Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus

Expand Messages
  • Wieland Willker
    Marginally on-topic Google scholar also came up with the following article: Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 52 (2001) 512f. Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus:
    Message 1 of 3 , Nov 19, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Marginally on-topic "Google scholar" also came up with the following
      article:

      Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 52 (2001) 512f.
      "Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus: The Intellectual Origins of a Henrician Bon
      Mot"
      by PETER MARSHALL

      http://journals.cambridge.org/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=0&5000
      01REQSUB=&REQSTR1=S0022046901005978
      (limited access!)

      The author writes:
      "Credit for introducing mumpsimus and sumpsimus to the language is given
      by the Oxford English dictionary to the humanist and diplomat Richard
      Pace, but in fact the origins of the phrase can be traced further back,
      to the lodestar of the early sixteenth-century humanist movement,
      Desiderius Erasmus. In a letter of August 1516 to an English
      correspondent, Henry Bullock, Erasmus railed against the opponents of
      his recent edition of the New Testament, specifically those who were
      arguing that no textual changes to Scripture were permissible unless it
      were on the authority of a general council. This seemed to Erasmus
      willfully block-headed; the corruption in some passages were too obvious
      to be overlooked, and by way of analogy he brought in a personal
      reminiscence. A printer in Paris, possessed of a mere smattering of
      learning, had confessed to him that twenty years earlier his press had
      produced service books and books of hours according to the use of Trier,
      which were subsequently found to have a great many discrepancies and
      errors. Of course, Erasmus noted, the printer corrected them all for
      subsequent editions, just as the leaders of the Church should now be
      willing to allow necessary corrections to the far more important text of
      holy writ itself. If they opposed this, they would resemble `the
      mass-priest who refused to change the word mumpsimus which he had used
      for twenty years, when someone told him that sumpsimus was what he ought
      to say'.( The context for the malapropism is the postcommunio prayer in
      the canon of the mass, where `sumpsimus' (the first-person plural
      perfect indicative of `sumere', to take up) appears in numerous ariant
      settings.) Erasmus does not claim directly that this priest had been
      using one of the defective Trevisan missals, though the implication is
      that some such corrupted text (a simile for the Vulgate) must have come
      into his hands. Whether such a priest ever really existed must remain
      questionable."

      There are things on earth that you just HAVE TO KNOW!

      Best wishes
      Wieland
      <><
      ------------------------------------------------
      Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
      mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
      Textcritical commentary:
      http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
    • Dave Washburn
      I m not familiar with the phrase, but I am a big fan of Erasmus. What does mumpsimus mean then? Or does it mean anything? I can t find it in any of my
      Message 2 of 3 , Nov 19, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        I'm not familiar with the phrase, but I am a big fan of Erasmus. What does
        "mumpsimus" mean then? Or does it mean anything? I can't find it in any of
        my Latin resources (admittedly very limited).

        On Friday 19 November 2004 06:36, Wieland Willker wrote:
        > Marginally on-topic "Google scholar" also came up with the following
        > article:
        >
        > Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 52 (2001) 512f.
        > "Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus: The Intellectual Origins of a Henrician Bon
        > Mot"
        > by PETER MARSHALL
        >
        > http://journals.cambridge.org/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=0&5000
        > 01REQSUB=&REQSTR1=S0022046901005978
        > (limited access!)
        >
        > The author writes:
        > "Credit for introducing mumpsimus and sumpsimus to the language is given
        > by the Oxford English dictionary to the humanist and diplomat Richard
        > Pace, but in fact the origins of the phrase can be traced further back,
        > to the lodestar of the early sixteenth-century humanist movement,
        > Desiderius Erasmus. In a letter of August 1516 to an English
        > correspondent, Henry Bullock, Erasmus railed against the opponents of
        > his recent edition of the New Testament, specifically those who were
        > arguing that no textual changes to Scripture were permissible unless it
        > were on the authority of a general council. This seemed to Erasmus
        > willfully block-headed; the corruption in some passages were too obvious
        > to be overlooked, and by way of analogy he brought in a personal
        > reminiscence. A printer in Paris, possessed of a mere smattering of
        > learning, had confessed to him that twenty years earlier his press had
        > produced service books and books of hours according to the use of Trier,
        > which were subsequently found to have a great many discrepancies and
        > errors. Of course, Erasmus noted, the printer corrected them all for
        > subsequent editions, just as the leaders of the Church should now be
        > willing to allow necessary corrections to the far more important text of
        > holy writ itself. If they opposed this, they would resemble `the
        > mass-priest who refused to change the word mumpsimus which he had used
        > for twenty years, when someone told him that sumpsimus was what he ought
        > to say'.( The context for the malapropism is the postcommunio prayer in
        > the canon of the mass, where `sumpsimus' (the first-person plural
        > perfect indicative of `sumere', to take up) appears in numerous ariant
        > settings.) Erasmus does not claim directly that this priest had been
        > using one of the defective Trevisan missals, though the implication is
        > that some such corrupted text (a simile for the Vulgate) must have come
        > into his hands. Whether such a priest ever really existed must remain
        > questionable."
        >
        > There are things on earth that you just HAVE TO KNOW!
        >
        > Best wishes
        >     Wieland
        >        <><
        > ------------------------------------------------
        > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
        > mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
        > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
        > Textcritical commentary:
        > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        >
        >
        >
        > ADVERTISEMENT
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        > To visit your group on the web, go to:
        > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/
        >  
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >  
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

