TwinCrier's guide to the English Language

[TwinCrier]

Having trouble reading the King James Bible? Oh, thou jarring long-tongued scurvy-knave! Here is my guide to help you through the tough language of English.

Whatever you learned about masculine and feminine adjectives in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Spanish, French or what ever other language you know.... fergitaboutit. Wipe it from your memory. In English only things with gender are assigned gender. Forget about infinitives and grammar. All you need to know is this:

Thees and thous (and thy and thine) will trouble YOU no longer. These hard to understand archaic words are simple singular forms for the word YOU. You and your and yours are used when speaking to multiple people. However, be aware that referring to a group as "you people" is oft considered a racial slur in modern English.

Hither means here and thither means there.

If you com across a short word that doesn't seem to make sense, see how it fits into the sentence, Oft usually means often and yon means yonder.... see how easy that can be? We do this much in our modern slang.

Lastly, verbs that end with -th are present tense. Add an s instead and you'll be fine. It's not the Elizabethan English that is troublesome, but the modern English, full of slang and double meaning, that causes confusion.

Tune in next week, same bat time, same bat channel, when we learn that "I before E except after C" isn't so weird after all.

 

[Logos1560]

Having trouble reading the King James Bible?

It's not the Elizabethan English that is troublesome,

Are you implying that it is wrong to update archaic words? Would you say that present-day English readers never read the wrong meaning into any words used in the KJV?

 

[Morghaine]

Having trouble reading the King James Bible? Oh, thou jarring long-tongued scurvy-knave! Here is my guide to help you through the tough language of English.

Whatever you learned about masculine and feminine adjectives in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Spanish, French or what ever other language you know.... fergitaboutit. Wipe it from your memory. In English only things with gender are assigned gender. Forget about infinitives and grammar. All you need to know is this:

Thees and thous (and thy and thine) will trouble YOU no longer. These hard to understand archaic words are simple singular forms for the word YOU. You and your and yours are used when speaking to multiple people. However, be aware that referring to a group as "you people" is oft considered a racial slur in modern English.

Hither means here and thither means there.

If you com across a short word that doesn't seem to make sense, see how it fits into the sentence, Oft usually means often and yon means yonder.... see how easy that can be? We do this much in our modern slang.

Lastly, verbs that end with -th are present tense. Add an s instead and you'll be fine. It's not the Elizabethan English that is troublesome, but the modern English, full of slang and double meaning, that causes confusion.

Tune in next week, same bat time, same bat channel, when we learn that "I before E except after C" isn't so weird after all.

Thee thanks thou kindest lady for thou most knowledgeable lesson! (how'd I do?)

 

[Jim1927]

I am English, and I can tell you there is a lot more than thee's and thou's to throw one off in the KJV.

What about Hinder and let? They too have opposite meanings, just to mention two words.

How many people can say the loved Shakespeare when in school? How many say they fully understood what Shakespeare was saying in his writings.

Even to-day, we have different meanings for simple words in English. When I first came to the USA, the hardest time I had was with the usage of certain words. If I bed you for the night, what might you think? What if I knock you up in t' morning? And never should I admonish you to keep your pecker up! Then there is walking through the subway or sitting on a chesterfield rather than puffing it.

English is not always straightforward, and especially 1611 English. Hence the need for upgrades.

When I publicly read from my faithful 1945 KJV, I always change the words as I read it.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Pepperoni]

Having trouble reading the King James Bible? Oh, thou jarring long-tongued scurvy-knave! Here is my guide to help you through the tough language of English.

Whatever you learned about masculine and feminine adjectives in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Spanish, French or what ever other language you know.... fergitaboutit. Wipe it from your memory. In English only things with gender are assigned gender. Forget about infinitives and grammar. All you need to know is this:

Thees and thous (and thy and thine) will trouble YOU no longer. These hard to understand archaic words are simple singular forms for the word YOU. You and your and yours are used when speaking to multiple people. However, be aware that referring to a group as "you people" is oft considered a racial slur in modern English.

Hither means here and thither means there.

If you com across a short word that doesn't seem to make sense, see how it fits into the sentence, Oft usually means often and yon means yonder.... see how easy that can be? We do this much in our modern slang.

Lastly, verbs that end with -th are present tense. Add an s instead and you'll be fine. It's not the Elizabethan English that is troublesome, but the modern English, full of slang and double meaning, that causes confusion.

Tune in next week, same bat time, same bat channel, when we learn that "I before E except after C" isn't so weird after all.

Well, I like it . . .

 

[TwinCrier]

Are you implying that it is wrong to update archaic words? Would you say that present-day English readers never read the wrong meaning into any words used in the KJV?

