The Evolution of Language: Sacrificing Meaning

Language has been evolving for thousands of years, and that is precisely the problem modern biblical scholars face when analyzing various sources of ancient, scriptural text. During the difficult task of translating, the translator must match up each foreign word with its native counterpart, ensuring that the exact literal meaning of the concept is not distorted in the process. A quick glance across a variety of modern English Bibles (the Authorized King James Version, William Tyndale's Pentateuch, the Geneva Bible, and the Douay-Rheims Bible) indicates that this is not a simple task. As evidenced by varying word choice within these Bibles, modern English correlates were often simply unavailable for ancient words and concepts. The translators composing these Bibles were tasked with the the duty of conveying the meaning behind the original word in the face of a changing linguistic landscape. Sometimes, they relied upon words that were popular in (and perhaps particular to) their native vernacular, to better familiarize the audience with archaic concepts. They also varied in word choice when attempting to convey fantastical or supernatural occurrences within the text. In this capacity, word choice can be a powerful literary device, as it can help convey tropological, historical, literal, anagogical, and sometimes, contemporary meaning. While translators have an important duty to preserve the integrity of the ancient word, they also possess the power to distort it by interjecting words colored with their own personal biases.

A close look at Genesis chapters 6 and 7 in each of the aforementioned English Bibles garners a handful of passages that include word variation. The first most remarkable instance of variation occurs in verse 4, with the description of “giants,” the progeny of “the sons of God” and “the daughters of men.” While the Authorized Version and the Geneva Bible both maintain the use of the word “giants,” Tyndale changes the word to “tyrants,” and in the Douay-Rheims Bible, the creatures are referred to as “devils.” The Authorized Version and the Geneva Bible's literal use of the word “giants” leaves room for interpretation amongst readers. A “giant” could either be “a legendary humanlike being of great stature and strength,” “a living being of great size,” “a person of extraordinary powers,” or “something (or someone) unusually large or powerful.”1 Tyndale, with the inclusion of the word “tyrant,” indicates a historical, political, or even tropological meaning behind the corruption that came unto the earth. Such a choice is reflective of Tyndale's own political ideology; he was an advocate for the common people and fought against their oppression by a “tyrannical” church. The Douay-Rheims Bible, on the other hand, refers to the “giants” as “devils,” a more anagogical interpretation than the other three texts offer. In the Annotations of the Douay-Rheims version, these “devils” are identified as a distinct species from man, and were “the most insolent, lascivious, covetous, cruel, and in all kind of vices impious” (23). The translators of this Bible decided to offer their readers a more spiritual interpretation that might better convey the wickedness of the creatures that corrupted the earth and brought about an apocalyptic flood. Since “giants” are fantastical creatures with which human beings are unfamiliar, translators have struggled with offering their audiences words that make the supernatural concept easier to comprehend. Sometimes, new meaning accompanies the new word choice.

The next instance of word variation takes place between verses 5 and 13, which detail the corruption of mankind on the earth. Where the Authorized Version refers to the “wickedness” of men and “violence” throughout the earth, Tyndale uses the words “wickedness” and “mischief.” Instead of “violence” or “mischief,” the Geneva Bible says that the earth was filled with “cruelty.” The Douay-Rheims edition deviates the furthest from the Authorized Version. In it, men are full of “malice” and the earth is full of “iniquity.” Despite their differences, all versions claim that the “hearts” of men were filled with “evil.” This is one instance in which it would be very beneficial to have access to the most antiquated version of the scripture as possible. The word variations here seem to serve contemporary purposes only. The translators were more than likely experimenting with the rapidly changing vernacular, attempting to see if one particular word would convey the appropriate meaning better than another. The words translators selected were likely more popular (or simply more colorful) and their definitions more precise than the general, bland terms of “wickedness” and “violence.” A closer look at the Hebrew word used in the original scripture would yield any other significance the variation of word choice might indicate.

Finally, another significant incidence of word play exists in verse 9, in the explanation for why Noah and his family were spared from the flood. Both the Authorized Version and the Douay-Rheims Bible say Noah was “perfect in his generations.” Tyndale refers to Noah as “righteous,” while the Geneva Bible say he is “upright.” The use of the word “perfect” in the Authorized and Douay-Rheims versions indicates that Noah was “entirely without fault or defect”2, a flawless specimen of man. The word “upright” was used as early as the 12th century and indicated one who is “marked by strong moral rectitude.”3 The word “righteous,” however, did not appear in the English language until 1530, the same year that Tyndale's translation emerged.4 The avoidance of the word “perfect” in reference to Noah could either be a device to make readers feel adequate and worthy of God's praise despite their moral shortcomings, or a foreshadowing of the imperfection that Noah would display after the flood. The words “righteous” and “upright” both indicate active participation on behalf of the individual, whereas the word “perfect” could suggest that the individual was created without flaws and thereby existed flawlessly by the will of God. The distinctions between the words “perfect,” “righteous” and “upright” may be minor, but they highlight, once again, the translator's difficult task of choosing the appropriate word for both historical and spiritual accuracy, in a context that preserves the text's authenticity while imparting a contemporary correlate for readers to comprehend.

The complexity of translating ancient texts is outlined in the Introduction of the Authorized Version. It points out that even many of the Hebrew texts included in the Old Testament were written as “hostile commentary” to earlier sacred texts from places like Canaan, Mesopotamia and Egypt (xxi). In other words, not only was the Bible written about people from another time, another culture and another language, it was created as a response to a time, culture, and language even further removed. It is no surprise that modern English translators – and to an even greater extent, the modern English audience – have difficulty reading and understanding the ancient, foreign concepts presented in the text. The Introduction explains that “it is not an aberration but actually a recurring characteristic of the Bible that it is written in a language at some remove from that actually spoken by its readers” (xxiii). By the time the New Testament was written, Hebrew itself was an archaic language. Today, most English translators work with the Latin Vulgate; Latin, too, is now a classical language. After the messy attempt by many translators to employ a contemporary vernacular in their editions, the language of the Authorized Version became “deliberately archaic and Latinized” (xxviii). Because of its adherence to an earlier, more authentic version of the ancient scriptures, the Authorized Version becomes perhaps the most reliable biblical source available in the English language.

1. "giants." Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2010. Merriam-Webster Online. 11 May 2010. Web.
2. "perfect." Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2010. Merriam-Webster Online. 11 May 2010. Web.
3. "upright." Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2010. Merriam-Webster Online. 11 May 2010. Web.
4. “righteous.” Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2010. Merriam-Webster Online. 11 May 2010. Web.

Works Cited

Genesis. The Bible: Authorized King James Version. NY: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.

Genesis. The Douay-Rheims Bible. Ed. Laurence Kellam. The English College of Douay, 1609. Print.

Genesis. The Geneva Bible. Geneva, 1560. Print.

Genesis. Tyndale's Old Testament. Ed. David Daniell. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1530. Print.

Introduction. The Bible: Authorized King James Version. NY: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.