        --
        Dave Washburn
        http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
        "No good. Hit on head." -Gronk
      • Dan & Rachel King
        Of course it means nothing, the point being that the priest knew no Latin (like many priests of th age no doubt) and sisn t know what he was saying anyway.
        Message 3 of 3 , Nov 19, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Of course it means nothing, the point being that the priest knew no Latin (like many priests of th age no doubt) and sisn't know what he was saying anyway. It's a good story because of the silly-sounding words you can create out of Latin gone-wrong, something which schoolboys continue to do gleefully...
           
          ...a great story, though.
           
          Dan King
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 2:13 PM
          Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus


          I'm not familiar with the phrase, but I am a big fan of Erasmus.  What does
          "mumpsimus" mean then?  Or does it mean anything?  I can't find it in any of
          my Latin resources (admittedly very limited).

          On Friday 19 November 2004 06:36, Wieland Willker wrote:
          >  Marginally on-topic "Google scholar" also came up with the following
          >  article:
          >
          >  Journal of Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 52 (2001) 512f.
          >  "Mumpsimus and Sumpsimus: The Intellectual Origins of a Henrician Bon
          >  Mot"
          >  by PETER MARSHALL
          >
          http://journals.cambridge.org/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=0&5000
          >  01REQSUB=&REQSTR1=S0022046901005978
          >  (limited access!)
          >
          >  The author writes:
          >  "Credit for introducing mumpsimus and sumpsimus to the language is given
          >  by the Oxford English dictionary to the humanist and diplomat Richard
          >  Pace, but in fact the origins of the phrase can be traced further back,
          >  to the lodestar of the early sixteenth-century humanist movement,
          >  Desiderius Erasmus. In a letter of August 1516 to an English
          >  correspondent, Henry Bullock, Erasmus railed against the opponents of
          >  his recent edition of the New Testament, specifically those who were
          >  arguing that no textual changes to Scripture were permissible unless it
          >  were on the authority of a general council. This seemed to Erasmus
          >  willfully block-headed; the corruption in some passages were too obvious
          >  to be overlooked, and by way of analogy he brought in a personal
          >  reminiscence. A printer in Paris, possessed of a mere smattering of
          >  learning, had confessed to him that twenty years earlier his press had
          >  produced service books and books of hours according to the use of Trier,
          >  which were subsequently found to have a great many discrepancies and
          >  errors. Of course, Erasmus noted, the printer corrected them all for
          >  subsequent editions, just as the leaders of the Church should now be
          >  willing to allow necessary corrections to the far more important text of
          >  holy writ itself. If they opposed this, they would resemble `the
          >  mass-priest who refused to change the word mumpsimus which he had used
          >  for twenty years, when someone told him that sumpsimus was what he ought
          >  to say'.( The context for the malapropism is the postcommunio prayer in
          >  the canon of the mass, where `sumpsimus' (the first-person plural
          >  perfect indicative of `sumere', to take up) appears in numerous ariant
          >  settings.) Erasmus does not claim directly that this priest had been
          >  using one of the defective Trevisan missals, though the implication is
          >  that some such corrupted text (a simile for the Vulgate) must have come
          >  into his hands. Whether such a priest ever really existed must remain
          >  questionable."
          >
          >  There are things on earth that you just HAVE TO KNOW!
          >
          >  Best wishes
          >      Wieland
          >         <><
          >  ------------------------------------------------
          >  Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          >  mailto:willker@...-bremen.de
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
          >  Textcritical commentary:
          http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          >
          >
          >
          > ADVERTISEMENT
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >  Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          > To visit your group on the web, go to:
          > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/textualcriticism/
          >  
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > textualcriticism-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >  
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

          --
          Dave Washburn
          http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
          "No good.  Hit on head."   -Gronk




        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.