# Authorized Version - 2011



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 16, 2008)

For those who are interested, as mentioned previously, quadricentennial commemorations are planned to mark the occasion of the 400th anniversary of the 1611 Authorized (King James) Version of the Bible, which will take place in 2011. 

The following websites contain information and/or will be updated periodically in the coming months and years about the coming events.

2011Trust
The King James Version 400th Anniversary Website
KJV - 400 years in the year 2011

-----Added 12/16/2008 at 11:44:00 EST-----

King James Version (KJV) Bible 400th Anniversary (1611 - 2011)


----------



## Zenas (Dec 16, 2008)

Whyfor ye type as such regarding thee KJV?


----------



## Grymir (Dec 16, 2008)

Why doth thee asketh, seeing as it is the most noble of parchments?


----------



## LawrenceU (Dec 16, 2008)

Zenas said:


> Whyfor ye type as such regarding thee KJV?



Wow, talk about butchering English. . .


----------



## Grymir (Dec 16, 2008)

2011 looketh like a good year. 400 years and still going strong. The last link above heas a nice countdown widget you can get, and the first one has this nice quote -

"To read it is to feel simultaneously at home, a citizen of the world, and a traveller through eternity."


----------



## jogri17 (Dec 16, 2008)

LawrenceU said:


> Zenas said:
> 
> 
> > Whyfor ye type as such regarding thee KJV?
> ...



actually that is old english.


----------



## LawrenceU (Dec 16, 2008)

jogri17 said:


> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> > Zenas said:
> ...



Se sy ne aeldu Englisc.


----------



## Zenas (Dec 16, 2008)

jogri17 said:


> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> > Zenas said:
> ...



It's butchering early Modern English. Old English is more like German.


----------



## Spinningplates2 (Dec 16, 2008)

LawrenceU said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> > LawrenceU said:
> ...



Verily, verily, KEEP thee behind me KJV.


----------



## Ivan (Dec 16, 2008)

Zenas said:


> jogri17 said:
> 
> 
> > LawrenceU said:
> ...



JA!


----------



## KMK (Dec 16, 2008)

Maybe 'bump' this thread in a year or so when the websites are actually functional.


----------



## LawrenceU (Dec 16, 2008)

Old English is Anglo/Saxon. Did you ever read Beowulf? It was written in Old English. Most schools now merely teach the translation. Old English used both runes and and alphabet depending upon time and location of the writer. It is a pretty interesting language.


----------



## TimV (Dec 16, 2008)

> Why doth thee asketh, seeing as it is the most noble of parchments?


Doth thee or doest thou?


----------



## Grymir (Dec 16, 2008)

TimV said:


> > Why doth thee asketh, seeing as it is the most noble of parchments?
> 
> 
> Doth thee or doest thou?






I mis-speaketh!


----------



## Prufrock (Dec 16, 2008)

LawrenceU said:


> Se sy ne aeldu Englisc.



Wow, haven't read anything like that in a while.

There was a _wonderful_ Anglo-Saxon and medieval English literature course at my alma mater; Beowulf in real Old English is quite interesting.

English major, per chance?


----------



## Wannabee (Dec 16, 2008)

Prufrock said:


> LawrenceU said:
> 
> 
> > Se sy ne aeldu Englisc.
> ...



Thou thinkest? 

In a cynical way, I find great glee in pointing out Lawrence's grammar errors.  pthth


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Dec 16, 2008)

LawrenceU said:


> Zenas said:
> 
> 
> > Whyfor ye type as such regarding thee KJV?
> ...



Thee is a personal noun or pronoun.

Well at least I think it is. 


It should probably say something like 

Why art thou scribing such reguarding the KJV?


----------



## Jon Lake (Dec 16, 2008)

It is pretty cool it has been around so long, that is QUITE a run for a Bible!


----------



## LawrenceU (Dec 16, 2008)

Wannabee said:


> Prufrock said:
> 
> 
> > LawrenceU said:
> ...



I was a Bible / Biblical Languages and English major with an emphasis on grammar and linguistics. I love languages and grammar. I'm weird that way. But, in my harried life my grammar gets rather poor at times. And, yes Joe catches me often, but it goes both ways


----------



## Ivan (Dec 16, 2008)

Okay, question...are there any special 400th anniversary edition of the KJV coming out? If there is one, and depending on its presentation, I'd buy one.


----------



## Grymir (Dec 16, 2008)

I bet there will be!! At least I hope so. If not, I need to open a publishing shop. KJV printed by KJV lovers!!!!


----------



## JohnGill (Dec 16, 2008)

*Grammar police*



Zenas said:


> Whyfor ye type as such regarding thee KJV?



Wherefore dost thou type such regarding the KJV?



Grymir said:


> Why doth thee asketh, seeing as it is the most noble of parchments?



Wherefore dost thou ask, as it is the most noble of parchments?

-th ending does not go with 2nd person singular pronouns! 

Butchers!!


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Dec 17, 2008)

Ivan said:


> Okay, question...are there any special 400th anniversary edition of the KJV coming out? If there is one, and depending on its presentation, I'd buy one.



Here is one that is available now (it's a little pricey though):

KJVPulpit.com - Home - 1611 King James Bible - 400th Anniversary Edition


----------



## Wannabee (Dec 17, 2008)

JohnGill said:


> Zenas said:
> 
> 
> > Whyfor ye type as such regarding thee KJV?
> ...



Could also be "Wherefore dost thou type such regarding thy KJV?"

Second person personal pronouns beginning with "th" are singular. Those beginning with "y" are plural. The old English definitely was more precise. I didn't know that about the --th though. Thanks!



Disclaimer - the reason I love catching Lawrence is because, though I love grammar, mine is largely intuitive. He understands it much better than I, so it's just a sort of prideful kick I get out of catching him. And, it's not that often.


----------

