Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 05/01/2005 17:00, Jim West wrote:

> At 11:53 AM 1/5/2005, you wrote:
>
> > Jim, just for clarification, are you in fact asserting the following?
> >
> > 1) The King James Version was based entirely on previous English 
> > versions without reference to the original language texts.
>
>
> No- it was based on earlier english texts and also compared with the 
> hebrew and greek texts.  That is, imagine the translators of the KJV 
> sitting at their desks (or standing- folk back in that time generally 
> stood while they wrote).  On one side of the desk they have Tyndale 
> and Wycliffe and on the other Hebrew and Greek texts.  They took 
> Tyndale and Wycliffe and copied them out while glancing at the 
> originals to make sure that Wycliffe and Tyndale were not too far off 
> the mark.  Where they felt it necessary to update, they did.
Fair enough. This is the kind of process which I thought was happening. 
It is not quite paraphrase because the originals are consulted. But it 
is not an independent translation either. And this is how most English 
versions have been done, except for Wycliffe's very first one. 
Ironically one of the few which was not done in this way was "The 
Message", which is described on its back cover as a "paraphrasing 
translation".

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.8 - Release Date: 03/01/2005