Talk:Authorized Version: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Peter Jackson |
imported>Martin Wyatt No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Origins == | == Origins == | ||
May I question the statement about the Bishops' Bible? My information is that the AV was heavily dependent for scholarship and wording on the Geneva Bible, which, unlike its predecessors, made use of both continental and Jewish scholarship. The Geneva Bible in itself was unacceptable because of its marginal glosses, which had an extremely "protestant" turn to them. This made it repugnant to James and his establishment. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 13:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC) | May I question the statement about the Bishops' Bible? My information is that the AV was heavily dependent for scholarship and wording on the Geneva Bible, which, unlike its predecessors, made use of both continental and Jewish scholarship. The Geneva Bible in itself was unacceptable because of its marginal glosses, which had an extremely "protestant" turn to them. This made it repugnant to James and his establishment. --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 13:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
| Line 6: | Line 5: | ||
:While you're here you might want to add a note about Quaker use of 2nd person singular pronouns. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 15:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC) | :While you're here you might want to add a note about Quaker use of 2nd person singular pronouns. [[User:Peter Jackson|Peter Jackson]] 15:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC) | ||
::I am probably being dense, but am not sure where it would fit in. Also, I don't know whether I could write anything sensible without saying something about the use of the plural "you" as an honorific, and I do not know how or when that developed. (The Quaker thou and thee addressed to everyone was a statement of egalitarianism.) --[[User:Martin Wyatt|Martin Wyatt]] 21:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:29, 25 September 2014
Origins
May I question the statement about the Bishops' Bible? My information is that the AV was heavily dependent for scholarship and wording on the Geneva Bible, which, unlike its predecessors, made use of both continental and Jewish scholarship. The Geneva Bible in itself was unacceptable because of its marginal glosses, which had an extremely "protestant" turn to them. This made it repugnant to James and his establishment. --Martin Wyatt 13:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- I've changed it to "main basis" for now. Maybe more detail would be desirable. My understanding is that the translators were very eclectic, making use of all available Bibles in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English and no doubt other languages, including even the Catholic Douai. But the Bishops' Bible was the main basis, being treated as the default. Peter Jackson 15:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- While you're here you might want to add a note about Quaker use of 2nd person singular pronouns. Peter Jackson 15:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- I am probably being dense, but am not sure where it would fit in. Also, I don't know whether I could write anything sensible without saying something about the use of the plural "you" as an honorific, and I do not know how or when that developed. (The Quaker thou and thee addressed to everyone was a statement of egalitarianism.) --Martin Wyatt 21:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)