The Press.
London, England, 1858-09-04 00:00:00

well be taken for granted. As to " the constant
" solemnity and seriousness which, by some name-
" less skill, is made to rest upon all," we think
that no nameless skill, but only a very moderate
share of good taste was requ►site to insure this,
if it has been attained ; that, however, much of
the solemnity with which the words of the Au-
thorized Version sound in our ears is to be attri-
buted to the association of them in our minds
with sacred seasons and rites, and much to the
archaism of its language, which in' some places
has made it seem more solemn than was neces-
sary—e. g., the commencement of St. Luke's
Gospel, which in the original has a familiar, con-
versational sound, reads in the Authorized Ver-
sion like an Act of Parliament.
Of course, in a volume like this there was not
much room for originality. The chapter, how-
ever, in which Dr. Trench shows that many of
the phrases in our version which had been
charged with inaccuracy or impropriety are in
reality neither inaccurate nor improper, but
simply obsolete, contains several observations
which to us at least are new. The most notable
of these is upon that passage, " Take no thought
for your life what ye shall_ eat," &c. Dr. Trench,
by a reference to Julius Cesar, which might as
well have occurred to people before, shows that
the offensive phrase "Take no thought" meant
in the time of James 1., "Do not disturb your-
selves needlessly about." The passage is in act ii.
scene 1—

Alas, good Cassius, do not think of him ;
If he love Cesar. all that he can do
Is to himself: sake thought and die for Cesar—

where "take thought" clearly means "take it to
heart." NVe must find room for another obser-
vation, which refers to the Dean's old friend
"its." Ile says—" I have observed in English,
"Past and Present,' that 'its' nowhere occurs in
"our Authorised Version. Lev. xxv. 6. (` of its
" own accord') has been since urged as invalidating
"my assertion, but does not so really ; for re-
ference to the first, or indeed to any of the early
" editions, will show that in them the passage
" stood of it own accord.' Nor is 'it' here a mis-
''

print for its' ; for we have exactly the same 'by
it own accord' in the Geneva Version, Acts
" xii. 10; and in other English books of the be-
" ginning of the seventeenth century, which never
" employ its.' " Dr. Trench should have ex-
plained to us how this phrase " of its own accord"
came to be used.

The Dean's English style is remarkable in one
who studies our language so diligently. Perhaps,
however, too much study may here produce the
same effect as too little. Certain it is that no
style written now-a-days by a writer of mark is
less idiomatic, less English than that of this dis-
tinguished English philologer. We should judge
that he has never mastered the art of forgetting
himself in writing ; natural writing seems to him
slovenly : it is always ringing in his ears, What
is the use of my studying language more deeply
than others if I am to write like other people
after all ? Hence in every sentence curious and
uncommon constructions, which if any critic
were to find fault with, no doubt the Dean
would promptly crush him by, a reference to
Bishop Andrewe s Sermons or Holland's Transla-
tion of Pliny. Besides this, every sentence is
lengthened and weakened by a multitude of
unnecessary particles, whereas it seems to us that
what the Dean calls "a true knower of Eng-
lish " avoids particles as much as a true knower
of Latin. "Even as" is constantly occurring,
which we are sure is quite archaic, and could
never come naturally to the lips of any one at
the present day. "Indeed" appears continually,
without any sufficient reason ; and words of this
kind are insufferable if they are not necessary.
The result of this peculiarity, taken together
with the clerical colour of the style, is to make
the book read like a clumsy translation of
Chrysostom. Again, we have poetical phrases
such as " the claim of God's Word to be read
with devoutest reverence and honour." What-
ever Holland or Bishop Andrewes may say to
the contrary, we are persuaded that in prose there
ought to be an article before the superlative.
Also we have Latinisms, as " almost no one" for
" hardly any one," and " without all folds " for
" without any folds." We might criticize the
Dean's English at much greater length if we had
room. In another writer such shortcomings
might be passed over; but m"a true knower of
our language" they ought to meet with Loom