If YOU update the "archaic" words, to help YOU understand it better as I do while reading, no, no problem. If you let some ungodly scholar alter your bible out of laziness, then yes, I have a problem.

I am English, and I can tell you there is a lot more than thee's and thou's to throw one off in the KJV.

What about Hinder and let? They too have opposite meanings, just to mention two words.

How many people can say the loved Shakespeare when in school? How many say they fully understood what Shakespeare was saying in his writings.

Even to-day, we have different meanings for simple words in English. When I first came to the USA, the hardest time I had was with the usage of certain words. If I bed you for the night, what might you think? What if I knock you up in t' morning? And never should I admonish you to keep your pecker up! Then there is walking through the subway or sitting on a chesterfield rather than puffing it.

English is not always straightforward, and especially 1611 English. Hence the need for upgrades.

When I publicly read from my faithful 1945 KJV, I always change the words as I read it.

Cheers,

Jim

I have a public high school education and I've always known what hinder and let mean. Are you suggesting those words aren't used today? If Shakespeare is SO difficult, why isn't there a new revised version of Romeo and Juliette? The word of God doesn't need upgrades, KJV 1.0 works just fine. God doesn't need our help getting His point across.

 

[RichardT]

I thanketh thou kindest lady for thy most knowledgeable lesson! (how'd I do?)

fixed it.

 

[Eryk]

I use Archaic Words and the Authorized Version by Vance and King James Bible Word Book edited by Manser. And you can always just use Strong's to get a definition.

It really isn't hard to get the hang of the KJV. In terms of literary merit, this is the most beautiful book in English.

 

[Jim1927]

Indeed the most beautiful piece of literature.

Isaiah 36: 12..."Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] with you?" (KJV)

NIV "Was it only to your master and you that my master sent me to say these things, and not to the men sitting on the wall - who, like you, will have to eat their own filth and drink their own urine."

Please tell me what "let" and "hinder" mean.

Thank you,

Jim

 

[RichardT]

Indeed the most beautiful piece of literature.

Isaiah 36: 12..."Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] with you?" (KJV)

NIV "Was it only to your master and you that my master sent me to say these things, and not to the men sitting on the wall - who, like you, will have to eat their own filth and drink their own urine."

Please tell me what "let" and "hinder" mean.

Thank you,

Jim

I like the KJV translation of the verse better.

 

[Logos1560]

If YOU update the "archaic" words, to help YOU understand it better as I do while reading, no, no problem. If you let some ungodly scholar alter your bible out of laziness, then yes, I have a problem.

The word of God doesn't need upgrades, KJV 1.0 works just fine.

Are you suggesting that it was wrong for the KJV translators to update or upgrade the earlier English Bibles of which it was a revision (Tyndale's to Bishops')?
Should they have left in all the words below?

