My first…

…I am afraid I am not sure what to call the phenomenon.  I think I shall leave it to the reader to decide what “this” is; but I have learned thence that a rabbit hole only becomes deeper if one tries to remove it by digging.  I did not generally think the comment box was the best place for a such as this, but It would have been just fine if I had realised a bit earlier and not encouraged all this:

The general advice here keeping with the above analogy is:

Do not feed the rabbits; they will only dig faster.


The Viking from Yorkshire says:

Rate This

Insult thee, who among you art alone on using “thou”, and (where you generally cannot) understandest what it means; nay I would rather insult you, amongst whom thou art, for that you have lost such an important part – not only of your speech, but also what you can conceive…. although clearly, not thou!

Rate This

Ere I left your (green and) pleasant land, I was always different from you…. and bullied too – because my mind always saw and tried to express what I now realize was the difference between you and thee. Then chance, or Providence took me thence, and I came hither – and here the language expresses it. For as I am now part of us here, art thou of you; yet I am not “us”, nor canst thou be “you”…

Rate This

In Texas it is also deadly. Whatever one (not “thou”, not “you”) thinks of the death penalty, my responsibility is not the same as ours? Yet in Texas there are seven people who are going to be executed at some point because of a doctrine based on the confusion between thy responsibility and your responsibility – it’s called the Law of Parties. Only one is the murderer… but all seven must be executed. Now do I contend that this is the logical and absurd consequence of your lingual confusion! And glad I am to have found one of you, thee, who understandest.

Otherwise, your body is NOT the Holy Spirit’s Temple… see http://www.scribd.com/doc/49207268/Your-Body-Is-Not-The-Temple-of-The-Holy-Spirit – another misunderstanding only possible because of your language.

Thou canst see why I wasn’t popular, especially at church! :)

    • Rate This

      And I might add here also, that, although I am myself a scientist, I have a very close acquaintanceship with a scholar in Biblical Greek. If you should desire any further clarification/corroboration I would be happy to convey to him verbatim any query you may have.

      • Rate This

        of course, I am more than happy. When I wrote my essay – now some years ago – I should not have made a claim if I were unsure that it were true. If you ask your biblical scholar, specifically as to the meaning of the “your body” in the scripture I quoted, he will undoubtedly be able to confirm that it is plural – and that we are therefore talking about a collective body, that is to say the (addressed) body of believers to whom Paul is writing, and by extension Holy Church.

        I regret the downtime on the blog. It will be back, but I’m going to have to be more careful about how people get to know my personal e-mail in future.

        :)

        • Rate This

          I shall do so at the earliest convenience. Shall I show him your essay directly? That might be best unless you should wish to frame a question here verbatim. (My fear is that I may not ask the proper questions or frame them correctly if I do not have your exact words. Your question in your words copied verbatim [or rather “thy question in thy words,” I should no doubt here state : ) ])

          Re emails and such. I really wish more bloggers would heed my humble advice as per the using pseudonyms and separate public emails and other contact information.

          Alas, no-one seems the least bit acquainted with the history of such things; and are, therefore, not well acquainted with why such things are done; nor what horrendous consequences were often visited upon those who did not do them.

          • Rate This

            By all means, give your friend the essay. It is one of *many* other examples.

            How many people, I wonder, understand “put not your trust in princes nor in any child of man”? I suppose you might think this is telling you to be sceptical of authority…. know then, that the “your” is plural….

            Then I wonder how many people understand, in Modern English (bearing in mind that “thou” and “you” or its old subject form “ye” are NOT synonyms), Deuteronomy 4,21-23 Furthermore the LORD was angry with me for your sakes, and sware that I should not go over Jordan, and that I should not go in unto that good land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee [for] an inheritance: 22 But I must die in this land, I must not go over Jordan: but ye shall go over, and possess that good land. 23 Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the LORD your God, which he made with you, and make you a graven image, [or] the likeness of any [thing], which the LORD thy God hath forbidden thee? (the singular can here refer to the individual in the group, or, as in this case the Nation).

          • Rate This

            You are mistaken about ‘ye,’ unless I misunderstand : )

            This is the vocative case; wherein a large group is being addressed; yet all commanded to act as individuals and/or spoken to as individuals rather than as one body. Many young people–owing to poor schooling–certainly by no fault of their own, make this mistake. Now…. If you were around 600 years old (I am not that old; however I am much closer that you : ) you would know that as part of everyday speech, as did, for example Mr. Shakespeare.

            For example:

            23 Take heed unto yourselves [individuals], lest ye [same individuals] forget the covenant of the LORD your God, which he made with you [i.e. the covenant He made with all of you together], and make…

            I will show your essay to my friend, and see if his knowledge of the original Greek will shed some light.

          • Rate This

            No, I fear that thou be mistaken. “Ye” is the old Nominative form (though it certainly was used as a Vocative too), but already in Shakespeare’s day the Accusative Form “you” was doubling up as a Nominative, pretty much like today’s “you”. Also, even at the time the King James Bible was written, this manner of using “you” was very common as the Second Person Singular – indeed “thou” was already falling out of use. Interestingly, however, it was at this later stage that “ye” did continue in some “fast expressions”, and hence it is understandable that many people would associate it with the Vocative. Yet that is not its original purpose. It is the same distinction as between “thou” and “thee”, between “I”, and “me”, between “we” and “us” – and so “ye” and “you.

