« 上一页继续 »
from the books in question; I mean all sermons, devotional writings, and the so-called religious newspapers and periodicals. Their language is to so large an extent made up of unconscious quotation from our Authorized Version that, while they keep alive much that is valuable, they create the impression that the language has undergone far less change than has in reality befallen it. Setting aside therefore all literature of this kind, I have endeavoured, in the case of each word, or phrase, or construction, to ascertain whether it would find a place naturally in the usual prose writing of the day: I say "naturally,' because I wish to exclude all conscious and intentional employment of archaisms. It is necessary, moreover, to take prose as the standard, because in all languages poetry has dominion over the words of many generations. By this subjective process I may have excluded some expressions which others would have inserted, and I may have inserted some which they would have excluded. I will only ask any reader; before pronouncing a judgement upon this point, to consider carefully the context of the passages which are in each case selected for illustration. There are of course instances in which there will be differences of opinion, but I hope I shall have succeeded in making these as few as possible.
In considering the language of our English Bible, we must bear in mind that it has become what it is by a growth of eighty-six years, from the publication of Tyndale's New Testament in 1525 to that of the Authorized Version in 1611. Further, it must be remembered that our translators founded their work upon the previous versions, retaining whatever in them could be retained, and amending what was faulty. The result was therefore of necessity a kind of mosaic, and the English of the Authorized Version represents, not the language of 1611 in its integrity, but the language which prevailed from time to time during the previous century. It is in the writings of this period, therefore, that illustrations are to be sought, and from them the examples given in the present volume are chiefly derived. All these examples, except where the contrary is expressly stated, have been gathered in the course of independent reading, and in the few instances where quotations have been borrowed they have been carefully verified.
At the end I have added, for convenience of reference, an index of the editions of books most frequently quoted. In the case of works not included in this index, as they are less frequently referred to, the date of the edition is given with the quotation. I may take this opportunity of mentioning a curious bibliographical fact with regard to Udal's translation of Erasmus's Paraphrase, which I have not seen elsewhere mentioned. Of the first volume of this work, printed in 1548, three editions at least were issued, all bearing the same date. Before describing the differences between them it will be as well to state that the volume contains the Paraphrase of Erasmus on the four Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, that each book is preceded by the translator's dedication, and by Erasmus's preface, and that, in all the editions of 1548, each book has the folios separately numbered and a separate set of signatures. The three copies bearing the date 1548, which I have examined, are roughly distinguished as follows:
In (1) the folios are not numbered in the translator's dedication or in Erasmus's preface, but in the paraphrase alone.
In (2) the system of numbering the folios is so irregular that it can best be distinguished as agreeing neither with (1) nor (3).
In (3) the numbering of the folios includes both the translator's dedication and Erasmus's preface.
In the edition of 1551 the folios are numbered continuously throughout the volume.
As I only recently discovered these variations, I used for purposes of quotation copies of the editions marked (1) and (3) indiscriminately. All the quotations in the letters A-C are from the latter. In the rest of the volume the quotations are all from (1).
It has fallen to my lot to finish this work alone. A portion of it was published some years ago in a periodical for Sunday Schools called The Monthly Paper,' under the title of Notes on Scriptural and Liturgical Words, by the Rev. J. Eastwood, M.A.,' but this did not extend beyond the letter H.
Mr Eastwood is known as the author of The History of the Parish of Ecclesfield, Yorkshire,' and was deservedly esteemed by the late Mr Herbert Coleridge as one of the most indefatigable contributors to the English Dictionary projected by the Philological Society.
He had completed the work on the same plan, and his manuscript was then put into my hands for revision. With his consent I modified the treatment of the words, in which he aimed more especially at the instruction of Sunday School children, and endeavoured, in most instances by recasting each article, to render the work a contribution to English lexicography. Besides this, I added a large quantity of examples from my own reading, arranging them in chronological order, and more than trebled the number of words in Mr Eastwood's original list. For such etymological notes as occur in the course of the volume I am alone responsible. I would willingly have avoided speaking so much as I have been compelled to do in the first person. Had my colleague lived to see the completion of the book in which he took so much interest, it would have had the advantage of his careful revision, which now has been given only to the first few sheets. Wanting his friendly counsel, it has been my endeavour to carry out his wishes to the full, and with this end in view I have bestowed much time and labour, in the midst of many interruptions, upon the completion of what would have been the better for his superintendence.
To other labourers in the same field I have to express my obligations for the assistance I have derived from their works. I would especially mention the following:
A Short Explanation of Obsolete Words in our Version of the Bible, &c. By the Rev. H. Cotton, D.C.L. Oxf. 1832.
Scripture and the Authorized Version of Scripture, &c. By Samuel Hinds, D.D. Lond. 1845.
A Glossary to the Obsolete and Unusual Words and Phrases of the Holy Scriptures, in the Authorized English Version. By J. Jameson. Lond. 1850.
A Scripture and Prayer-Book Glossary; being an