Pronunciation of some English words
- Thus saith Michael Minow:
Christ is Risen!
Please post this also. Please think of the phrasing in the Holy
Bible. The words cannot be "thus sath the Lord . . " or "thus seth
the Lord". I might be wrong but back in the 60's when the movies
made about Biblical stories were done accurately. Charleton Heston
as Moses spoke "thus sayeth the Lord Thy God . .". I know he is not
an Orthodox Christian but he has enough respect of language and his
representation as a man of God to do his acting and speaking
properly. "In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was God".
Please let us stop butchering the words.
always your brother, Reader Michael from Holy Trinity Russian
Orthodox parish in Windsor Canada
OK, there it is. If you need to post anything to list and continue
to experience conflict between Hotmail and Yahoo, just send it my way
and I will post it. But I will be away until late Sunday, so I
cannot promise same-day service.
- Daniel is quite right. Until the introduction of the vernacular
after the Second Vatican Council, RCs were encouraged to "pray the
Mass" with the help of bilingual Missals. One can still find these
in second=hand bookstores from time to time. The language of the
English page facing the Latin was essentially that of the Douay-
Rheims Bible (minus the odd Latinisms of the pre-Challoner edn),
which is not significantly different from that of the King James
Bible or the Book of Common Prayer up to the 1936 edn (in the USA--
of course the date of the last edn to use the traditional liturgical
English will vary from country to country). Byzantine-rite
Catholics had similar bilingual books, and there were also some of
these emanting from Orthodox sources, with Slavonic in Latin letters
(Slovak orthography) on the verso and English on the recto, and
again the English was King James style. (Byz. Catholics also had
such books with Hungarian on one side and English on the other.)
And I am sure that there are other such things that I have not seen
but others on this list have. Few Roman Catholics knew much Latin,
although of course they learned a number of familiar texts by heart;
and American-born children of immigrants mostly lost their ancestral
language as quickly as American culture encouraged them to do so (as
soon as possible), so books of this sort were needed and were much
used. Now where I live it's a great effort to work up a Slovonic
service once a year.
--- In ustav@y..., Daniel Olson <daniel@k...> wrote:
> on 6/3/02 12:49 PM, Monk James wrote:
> > Roman Catholics worshipped in Latin until the 1960s, so
> > language isn't part of their experience.
> This is not really true. The "traditional" language of the Douay-
> version of the Bible was certainly very much a part of Roman
> experience. This version (New Testament published at Rheims in
1582 and the
> Old Testament in Douay in 1609-10) was contemporary to the
> Version (published in 1611). Of course, there are differences
> two translations, as is to be expected; but the use
> language is common to both versions. To be convinced of this one
> to compare the Douay-Rheims and the Authorised Version with any
> translation, for example "The New English Bible".
> In addition to the use of "traditional" language in the Douay-
> Roman Catholic prayerbooks, lay missals, hymnals, para-liturgical
> materials, etc., used "traditional" language as well. One well-
> example of this is the "Hail Mary" of the Rosary, which is still
> commonly used by Roman Catholics: "...blessed art thou among women
> blessed is the fruit of thy womb..."
> Daniel Olson