. . . person singular pronoun indifference?

[37818]

. . . person singular pronoun indifference reading God's word?
Do you use such a modern Bible translation, without care?

 

[Ben1445]

. . . person singular pronoun indifference reading God's word?
Do you use such a modern Bible translation, without care?

No.
Would you care to give some examples of what you are talking about?

And specifically, what are the implications of doing so?

Which versions are most guilty?

 

[37818]

No.
Would you care to give some examples of what you are talking about?

And specifically, what are the implications of doing so?

Which versions are most guilty?

Really?
Most translations which do not use the thee, thy, thou and thine pronouns because they are no longer being used in everyday speech.

 

[37818]

KJV
1881 ERV
1890 Darby translation
1901 ASV

 

[Logos1560]

Most translations which do not use the thee, thy, thou and thine pronouns because they are no longer being used in everyday speech.

So what? Those archaic pronouns are not present standard Modern English. The word of God is not bound or limited to archaic English pronouns. The word of God can be translated into present Modern English.

Alan Macgregor asserted: “Hebrew makes a gender distinction for second and third person pronouns (singular and plural) as it does also with singular demonstrative pronouns. The Greek has feminine third person plural pronouns, and feminine reflexive and reciprocal pronouns. However, the English language is incapable of effectively translating these” (400 Years On, p. 254).

William Mounce noted: “In English all imperatives are second person; in Greek there are second and third person imperatives” (Greek for the Rest of Us, p. 194).

John Beekman and John Callow wrote: “In New Testament documents, the singular form is used with plural reference with all three persons” (Translating, p. 107). John Beekman and John Callow asserted: “The use of the second person singular for the plural is found throughout the New Testament” (p. 108).

 

[37818]

.

So what? Those archaic pronouns are not present standard Modern English. The word of God is not bound or limited to archaic English pronouns. The word of God can be translated into present Modern English.

Alan Macgregor asserted: “Hebrew makes a gender distinction for second and third person pronouns (singular and plural) as it does also with singular demonstrative pronouns. The Greek has feminine third person plural pronouns, and feminine reflexive and reciprocal pronouns. However, the English language is incapable of effectively translating these” (400 Years On, p. 254).

William Mounce noted: “In English all imperatives are second person; in Greek there are second and third person imperatives” (Greek for the Rest of Us, p. 194).

John Beekman and John Callow wrote: “In New Testament documents, the singular form is used with plural reference with all three persons” (Translating, p. 107). John Beekman and John Callow asserted: “The use of the second person singular for the plural is found throughout the New Testament” (p. 108).matt

In the OT Hebrew, Aramic and the NT Greek it still matters.
Matthew 5:18, For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

 

[Logos1560]

.

In the OT Hebrew, Aramic and the NT Greek it still matters.
Matthew 5:18, For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

A post-NT Bible translation does not preserve, transfer, and keep all aspects of the Old Testament in Hebrew and Aramaic and all aspects of the Greek of the New Testament. Post-NT Bible translations are a different category than untranslated preserved original-language texts of Scripture.


E. W. Bullinger observed: “There are figures used in the English language, which have nothing that answers to them in Hebrew or Greek; and there are Oriental figures which have no counterpart in English” (Figures of Speech, p. xv). Concerning one figure, Bullinger noted: “This figure is common to all languages, but the instances cannot readily be translated from one language into another” (p. 307). In one example of such figures, E. W. Bullinger asserted: “Acrostics, like many other figures, occur only in the Originals, and cannot be reproduced in a translation” (p. 188). Concerning Psalm 111, Bullinger noted: “The Psalm has twenty-two lines, which commence successively with the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet” (p. 182). Concerning Psalm 119, E. W. Bullinger observed that in this Acrostic Psalm “the eight verses of each group begin with the same letter” (p. 182). Bullinger maintained that the first chapter of Lamentations is an acrostic which “consists of 22 verses, each of which commences with a successive letter of the alphabet” (p. 185). In another example, E. W. Bullinger claimed: “This figure [alliteration] is seen, of course, only in the Hebrew and the Greek. It is difficult to reproduce it in a translation” (p. 171). In still another example, Bullinger observed: “This figure [repetition of inflections] belongs peculiarly to the Original languages and cannot always be transferred in translation” (p. 177).

Steve Combs asserted: “There is no perfect tense in English that matches the Greek perfect tense. There is no exact equivalent” (Practical Theology, p. 106). William D. Mounce maintained that “Greek does have a category of verbs called ‘deponent’ verbs” and that “a deponent verb is one that is passive in its form but active in its meaning” (Greek for the Rest of Us, p. 147). KJV-only author Gail RIplinger admitted: “The verb tenses of the Greek language do not have direct equivalents in English” (In Awe, p. 283).

William D. Mounce asserted: “Because we do not have a dative case in English, we cannot say something in the same way as it is said in Greek” (Greek for the Rest of Us, p. 229). William Mounce observed: “A Greek sentence does not require an expressed subject,” and he added: “It is also common for Greek to drop a verb’s direct object, and English translators must add them back in” (p. 149). Dave Brunn gave an example of where the direct object was left out in the Greek at Luke 2:49 so that “the part of the verse that is translated ‘house’ or ‘business’ is left blank in Greek” (One Bible, p. 168).

 

[37818]

One attempt:
www.ModernLiteralVersion.org It is very important to read the Non-Bible pages at least once so you understand the MLV much better and its style.