On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
he may next turn over a few of the now neglected pages of Mr . John Bellamy , and he will be perfectly satisfied that no such principle as that laid down by Dr . Henderson can for a moment be admitted "
I have been particular in calling your attention to the last sentence quoted from the Professor ' s work , which he doubtless intended as a kind of triumphant climax to his broad assertions in opposition to Dr . Henderson , because ** thereby hangs a tale /'
To a person not altogether conversant with recent literary set-tos , the dictum of the Cambridge Professor might appear a 3 a settler , a perfect quietus for poor Bellamy . But how must the laugh be turned against the joi disant champion , when on referring
to the latest battle fought between him and Bellamy , ' not in Pierce Egan's Boxiana , but Lee ' s Remarks , and Bellamy ' s Reply , the reader will find that the Professor was repeatedly floored , and so terribly mauled in the last rounds , that he was at length .
unable to come to the scratch again , whilst Bellamy , for whom the phrase " neglected pages" is intended as a sort of revengeful after-slap , stalked away , little the worse for the affray , and contenting himself with sarcastically calling out to his antagonist to bear in mind for the future that
whatever asses may do now , they certainly never spoke in the days of Balaam !" But , a truce to pugilistic comparisons ! The real object of the present letter is to make a few observations on
the proposition maintained by Dr . Henderson as already quoted , and at the same time , by adducing a few instances from Mr . Bellamy ' Version of the Pentateuch , in support of the
Scotchman ' s assertion , to prove that , whatever may be said to the contrary by those whom he has disdained to flatter , his pages neither are neglected nor deserve to be so .
I have had occasion , Mr . Editor , to address you more than once , and , if J am not greatly mistaken , the impression made on your mind , by your
unknown correspondent , must be , that he is a plain-spoken man , one who , as already said * knows as little of Turkish , as many a Professor , and whose knowledge of Arabic , barely enables him' to distinguish between a
Untitled Article
stn and a shin , nor are you at ; all mistaken . In the absence of scholastic learning , I feel perhaps the more inclined to cling to established maxims and canons , and hence the shock T
experience on finding a particular rule disputed , which has been gravely and uniformly set forth by translators and commentators of every description under the general and hacknied maxim that " the Bible must be suffered to
interpret itself . " Without attempting to prove that what is here said of the sacred volume , applies equally to . any other literary work , and without pretending to shew how far the maxim here quoted extends , it surely will not be denied by any one , that it includes among the rest the substance of Dr .
Henderson ' s remark , which in plain English amounts to nothing more than this , " that any particular word occurring frequently in the same meaning in an original work ,, ought as frequently to be rendered by the uniform adoption of a corresponding word in the translation . " In a Greek treatise
on the mange of dogs , for instance , Professor Lee would certainly never think of rendering nvav by cat , but as often as the Greek term occurred , would use the corresponding English term dog , whereas by the rejection of what he terms Dr . Henderson ' s new
canon , I apprehend he would be at liberty to translate it by cat or even monkey , as the whim might seize him . To confess the truth , I greatly suspect that Professor Lee had some other object in view than merely to defend Ali Bey ' s Turkish Version of the New Testament , when he undertook to
controvert and exhibit , as novel , a canon which has long been in the mouth of every commentator on the Bible , and which he must have heard rung in his own ears , at one period of his life at least , pretty often . I fear his arguK nients were intended to be applied in defence of the Authorized Versions
of the Bible generally , and I am the more convinced of this , when I refer to the expressions used by him in regard to Mr . Bellamy ' s translation , and bear in mind the futile attempts made
by him for the same purpose in his attack on that gentleman already noticed . Be that , however , as it may , it is my firm opinion , that by neglecting Dr . Henderson ' s Canon ( if his it may still be called ) , the translators of our
Untitled Article
DO Professor Lee , Dr . Henderson ; and tfr . Relldrhy .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1825, page 90, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2533/page/26/
-