Comments on: Why is it that in some versions of the bible, certain words - seemingly at random - are capitalized?

Question: Why is it that in some versions of the bible, certain words - seemingly at random - are capitalized?

interrobang — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 20:56:08 -0800

Why is it that in some versions of the bible, certain words - seemingly at random - are capitalized? And I don't mean things like LORD and such; I'm talking about when it has words like "was" and "went" in all caps. I've never been able to find an explanation for this.

By: dhartung

dhartung — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:27:23 -0800

The first printing used Roman type instead of italics to indicate text that had been supplied by the translators, or thought needful for English grammar but which was not present in the Greek or Hebrew. -- Wikipedia: King James Version

By: interrobang

interrobang — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:31:03 -0800

Ah! Thank you!

By: amberglow

amberglow — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:46:15 -0800

That's really surprising, dhartung...they admit to making stuff up? Isn't the meaning changed depending on the word used?

By: dhartung

dhartung — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 22:16:49 -0800

There are always going to be differences between even languages with similar grammars, let alone between English and ancient Hebrew and Greek (or Aramaic, which is also found in source texts and is generally believed to be the language Jesus spoke). The ethical choice, of course, is to mark such passages prominently.

But then many of us are "debtors" while others are "trespassers". Bible translation has many subtleties and land-mines:

The RSV translators translated the Old Testament from a Jewish viewpoint. Other views, including those of the New Testament, were not considered. This translation style led Conservative sections of the Church to accuse the RSV of tampering with some passages that can be read as prophecies relating to Jesus. There were some people who were so enraged over the RSV that they took their anger to unhealthy extremes. Among this behavior were the actions of a pastor in the Southern USA who burned a copy of the RSV and sent the ashes to Luther Weigle, the chair of the translation panel. Even others began to create unfounded charges that members of the translation panel were communists. At Joseph McCarthy's request, these charges were printed in the US Air Force training manual. -- Wikipedia: Revised Standard Version

By: rhapsodie

rhapsodie — Sat, 31 Jan 2004 23:42:09 -0800

You also have to consider that the Hebrew and Greek languages have about 3 times as many words as the English language. Some tweaking is thusly required. And even after then, its always handy to have a Hebrew/Greek Bible dictionary to get a better idea about the verses.

By: rdr

rdr — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 00:23:40 -0800

You also have to consider that the Hebrew and Greek languages have about 3 times as many words as the English language

I'm surprised by this. I had always thought english had borrowed many words from many other languages and would therefore have a larger than normal number of words.

By: rhyax

rhyax — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 01:32:03 -0800

i would also like some evidence for that statement.

By: troutfishing

troutfishing — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 02:20:51 -0800

Metafilter - i would also like some evidence for that statement.

(polite skeptics amok)

By: languagehat

languagehat — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 15:40:16 -0800

You also have to consider that the Hebrew and Greek languages have about 3 times as many words as the English language

The reverse is true: the English vocabulary is far greater than that of any language in history, thanks to massive borrowing and innovation. Compare the OED to the largest you can find for Hebrew and Greek and you'll quickly see the difference.

The first printing used Roman type instead of italics to indicate text that had been supplied by the translators

I confess I haven't seen a first printing, but in subsequent printings the reverse is true: italics are used for text supplied by the translators. This is necessary because Hebrew and Greek omit words that are necessary for English grammar; in Hebrew, you can just say "This my son," but in English you have to supply a verb: "This is my son." Since the translators believed the original text was literally the Word of God, not wanting to (as it were) put words in God's mouth they carefully marked the ones they'd added.