abject (Dan. 4:17) Geneva
abrech (Gen. 41:43) Tyndale's
achat (Exod. 39:12) Tyndale's
advoutry (Mark 7:21) Tyndale's
affianced (Luke 1:27) Geneva
albs (Lev. 8:13) Tyndale's
arb (Lev. 11:22) Tyndale's
arede (Mark 14:65) Tyndale's
assoyl (Matt. 21:24) Tyndale's
breastlap (Exod. 25:7) Coverdale's
bruterer (Deut. 18:10) Tyndale's
buballs (1 Kings 4:23) Matthew's
buggerers (1 Tim. 1:10) Geneva
byss (Gen. 41:42) Tyndale's
calamite (Exod. 30:23) Tyndale's
cavillation (Luke 19:8) Bishops'
chevisance (Deut. 21:14) Tyndale's
commonalty (Lev. 4:13) Tyndale's
cratch (Luke 2:7) Geneva
debite (Luke 20:20) Tyndale's
deedslayers (2 Kings 14:6) Coverdale's
despicions (Acts 28:29) Tyndale's
diseasest (Mark 5:35) Tyndale's
door cheeks (Exod. 12:23) Geneva
egalness (2 Cor. 8:14) Tyndale's
endote (Exod. 22:16) Tyndale's
erewhile (John 9:27) Tyndale's
execrable (1 Cor. 12:3) Geneva
fardels (Acts 21:15) Geneva
flacket (1 Sam. 16:20) Matthew's
flaggy (1 Sam. 15:9) Matthew's
flawnes (1 Chron. 23:29) Matthew's
felicity (Gal. 4:15) Bishops'
fish panier (Job 41:7) Bishops'
forcer (1 Sam. 8:8) Matthew's
frayles (1 Sam. 25:18) Coverdale's
frumenty (Lev. 23:14) Tyndale's
gabish (Job 28:18) Geneva
gaoler (Acts 16:23) Geneva
grece (Acts 21:35) Tyndale's
hagab (Lev. 11:22) Tyndale's
handfasted (Deut. 22:23) Tyndale's
harborous (1 Tim. 3:2) Geneva
harbourless (Matt. 25:35) Tyndale's
hargol (Lev. 11:22) Tyndale's
haunted (John 3:22) Tyndale's
heavengazers (Isa. 47:13) Bishops'
hoared (Josh. 9:5) Matthew's
hucklebone (Gen. 32:25) Bishops'
Iim (Isa. 13:22) Geneva
jakes (2 Kings 10:27) Geneva
lamies (Lam. 4:3) Coverdale's
loured (Gen. 4:5) Tyndale's
manchet (1 Kings 4:22) Matthew's
mandragoras (Gen. 30:14) Tyndale's
maund (Exod. 29:3) Tyndale's
meinie (Gen. 22:3) Tyndale's
mizzling (Deut. 32:2) Tyndale's
moon prophets (Isa. 47:13) Bishops'
mossell (1 Cor. 9:9) Tyndale's
overscaped (Lev. 19:10) Tyndale's
overthwart (Deut. 32:5) Coverdale's
parbreak (Num. 11:20) Tyndale's
partlet (Exod. 28:32) Tyndale's
perquellies (2 Sam. 5:8) Coverdale's
pismire (Prov. 6:6) Geneva
plage (Deut. 17:8) Tyndale's
pleck (Lev. 13:4) Tyndale's
porphyry (Esther 1:6) Geneva
querne (Isa. 47:2) Bishops'
quier (1 Kings 6:5) Bishops'
raught (Ruth 2:14) Matthew's
rebecks (1 Sam. 18:6) Geneva
recule (2 Sam. 11:15) Geneva
redebush (Isa. 9:18) Coverdale's
rugagates (Jud. 12:4) Bishops'
sallets (Jer. 46:4) Bishops'
scrale (Exod. 8:3) Tyndale's
sethim (Deut. 10:3) Tyndale's
shawms (Ps. 98:6) Coverdale's
shope (Gen. 2:7) Tyndale's
simnel (Exod. 29:23) Tyndale's
slade (1 Sam. 25:20) Matthew's
slops (Isa. 3:20) Geneva
smaragdus (Exod. 28:17) Coverdale's
soleam (Lev. 11:22) Tyndale's
taxus (Exod. 25:4) Tyndale's
toot-hill (Gen. 31:49) Tyndale's
treacle (Jer. 8:22) Coverdale's
tunicle (Exod. 29:5) Coverdale's
unghostly (1 Tim. 4:7) Tyndale's
unhallow (Lev. 19:12) Coverdale's
unhele (Lev. 18:16) Tyndale's
wenest (Acts 8:20) Tyndale's
whalefish (Job 7:12) Bishops'
Whitsuntide (1 Cor. 16:8) Tyndale's

 

[aReformedPatriot]

I wonder, who told you the KJV was the only acceptable translation?

 

[Eryk]

Please tell me what "let" and "hinder" mean.

Thank you,

Jim

You are most welcome.

Let, from Old English letten, means obstruct. In modern English, anything that hinders a tennis game is called a "let". Let also means "permit" and it's used that way in the KJV as well. There are many other English words like this (e.g. "lie" means a falshood or to lay down).

Hinder (from Middle English bihinden) means behind, at the back, or at the rear.

And yes, the KJV is quite beautiful. Have you studied prosody? Can you find the dactyl in Isaiah 14:12? How art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer, Son of the morning!

 

[Logos1560]

The word of God doesn't need upgrades, KJV 1.0 works just fine

Do you use the original 1611 edition or do you use one of the upgraded later KJV editions?

There are 2,000 differences or changes that affect the sound of words between the 1611 edition of the KJV and the present Oxford edition of the KJV in the Scofield Reference Bible.

There are 4,000 differences or changes between the present Oxford KJV edition and the 2005 Cambridge edition in the NEW CAMBRIDGE PARAGRAPH BIBLE.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Anyone here can download for free and read the 1611 KJV and also the latest edition to see any difference for themselves by clicking here. The differences I think are over stated. Also from this same site you can download for free the Webster 1828 dictionary and read the meaning of KJV words.

 

[Logos1560]

The differences I think are over stated.