          • Rate This

            however in the bible, in that particular verse it appears to be used in the way in which I describe. (Although as you no doubt have read many times hereabouts I certainly do not claim to be an expert : )

          • Rate This

            Also, if I understand you correctly, your answer illustrates how (English speaking) people do not understand this anymore. There really is nothing more complicated here than the distinction between the singular and the plural. In the King James, that is all it is. Moreover, I now speak the two Norwegian languages fluently, and there is absolutely no sense of speaking to a group commanding them to be as individuals there. When the plural “ye”, “you”, “your” and “yours” is used, it means the group of people addressed; when “thou”, “thee”, “thy”, and “thine” are used it means the individual OR, as in this case, the Nation (of Israel), as a collective body.

          • Rate This

            This is quite confusing I think, for the reason that within the same sentence both ‘ye’ and ‘you’ are used. Ye being used with ‘Yourselves” (as a reflexive ?) and you coming shortly after in the following clause.

            This is where one needs a genuine grammar “Nazi” : ) Although you clearly do have great knowledge of such things, you do not strike me as quite that (for they are a peculiar bunch.) Although, I feel you clearly have the proclivity to become one (should you desire to do so.)

            I shall (as per my blog entry of http://sonnetblog.wordpress.com/2013/02/13/blessed-silence/ ) be switching to my ‘DND’ account in a half-hour or so.

            I have left you something to clarify, so please do feel free, and I shall see it when I switch back, although, as per my last post, I do feel my interest here is waning : )

            One last question: Do you have a public email I can give to JR so he can answer your queries directly? The comment boxes here are not the best venue for that. If you do have, or a semiprivate one you would rather not leave here, you may email it to my public email address which you will find listed on my gravatar.

            It was a pleasure being bested and/or further confused by you : ) I admit, that I may be less clear now then when we began.

            Our Biblical Greek scholar, on the other hand, is perhaps one of the few “Grammar Nazi” types I know personally, so his answers, I am sure, you will find quite authoritative, and no doubt will be sourced. (Which makes me feel tired for both reasons just thinking about it)

            This is a question also, I suppose, although just a curiosity: What, I wonder, brought you to the Norse-lands? And how did you first embark upon your biblical studies–particularly those involving grammar?

            It would be perfectly acceptable to point me to a blog entry if you have already answered that question long ago. I fear I have distracted you from your work enough already (and likewise) which is why I must switch accounts now: Too many comments which I know I will be compelled to answer.

          • Rate This

            But my friend, you use “We” and “us” in one sentence! Since it is the same distinction as “We went where he told us”, you get (or used to get) – this time spoken to the person who said the above – “Ye went where he told you”. That is “ye” and “you” in one sentence. Moreoever we can say “We went where he told us, but I did not obey”, and use “I” as well as “we” and “us”…. Therefore, by extension, in the same sentence, spoken to the person who said it – “Ye went where he told you, but thou didst not obey”, all in one sentence. Indeed this is my essential point that your understanding as English/American people is confused by the one word having to double for all. I fear I must go now, but when I get the blog back shall write much more on this. It’s actually very simple…. just as simple as “We” and “us”!

          • Rate This

            I think I am more confused than ever, young man! Particularly when vocatives eschew (I think) verb conjugation altogether. And then there is this matter of subject-verb agreement which fills my buffers to overflowing and things begin to pop off the top of the stack.

            In any case, I copy my grammar rather more from Shakespeare than the KJB,and he was not at all consistent in his grammar. He was, indeed, a wordsmith, but very much not a grammar nazi. And, unfortunately for me, the two do not go hand in glove.

          • Rate This

            And then… There are those infinitives… And split infinitives…

            And on top of all that, both ‘Ye’ and ‘You’ are used nominatively!…

            No, my young friend, I may write it, but I may never understand it! This is why truly hawkeyed grammar nazis make so much money!

            Tensor Calculus is much less ambiguous. I believe you may be causing me to regress, in actual point of fact. : )

          • Rate This

            And! Somehow I knew this would take me down the proverbial rabbit hole!! And although I am largely self educated in these matters–hence the holes in knowledge wherein my interest may wane–I will admit that I am used to, simply by accident and by no extreme effort on my part, knowing more about such things than most people your age–this, owing largely to the reason I mentioned. Still I had a suspicion, owing to your polylingulity (to coin a word… possibly) that you might easily outclass me in this.

            Still can you then clarify the use of “yourselves” in the verse I mentioned?

            And on a much lighter note, I must say that when I read your first response, I heard the voice of the Emperor from the (real) Star Wars trillogy (although the same fellow played the part in the prequels, I have discovered)

            “No… I … am… a… fraid… it… is… you… who… are… mis… take… en… (cackle)”

  • Rate This

    Yes I do see why : ) however you do remind me of a very, very dear friend–one I have not seen for quite a while, I’m sorry to say, for we were and are as close as any two friends may be. You have made me a bit homesick, in a sense. But not in a bad way.

One response to “My first…

Insults Make Me Happy:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s