Bjorn (bless his Norwegian plaid socks -- sorry that I cannot use your
funny "o" that looks like a lower-case "omega") uses an anecdote that
reminds me of its true origin.
The King James version of the bible was the universal English
translation for hundreds of years until the 20th century's plethora of
versions that has cursed us with the Tower of Babel all over again. The
original not-so-cultured ("cultivated" has the ring of falsity about it)
English gentleman retorted, when given a newfangled translation one
Christmas, "If the King James bible was good enough for Jesus, it's good
enough for me!"
Few care but... Today Scripture reading in churches is out of favour
(favor?) owing entirely to the absence of an acknowledged standard.
Worse, bible verse memorization (memorisation?)is now as unpopular and
impossible as is the virtually extinct catechismal process for the self-
same reason. The King James bible did more for the promotion, spelling
standardization (standardisation?), stability, and almost world-wide
adoption of the English language than any kind of educational programme
(program?) could achieve. If you could quote exactly in King James
parlance, your words would carry a peculiar ring of truth that is
utterly foreign to today's ears. The English language has thus been in
decline for a century. Perhaps Churchill memorialized (memorialised?)
the fact best in his WWII compliment to Americans, "We are two great
nations divided by a common language."
My point? Don't expect a spell checker to do the job of a language
checker, and don't blame our American cousins for that! Blame the modern
bible translators if you must find a scape-goat. [Spell-checked -- OK. I
disabled Grammatik (Grammar check?)ages ago!]
Yours, Aye,
Stephen.
-- Arachne V1.61, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
