26:12 -0700
From: Nancy Charlton <pluscachange at comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Bible translations
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID: <200709122201.l8CM1EMt012970 at rayon.richmond.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Of possible interest in this thread might be this photographic 
reproduction of the 1611 KJ or Authorised if you prefer. I printed 
out the sample page and found it to be low-res scanning, but viewed 
at a distance it's a knockout. It gives a good idea of what would 
have been a gorgeous book in its day, and the old fpelling could give 
students a feeling for historicity.

http://www.lifelineprinting.com/1611.htm

Nancy Charlton 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20070912/c373b23e/attachment-0001.html

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:07:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: Horace Jeffery Hodges <jefferyhodges at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Re: AV/KJV
To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
Message-ID: <386984.42839.qm at web54601.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Why wouldn't the title page be sufficient as evidence? Could such a work have been printed without authorization? And would "ecclesiastical or legislative sanction" have been necessary if the king were the head of the English Church?
   
  I'm asking in ignorance.
   
  Jeffery Hodges

Patrick Scott <SCOTTP at gwm.sc.edu> wrote:
  The title-page of the AV/KJV reads "Newly translated . . . . & . . .
diligently compared and revised by his Majesties speciall Comandement.
Appointed to be read in Churches" (I just checked editions from 1611 and
1764).

The convention in Britain is to refer to the Authorized Version (or
AV); in my experience, the usual reference in the U.S. has been to the
King James Version (or KJV). 

The catalogue Printing and the Mind of Man asserts that despite the
1611 title-page "no record remains of its authorization by King,
Parliament, or Convocation." Darlow and Moule, Historical Catalogue of
Printed Editions of Holy Scriptue, I, 133-134, writes of "The editio
princeps of King James' Bible, commonly known as the 'Authorised'
Version" (p. 133) that "No evidence exists that King James' version
received any definite ecclesiastical or legislative sanction" (p. 134).



Patrick Scott
Director of Special Collections, 
Thomas Cooper Library,
& Professor of English,
University of South Carolina,
Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
Tel: 803-777-1275
Fax: 803-777-4661, attn Dr Scott
E-mail: scottp at gwm.sc.edu

_______________________________________________
Milton-L mailing list
Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
Manage your list membership and access list archives at http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l



University Degrees:

Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
(Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in John's Gospel and Gnostic Texts")
M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University

Email Address:

jefferyhodges at yahoo.com

Blog:

http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/

Office Address:

Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
School of English, Kyung Hee University
1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu
Seoul, 130-701
South Korea

Home Address:

Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
Gunyoung Apt. 102-204
Sangbong-dong 1
Jungnang-gu
Seoul 131-771
South Korea
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20070912/5b2015dc/attachment.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Milton-L mailing list
Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
Manage your membership and access list archives at http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l

End of Milton-L Digest, Vol 10, Issue 12
****************************************

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.





More information about the Milton-L mailing list