top of page
Search

A Close Linguistic Analysis of a Pre-Twentieth Century Text- Authorised Version of the Bible, 1611

Writer's picture: Rebecca Kate HodgeRebecca Kate Hodge
Jul 30, 20215 min read

The Authorised Version of the Bible (also known as the King James Version) was written towards the beginning of the 17th Century when the state of the English language would, today, be described as Early Modern English. This extract is taken from Chapter 25 of the book of Matthew- the first of the 4 gospels- and consists of 17 verses; 36 lines.

Syntax The clause ‘to another two’ (verse 15, line 4) has a different word order to that of which we use in Present Day English. It follows from the noun phrase ‘five talents’, therefore we know that the pronoun two in the clause is referring to the noun talents. Here the prepositional phrase ‘to another’ precedes the pronoun ‘two’, whereas in PDE we are more likely to have the prepositional phrase following the pronoun. Similarly, in the clause ‘from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath’ (verse 29, line 37) the prepositional phrase ‘from him’ precedes the noun phrase ‘even that which he’ and the verb phrases ‘hath’ and ‘shall be taken’. In PDE we are more likely to see the noun and verb phrase preceding the prepositional phrase; therefore this clause would most likely be written ‘Even that which he hath shall be taken away from him that hath not’.

Morphologically speaking, this text uses the archaic suffixes -th and -st in the verbs ‘cometh’ and ‘reckoneth’ (verse19, line 11) and ‘deliveredst’(verse 20, line 14), ‘knewest’ (verse 26, line 30) and ‘oughtest’ (verse 27, line 32). The verbs ‘cometh’, ‘reckoneth’ and ‘oughtest’ express the simple present tense, where today we would use the bare infinitive form of these verbs plus the suffix -s to create this tense, e.g. ‘comes’, ‘reckons’. However, the auxiliary verb ‘ought’ is followed by ‘to’ in the simple present tense as it requires another verb in its infinitive form to follow it. ‘Deliveredst’ and ‘knewest’ express the simple past tense of the verbs, where today the suffix -ed is added, or, for irregular verbs, the vowel sound is changed, e.g. drive (present) -drove (past). Interestingly, in Early Modern English it appears that the -ed suffix (past tense marker in PDE) was used alongside the -st suffix. Similarly for irregular verbs, the vowel sound change occurred as well as the added -st suffix.

Pronouns This text uses many archaic pronouns; thou (verse 21, line 16), thee (verse 23, line 22), thy (verse 25, line 27), thine (verse 25, line 28) and ye (verse 30, line 38). All of these pronouns are not commonly used in spoken or written Present Day English, although in some instances they have been preserved, for example in bible readings in the church. Thou is defined as ‘the subjective case of the second person singular pronoun’ (OED) and thee is also a second person singular pronoun defined as ‘the objective case of the personal pronoun thou, representing the Old English accusative and dative’ (OED). Both of these forms have been replaced in PDE with the one second person singular pronoun you, used for both accusative, dative and nominative cases.

Mine (verse 27, line 33) in the clause ‘I should have received mine own with usury’ is used differently to that of PDE’s use of the pronoun. Defined as ‘Modifying a following noun… archaic or poetic; otherwise superseded by my adj. (OED), this pronoun- originally inherited from Germanic- expresses both the ‘possessive adjective and pronoun of the first person singular… (determiner)’ (OED). Today, mine is mostly used as a pronoun that replaces a noun or noun phrase of which you are stating belongs to you, e.g. Do you have a water bottle like mine? Mine here is a pronoun replacing the noun phrase water bottle. Or, mine is used as an adjective expressing ownership of a noun or noun phrase in the complement position, e.g. That water bottle is mine. In PDE, mine is only used after the noun phrase, or in place of it, in a clause. The pronoun my has replaced mine as the only first person singular pronoun used as a determiner in post-modifying position.

Meaning The conjunction for opening the first sentence of the passage ‘For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country…’ (verse 14, line 2) is no longer used in this sense at the beginning of a sentence; it is also rarely used as a subordinating conjunction within a sentence in Present Day English. In this case, the use of for is described as ‘Introducing the ground or reason for something previously said’ (OED) and also ‘may be explained …as an ellipsis’ (OED) in its earliest uses in the conjunctive position. The first written record of this use of for dates back to early Middle English, c1150- ‘Hwu sceal þiss gewurðen, for ic necann naht of weres gemane.’ (OED) A later example of its use from 1615, the same century as the Authorised Bible, ‘A Churchman shee dare not venture vpon; for shee hath heard Widowes complaine of dilapidations’ (OED) demonstrates how the use of for in both of these Early Modern English instances could be replaced by the conjunction because and express an identical meaning. Present Day English tends to make use of other the conjunctions like since, as and because that propose an explanation for a preceding clause. For also expresses several other meanings- ‘In order to obtain’, ‘Conductive to’, ‘In place of, instead of’, ‘Senses relating to advocacy or support’ and ‘In requital of’ (OED)- of which are more popular uses of for in Present Day English.

Several in the noun phrase ‘his several ability’ (verse 15, line 5) expresses the meaning ‘Individually separate; different’ (OED) which has become a less popular use of the adjective that Present Day English commonly uses to describe ‘…a vague numeral: Of an indefinite (but not large) number exceeding two or three; more than two or three but not very many. ‘ (OED) The first written record of the initial sense of several was in 1445 with a variant spelling- ‘So that yf thou woldist nat enclyne to her severel preyers…’(OED). Present Day English has replaced several with synonymous adjectives like distinct, particular, individual and specific.

The plural noun talents (verse 15, line 4) expresses something quite different from what it does now in Present Day English. ‘The value of a talent weight (of gold, silver, etc): a money of account’ (OED) is the historical definition of this noun used throughout the text. Talent in this sense is a loanword from Greek originally meaning ‘balance, weight, sum of money (OED). This term that describes a specific value of money determined by its weight has dropped out of usage and today we are likely to use the nouns coins or notes when referring to the physical money itself, or specific present day currency, e.g. pounds. The use of talent in this sense had its first written record in c893- ‘ Eac him gesealden þæronufan iii. m talentana ælce geare’ (OED). A similar usage from the same decade as the authorised bible comes from Shakespeare’s Timon of Athens (1616)- ‘My occaions haue found time to vse ‘em toward a supply of mony: let the request by fifty Talents’ (OED) which further demonstrates this noun being used to express monetary value.

References

 
 
 

Opmerkingen

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

  • Twitter

@RebeccaWrites Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page