question regarding R, RCS, or OCS (?)

[Jules Levin]

At 06:59 PM 3/5/2006, you wrote:


>Not feminine, archaic neuter plural.
>
><http://www.spravka.gramota.ru/hardwords.html?no=369>
...
Paul B. Gallagher


Since I expect that everyone will come back with the neuter
plural, I guess I should clarify why this did not occur to me.
1.  This would be the only archaic linguistic form I have seen
in the translation, which I am sure was done within the last
30 years, if not 20.
2.  What is the neuter plural Adj agreeing with?  In view of English,
this seems to be a traditional translation (Greek?), but the original Hebrew
I believe (don't have it in front of me and too lazy to get up and look for it)
is makom kadosh--holy place, for the inner chamber of the Tabernacle.
3.  This translation is definitely NOT the product of a traditional chain of
translations going back to RCS and OCS sources.  It is possible that 
the translator
in fact never looked at any non-Jewish Biblical translation, and the earliest
Jewish translations from Hebrew into Russian are mid-19th C.  (I am 
guessing here,
admittedly.)  Thus the motive for using an archaism unintelligible to 
the modern
reader is what exactly...?  (My point being that if there is a 
traditional rendering, even when
the exact meaning is lost on modern readers, it still has the power 
to lend a tone of
sanctity, etc., as with the use of thou, thine, etc. in an English 
translation. )
So I still think something remains to be explained here.
Jules Levin
     

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------