7

I would be grateful if someone could translate the following text as I am doing some research on Luke 1:35 and the various historical readings of the text in English :

for þan þt halig þe of þe akenned byð; byð godes sune ge-nemned.

Luke 1:35 - The Wessex Gospels - 1175

EDIT : I am particularly interested in whether the Wessex translation contains the words 'of thee' after the words 'be born' or 'be begotten'. The Stephanus, Erasmus (1519) and Elzevir Greek texts do not have 'of thee' yet Beza does. I am uncertain what text the Wessex translates (it may be from the Vulgate) and this is part of my enquiry.

Nigel J
  • 24,448
  • 1
    for þan þt halig þe=for then the Holy (?)..............of þe akenned byð= of thee akinned is( (is of thee akinned)............ byð godes sune ge-nemned.= is God's son named (is named God's son). i can't attempt a modern translation.. – J. Taylor Feb 27 '18 at 01:24
  • 1
    Doesn't looking at KJV help? – Jim Feb 27 '18 at 01:53
  • NIV - The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[a] the Son of God. – Hot Licks Feb 27 '18 at 03:21
  • KJV - And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. – Hot Licks Feb 27 '18 at 03:22
  • Or just look here. – Hot Licks Feb 27 '18 at 03:24
  • Go to your reference, find the Wessex version near the bottom of the page, then look at the 3-4 versions above that, of slightly newer yet similar translations. – Hot Licks Feb 27 '18 at 03:52
  • 1
    Here's another West Saxon translation: forðam þæt halige ðe of þe acenned byð byþ godes sunu genemned. – Laurel Feb 27 '18 at 04:13
  • The Koine original uses a present participle and substantivized adjective, all with a neuter article and endings. You can see the struggle to get that construction into English suitable for public proclamation. Cf. KJV: what woman would be pleased to hear, angel or no, that she's about to bear a thing? See https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/31903/is-the-kjv-wording-holy-thing-wrong-in-luke-135 but only the chosen answer. – KarlG Feb 27 '18 at 05:29
  • @KarlG That is exactly what I am looking at. The Greek εκ σου, 'of thee', is not in the Greek text of Stephanus or Elzevir, but it is in Beza. And I am interested in whether the Wessex Gospels contain the words 'of thee' after 'be born'. Personally, I do not think it should be rendered 'be born' I think it is not future and I believe it to mean a 'present begetting'. – Nigel J Feb 27 '18 at 05:48
  • The Vulgate supplies an ex te, which Luther also follows. Since Kind (child) is neuter, German (and I presume Old English) has no problem with a neuter there, but the Koine doesn't suggest child. The KJV gets the grammar right, but at a price. Luther has the holy, that is born of you (das Heilige, das von dir geboren wird). http://12koerbe.de/euangeleion/louk-01.htm#35 – KarlG Feb 27 '18 at 06:07
  • @KarlG Luke and Matthew make it clear that gennao 'beget' comes after tikto 'deliver'. So the present participle 'begetting' should be honoured and the whole should not be seen as a future event - the 'birth' of a baby. – Nigel J Feb 27 '18 at 06:10
  • I'm not sure what your point is. The construction can't be rendered verbatim into Latin, German, or English. Mary isn't pregnant when the angel pops round. The angel is going on about childbirth, which obviously hasn't happened yet. AFAIK, no one has understood the Annunciation as the moment of incarnation. – KarlG Feb 27 '18 at 06:21
  • @KarlG There are three events - annunciation, conception and delivery. I believe that the present participle γεννωμενον refers to conception, not delivery. As you say, it is certainly not annunciation. – Nigel J Feb 27 '18 at 12:34
  • This may help........http://textusreceptusbibles.com/Youngs/42/1 – J. Taylor Feb 27 '18 at 15:41
  • @J.Taylor Thank you. Young rejects the addition of εκ σου 'of thee'. I have asked a textual critical question in hermeneutics to find out what codex is responsible https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/32059/what-evidence-supports-bezas-inclusion-of-%CE%B5%CE%BA-%CF%83%CE%BF%CF%85-in-luke-135 – Nigel J Feb 27 '18 at 16:26

2 Answers2

6

Here's my translation (something idiomatic in Modern English while being as faithful to the original as possible):

Also that holy one that is born of thee, will be called God's son.

To see why I translated it this way, let's start with a rough word by word translation, one for each half:

1.

for þan þt halig þe of þe akenned byð
forthe that holy one that of thee akenned be

2.

byð godes sune ge-nemned
be god's son called

Now I'll refine the translation word by word:

for þan: The first two "words", "for þan", should be considered one word, "forthe(n)" because this other OE version of the text writes it as a single word "forðam". According to the OED, the word means "even", but I think Wiktionary gives a more apt translation: "also".

þt: Quite clearly "that". This book makes me think it was written as one character, "ꝥ", which only ever refers to "that".

halig: Only a noun really makes sense here. The relevant OED definition of holy (noun) is: "That which is holy; a holy thing." It's interesting to note that several Bibles use "holy thing" instead of "holy one".

þe: I also translate this as "that", because it makes sense. (If you have a better suggestion, leave a comment).

At this point, it makes sense to move some words...

byð: This is by+ð, or the verb be plus the archaic third person singular ending (written at various points in time as -ð, -þ, -th). According to Wiktionary "the present tense is used for the future, with context determining which tense is meant", and context says we should use the future tense in the translation: "will be".

akenned: born.

of þe: I think this should be translated as "of thee". Nothing else makes much sense, and "of þe" is certainly translated as "of thee".

OK, second part now... I moved a word here too:

byð: As I said above, "will be" is the best translation.

ge-nemned: The verb here is "nemnen", which I translate as "called" because it matches the MED's definition 3. An explanation of the prefix ge- can be found at What we've gelost — why doesn't English use the prefix "ge-"?.

godes: This is a pretty clear cut possessive. While Old English didn't usually capitalize words mid-sentence, Modern English would definitely capitalize it: "God's".

sune: This is an old spelling of "son", used in OE and ME.

Laurel
  • 66,382
  • Excellent. Thank you. Up-voted and accepted. – Nigel J Mar 08 '18 at 01:36
  • Wow, what beautiful raw literature they had in Old Hibernia/Logres! And excellent translation! Thank you. – Conrado Apr 22 '20 at 00:49
  • Excellent but I would use "the holy one" rather than "the holy thing". – Greybeard Jan 05 '22 at 00:47
  • @Greybeard After all this time I agree, although it's worth remembering that we still use the phrase "that sweet thing" to refer to a child. Plus the KJV uses "thing" here, but that's because it's the KJV (old!). – Laurel Jan 05 '22 at 01:13
1

Almost all bible translations done pre 1611 has born 'of you', this includes most KJV bibles. Almost all of these are based off of the Textus Recepticus. The Wessex Gospels are based off of 'Royal MS 1 A XIV' which is written on parchment and is also known as the Codex Evangeliorum Anglice.

Lenroc
  • 11
  • 1