Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1886-07-07
ly department won the respect and esteer
of all classes.
ITALICS IN OUR ENGLISH BIBLES.

II 4A1hSo ~ AAS ~H
words supplied in translating, even the pro-
nominal subject which is implied in the
verb by its infection, or the copula-verb i'm
piled by the juxtaposition of words. The
~revisers, in their preface lay down a rule
which is, for substance, that they will itali-
cize only the words that are supplied for max
ing good sense in English, and not those
which are properly implied in the phraseol-
ogy of the Hebrew. But in their use of this
rule they seem to count all the ordinary con-
lectures by which the translator into Eng
lish supplements the Hebrew phraseology
as implied; it is only in extraordinary in
stances that they count anything as supplied.
That their rule properly understood, is a
correct one, 1 do not dispute; but 1 am con-
strained to question its correctness as inter
preted by the use they make of it.
That their usage is that which ordinarily
obtains in popular translations into English
from other languages will readily be admit
ted but the English Bible, though a popu-
lar translation, is in some important respects
different from most other popular transla-
tons. If there was any reason why revl-
sers should spend so much time upon it, that
reason is found in the fact that the Bible is
a religious book-a book which people are
expected not merely to read and cast aside,
as they do the latest novel or poem, but to
study carefully and accurately. 1t follows
that all means not inconsistent with the
flowing character of a popular book should
be used to make the translation an accurate
reproduction of the original. The revisers
recognize the use of italic type as a means OF
this sort. We are familiar with it. 1t does
not offend the eye. 1t does not interfere
with continuous and fluent reading. 1t
ought to be retained, therefore, wherever it
actually conduces to the more accurate tx
preston of either the meaning or the char
acteristic style Of the original. Probably
half or more of the omissions of italics in
the Revised Version are in violation of this
principle.
Let me illustrate this by a few instances
taken at random from Malachi:
% "My name shalt be great among the
Gentiles" (Mal. i. 1I, the Revised Version
translates ''my name isgreat," putting "shall
be" into the margin. The revisers, there
fore here recognize the fact thatit is a matter
; Indifference of judgment whetherthe copula
should be supplied in the present or in the
future-that is whether the passage is a
statement of fact or a prediction. The in
sertion of the word is to make out the sense
in English not merely the insertion of the
copula which is implied in the Hebrew, but
is also the insertion of the opinion of the
Translator that the statement is that of a
fact and not a prediction. I think that this
opinion is correct, but manifestly it is sup
piled as a matter of critical judgment, and
not implied in the Hebrew Of the clause.
The italicizing oft would indicate this, and
would thus avoid the stating of the c%onject-
ure as if it were a fact. In this instance,
the matter is somewhat less important, be-
cause the marginal note calls attention to
the difference of opinion as to the tense
but in hundreds of similar instances there
is no marginal note.
() "Pour you out a blessing, that there
shall not beroom enough to receive IT," (Mal.
iii. 10Y. Here the Revised Version omits
the italics except with the last three words.
The Hebrew is here obscure. Different
scholars give several different explanations
of it. The translators of King James take
one explanation, but make it evident that
that they obtain it by filling up from the
Hebrew. The ~revisers take the same
PLANTATION, and conceal the fact that it is
mostly explanation. If one should retrans-
late the King James version into Hebrew
he would be very likely to hit upon the X
act words of the original. If he should re-
translate the Revised Version he would OBJ
tain a result entirely different from the
original.
(3) A very different instance is "a son
honoreth his father, and a servant his mas
ter" (Mal. i. g. Here the revision omits
the word his is implied, which would ordi-
narily be sufficient reason for leaving it un-
distinguished. But here t is also true that
it would be as natural for the Hebrew to
express the pronoun as for the English
that the omission of it is mark of peculiar
style; that this popularity might be trans,
ferred into perfectly good English: ga son
honoreth q father, and a servant his mas
ter )" that the popularity is at least indicat-
ed in the old version by its noting that the
word his is supplied that it is buried out
of sight in the revision, and that the test OF
retranslation would here vindicate the old
and condemn the new.
The instances thus objected to must be
nearly half as numerous as the verses in the
Old Testament. They may be relatively
fewer in the New Testament. In this mat
ter the Bible of King James, with all its
superfuity of italics, is greatly to be pre-
ferred to that of the r~evisers, with its thou
sands upon thousands of supplied %conject-
ures, undistinguishable from the other parts
of the text.
WHAT WAS II LOST CAUsE?-In his
carefully prepared speech at Montgomery,
Jefferson Davis recognized the fact that the
'lost cause" is lost forever. He spoke to the
people of their common country" and ex-
horted them to be faithful to their obliga-
tions as citizens. In one of the impulsive
impromptu speeches which he made later
on, he said, as reported, that ''the lost cause
is not lost; it will live again it is not dead
but sleeping" The Mobile Register says to
this "To the old Confederates who fought
through the civil war it looks as ifthe cause
for which we fought is pretty thoroughly
dead" And it pertinently inquiries what
the cause actually was. If slavery, no man,
not even Mr.. Davis, will deny that the &C.
cursed institution is as dead as the bondage
of the children of Israel under Pharaoh. If
it was the right of secession, and the arbi-
tratement of the sword did not settle that,
"it so happens" says the Register, "that