The English that we speak at work or the dinner table is often the same English we speak at church. It wasn’t always so. The KJV offers a language that is slightly outside of everyday experience, which expands our capacity to contemplate, see, and know God. Before the modern era, when translations became more abundant, Christian English-speakers were basically bilingual—everyday English and KJV English existed side-by-side.
What I am proposing is a rediscovery and reinvigoration of this sort of English bilingualism. Reading a Bible that’s a little bit difficult, and unusual, is good for you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I appreciate the point you are making. Regarding the English language, it is a diverse field with many differing dialects. The English spoken in the U.S., England, Ireland, Australia, the Bronx, Texas, all of these differ.
ReplyDeleteWhen modern translations assert that they are translating into 'contemporary' English, they really mean that they are translating into a contemporary dialect of English that is the norm for a sub-set of English speakers. These contemporary translations are not in the English spoken in India or South Africa, or, for that matter, Liverpool, or in Kenya. I don't object to this, but I think it is worth pointing out.
And here is one of the advantages of the KJB; every English speaker today has the same relationship to the English used in its pages. That is to say an American, an Indian, a Kenyan, the Irish, etc., are all in the same position vis a vis the KJB and its English usage. In this sense I would suggest that the KJB is more universal in its English than modern translation that are written in a particular dialect spoken by a sub-set of English speakers.
Thanks,
Jim