question regarding R, RCS, or OCS (?)

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Jules Levin wrote:

> 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

You may well be right. However, languages have other examples of frozen 
archaic forms used by modern speakers with no understanding of their 
provenance or grammatical form. This is especially common in religious 
contexts, where the speaker feels no right to "correct" the words of his 
god, prophet, saint, etc. But we also see things like "to prorate" from 
Latin "pro rata" (which never remotely resembled a verb) and "media" 
treated as singular noncount because modern speakers no longer know 
Latin plurals as they did a generation ago. A better example of the 
reluctance to "correct" an authority is the habit in American political 
speech of not declining "we the people" -- we hear otherwise literate 
speakers say things like "the power belongs to we the people."

But I look forward to hearing more expert opinions on the subject. I 
would've expected a singular, too, based on the sense that this is a 
special place, not one of many.

-- 
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher
pbg translations, inc.
"Russian Translations That Read Like Originals"
http://pbg-translations.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 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/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------