tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20277527.post5669350149475920414..comments2023-07-28T07:13:03.542-05:00Comments on BIBLIA THEOLOGICA: It still clinks and clanksabcanedayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13671418539630398806noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20277527.post-2984551863869927732007-07-16T07:24:00.000-05:002007-07-16T07:24:00.000-05:00David,You said, I've heard, for example, supporter...David,<BR/><BR/>You said, <I>I've heard, for example, supporters of the ESV who prefer it over the TNIV, partly because of its use of inclusive language [which is also found in the ESV, but not usually incorporating singular/plural clashes]using this same language themsleves in their sermons.</I><BR/><BR/>I have heard the same. In fact, I was tempted to offer an example or two, but I resisted the temptation. I did not express it this way, but this is one source of my lament. Some who complain about the TNIV and push the ESV, as superior grammatically and theologically, seem unaware of at least two things: (1) that the ESV, the KJV, and other translations on various occasions break <I>the rule</I> of agreement concerning singular nouns and plural pronouns; and (2) that they, themselves, regularly violate <I>the rule</I> in their preaching and lecturing. Their own untidiness in preaching betrays their public criticism of the TNIV.abcanedayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13671418539630398806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20277527.post-58499943031242347852007-07-16T06:32:00.000-05:002007-07-16T06:32:00.000-05:00David,You're right about the use of you and I as c...David,<BR/><BR/>You're right about the use of <I>you and I</I> as clanking when put for <I>you and me</I>.<BR/><BR/>You are also correct about the squabbles that some have raised about the TNIV. My disappointments with the TNIV are different from those expressed by leading objectors who have pushed the ESV instead. By the way, some of the leading critics of the TNIV have been major players in the production of the ESV.<BR/><BR/>I readily acknowledge that the English language poses some difficulties as testified to by comments and commentary in the following links in addition to the link that you provided.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they" REL="nofollow">Wikipedia's Singular they</A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-the2.htm" REL="nofollow">World Wide Words: Singular They</A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.randomhouse.com/wotd/?date=19980501" REL="nofollow">Word of the Day</A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/003572.html" REL="nofollow">"Singular they": God said it, I believe it, that settles it</A><BR/><BR/>My lament, which is not about a moral issue but a grammtical matter, has some measure of warrant to it. Consider the examples that I offered in my blog entry.<BR/><BR/><I>What we desire in <B>a representative</B> is that <B>they</B> be <B>a person</B> of integrity--that <B>their</B> character be a morally consistent whole.<BR/><BR/>If <B>a voter</B> is looking for Jesus on the Republican ticket, <B>they're</B> not going to find him. There was only one perfect man, and all others have fallen short. <B>They</B> should look at how a candidate dealt with <B>his</B> moral failures.</I><BR/><BR/>The writer could easily have pluralized the nouns without losing anything. That way the nouns would have agreed with the pronouns, if he wanted to avoid the generic use of <I>he</I>. On the other hand, the writer equivocates. The writer strangely uses <EM><STRONG>they </STRONG></EM>to refer to <EM><STRONG>a voter</STRONG></EM>, singular, but then, when referring to the generic "<EM><STRONG>a candidate</STRONG></EM>," uses the generic <EM><STRONG>his</STRONG></EM>, singular and masculine pronoun. This grammtical equivocation validates my lament. It suggests that the writer's grammatical thought processes and choices have been made untidy and disorderly by attempting to be politically correct. And this, after all, is my point. Grammatical sloppiness has settled in. <BR/><BR/>If we decide to bow to political correctness in preference for more creative and thoughtful writing, at least we ought to be consistent in our avoidance of the generic use of <I>he</I>, <I>him</I>, and <I>his</I>.<BR/><BR/>Jane Austen gave greater thought to her words than many, perhaps most, current writers. This, ultimately, is my lament. Too many writers and speakers have become untidy in their use of words. This reflects they they have become untidy in their thought processes, also.abcanedayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13671418539630398806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20277527.post-91288626355506010592007-07-14T06:04:00.000-05:002007-07-14T06:04:00.000-05:00But the one that grates more on my ears is the use...But the one that grates more on my ears is the use of "I" for "me." It is all-but-universal, now.<BR/><BR/>Nobody in Australia [well, except for Peter O'Brien, author of prison epistles commentaries and an eagerly awaited commentary on Hebrews] seems to say "you and me" anymore [where appropriate] but I hear people saying "He said a heartfelt prayer for you and I." etc, etcDavid McKayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04027490637755317026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20277527.post-60897529029858684152007-07-14T05:59:00.000-05:002007-07-14T05:59:00.000-05:00Hi Ardel. I used to think this way, but have disco...Hi Ardel. I used to think this way, but have discovered that the so-called singular "they" and using plural words with singulars has great antiquity.<BR/><BR/>And I have to admit that it is the way people speak. I don't like it, but it is used by almost everyone, including people who speak against it.<BR/><BR/>I've heard, for example, supporters of the ESV who prefer it over the TNIV, partly because of its use of inclusive language [which is also found in the ESV, but not usually incorporating singular/plural clashes]using this same language themsleves in their sermons.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes they put the ESV into an inclusive improvised version, after having a few sentences before told everyone they disagree with that dreadful TNIV.<BR/><BR/>I suppose yo uhave seen the websites which document the use of this singular/plural combination throughout English history?<BR/><BR/>Here's one of many:<BR/><A HREF="http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html" REL="nofollow">Everybody Loves Their Jane Austen</A>David McKayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04027490637755317026noreply@blogger.com