The number of differences are under stated by KJV-only authors. Ed DeVries wrote: “Buy a KJV at any bookstore and compare it to a KJV from 1611 and you will see that EVERY word is the same” (Divinely Inspired, Inerrantly Preserved, p. 66). William Bradley claimed that “the King James Bible printed in 1611 reads the same as the King James Bible printed in 1997” (Purified Seven Times, p. 115). Mickey Carter suggested that "the words were never changed" between the 1611 edition and the 1769 edition (THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ARE NOT THE SAME, pp. 173-174).

When some differences are acknowledged, the number is usually understated. D. A. Waite admitted that there are "136 substantial changes" between the 1611 KJV and current KJV plus "285 minor changes of form" (Defending the KJB, p. 244, see also pp. 3-4). In another book, Waite noted that he “found only 421 changes to the ear from the 1611 original compared with the 1917 Old Scofield King James Bible of today” (Fundamentalist Mis-Information on Bible Versions, p. 53, see also pp. 90-93). He indicated that he was sure that if another person did the same comparison that they “would get the same results” (p. 93).

I did the same comparison that Waite did and used the same criteria for listing differences that he used, and I found that Waite's count is inaccurate. I found over 2,000 of the same-type differences that were listed by Waite.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

Would you have a list of verses I could look at that use completely different words? Different spelling of words isn't a big deal to me. You may know I'm not KJV only but I like the truth about the whole translation debate to be known.

The number of differences are under stated by KJV-only authors. Ed DeVries wrote: “Buy a KJV at any bookstore and compare it to a KJV from 1611 and you will see that EVERY word is the same” (Divinely Inspired, Inerrantly Preserved, p. 66). William Bradley claimed that “the King James Bible printed in 1611 reads the same as the King James Bible printed in 1997” (Purified Seven Times, p. 115). Mickey Carter suggested that "the words were never changed" between the 1611 edition and the 1769 edition (THINGS THAT ARE DIFFERENT ARE NOT THE SAME, pp. 173-174).

When some differences are acknowledged, the number is usually understated. D. A. Waite admitted that there are "136 substantial changes" between the 1611 KJV and current KJV plus "285 minor changes of form" (Defending the KJB, p. 244, see also pp. 3-4). In another book, Waite noted that he “found only 421 changes to the ear from the 1611 original compared with the 1917 Old Scofield King James Bible of today” (Fundamentalist Mis-Information on Bible Versions, p. 53, see also pp. 90-93). He indicated that he was sure that if another person did the same comparison that they “would get the same results” (p. 93).

I did the same comparison that Waite did and used the same criteria for listing differences that he used, and I found that Waite's count is inaccurate. I found over 2,000 of the same-type differences that were listed by Waite.

 

[Eryk]

Changes in the King James Version

Original errors of the press corrected (from Matthew):

4:25 great great -- great
5:47 do you-- do ye
8:25 awoke, saying -- awoke him, saying
21:20 away?-- away!
26:34 might -- night

This is why I don't use a "1611" KJV (there are manuscript differences in the first edition so there really is no single "original" KJV). I'll defend the KJV, but it wasn't perfect then and it's not perfect now.

 

[Logos1560]

Would you have a list of verses I could look at that use completely different words?

It would take several pages to list all 2,000 of the changes.

I will briefly list some of the bigger differences.

six words added to 1611 Eccl. 8:17 ["yet he shall not find it"]

three words added to 1611 at several verses:
Lev. 26:40, Num. 7:31, Num. 7:55, Josh. 13:29, Jud. 1:31, 2 Kings 11:10, Ezek. 3:11, 2 Cor. 11:32, 2 Tim. 4:13

two words added to 1611 at several verses:
Exod. 15:25, Exod. 21:32, Exod. 35:11, Lev. 19:34, Lev. 26:23, Deut. 26:1, 1 Sam. 18:27, Ezek. 34:31, Ezek. 46:23, John 7:16, 1 John 5:12

There are over 60 verses where later editors add one word not in the 1611. There are 15 to 20 verses where later editors omit one word found in the 1611.

There are over 30 verses where changes in the number [singular/plural] of words was made [That is not including the ones listed by Waite].

 

[Eryk]

In the year 1611 there were two distinct folio editions of this Bible published. Each of them has errors and readings peculiar to itself. One edition has, for instance, "Judas" instead of "Jesus" in Matt. xxvi., 36; the other has a part of the verse repeated in Exod. xiv., 10, making what printers call "a doublet." In Gen. x., 16, one copy reads the "Emorite," and the other the "Amorite." One has in Ruth iii., 15, "He went into the city;" the other has, "She went into the city." This led to their being designated, the great He Bible, and the great She Bible. Source