" ... I had a source of inspiration in my brother Bartholomew, the Orthodox Patriarch, who ..."etc.etc..
This is from the English version. Of languages which I can stumble through, the definite article is absent from the French. The comma after Patriarch is present only in the English (could someone give me a hand with the Polish?).
Does it matter?
Well, consider this: "I had dinner with Booboo, the king of Timbuctoo, who ...". It implies just one holder of that august regal title. Now consider: "I had dinner with Booboo an African chieftain who ..." It allows ... even, I think, requires ... a plurality of such dignitaries.
There are more Orthodox Patriarchs than just one. But the English phrase makes it sound as if there is only one such personage, "the Orthodox Patriarch". The direct article is reinforced by the comma, because, without the comma, you could read the sentence as meaning "Bartholomew, that particular one among the Orthodox Patriarchs who ..."
But what a waste of time, examining different translations ... isn't it inevitable that ...
No!! It is not inevitable! Time was, when important formal documents emerging from Rome would be in a dead language the juridical precision of which only rather rarely left ambiguities to be haggled over.
But still ... does it really matter?
Just possibly, it might. His All-Holiness might not regard English as his first-to-turn-to language among those offered him by Rome, but his 'Minister of Foreign Affairs, Metropolitan Hilarion, did his Patristics in Oxford (under Timothy Ware) and he speaks English like an Englishman. He might, indeed, read this document in its English version.
And the Patriarch of Constantinople, and the Patriarch of Moskow and All the Russias, are not currently in communion. Is our most holy Father Cyril going to like it that PF regards Bartholomew as the Orthodox Patriarch?
Good point. But if the original were in Latin, how would we know if we should translate with a definite article? Now, in Greek of course, ...
ReplyDeleteI would understand "..Smith, the American,..." not to mean that Smith is the only American in the world but, rather, that of all the Smiths
ReplyDeletein our common acquaintance, the reference is to that Smith who is American.
So, the reference is to that Bartholomew who is an Orthodox Patriarch - however many others there may be.
Dear Father,
ReplyDeleteIn Polish it sounds: "mój brat Bartłomiej, Patriarcha Prawosławny, który...", which can be rendered word by word: "my brother Bartholomew, Orthodox Patriarch, who...". In fact we don't have definite articles (sometimes we use demonstrative pronouns as definite articles but only in situations when we are speaking about something mentioned in the preceding sentence, e.g. "I bought a book. This book was published two years ago"). In Polish that Francis' phrase is ambigous, it can be read both as "just one of the many Orthodox patriarchs" and as "the Orthodox Patriarch". It's interesting that Polish translator (I don't know what language he/she translated from) decided to write "Orthodox Patriarch" with capital letters. It indicates that he/she could read it in the original text as "the Orthodox patriarch" and wanted to render it using capitals. According to our basic language rules both of them should be typed in lowercase, though it is possible to write such words with capitals if one wants to emphasize e.g. someone's status. But it's only guess, nothing certain.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnd one more thing. In Polish translation there is a comma between "Patriarch" and "who". But it is due to our language rules: we always put commas before "which" and "who" (in Polish it's only one word: "który") and doesn't strengthens possible understanding "Patriarcha Prawosławny" as "the Orthodox Patriarch".
ReplyDeleteGiven that Bartholomew has fallen out of communion with Moscow, could it not be that he has secretly joined the Uniates amongst whom he might well be for all I know the Patriarch. In any case, whether or not this is true, Bartholomew a crypto-protestant and alleged freemason has found his home in mother Rome like so many. One hopes that they do not end up like the ill-fated Panchamama idols. But then Bergoglio fished them out of the TIber. So it goes. Everyday ecclesiatical affairs look more and more like monkey business
ReplyDeleteWilliam - in Greek be cautious :
ReplyDeleteRSV Mark 1:1 ¶ The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
BYZ Mark 1:1 Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ, υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ.
Last time I heard we Antiocheans had a Patriarchate.
ReplyDeleteThere is no article, definite or indefinite, in Polish either. The comma after “Patriarcha Prawosławny“ is required by the following relative clause; writing with Capitals might be interpreted as denoting “the Orthodox patriarch”, but my knowledge of Polish is too limited to be certain about this level of subtlety.
ReplyDeleteThe German version on the other hand is even more likely to be read as “the orthodox patriarch” than the English version due to the positioning of the relative clause, which might be translated – preserving the word order, however crude it sounds in English – as “While … a source of inspiration has through our brother, the orthodox patriarch Bartholomaios, been shared with us, who …” If one wanted to refer to him as one of the orthodox patriarchs, it would sound more natural to either omit the definite article or put the qualifier next to the relative clause: “While … a source of inspiration has through or brother Bartholomaios been shared with us, the orthodox patriarch, who …”
I think that I shall return to reading The Bases of the Social Concept of The Russian Orthodox Church. From what one hears of TF, the former would be more edifying.
ReplyDeleteBoth Latin and Russian lack articles, definite or indefinite, though Greek has definite articles. Not sure what the original of the text was, or if there was more than one, but the point would likely be lost on Vladyka Kirill.
ReplyDeleteBoth Russian and Latin lack articles so the point would likely be lost on Vladyka Kirill.
ReplyDeleteAnd from the Basis of the Social Concept, this general statement:
ReplyDelete“Fulfilling the mission of the salvation of the human race, the Church performs it not only through direct preaching, but also through good works aimed to improve the spiritual-moral and material condition of the world around her. To this end, she enters into co-operation with the state, even if it is not Christian, as well as with various public associations and individuals, even if they do not identify themselves with the Christian faith. Without setting herself the direct task to have all converted to Orthodoxy as a condition for co-operation, the Church hopes that joint charity will lead its workers and people around them to the knowledge of the Truth, help them to preserve or restore faithfulness to the God-given moral norms and inspire them to seek peace, harmony and well-being — the conditions in which the Church can best fulfil her salvific work.” Basis I.4. https://mospat.ru/en/documents/social-concepts/
Having checked all the available language versions, it's evident that someone has quite simply botched the English translation, only this one - by introducing a comma where it shouldn't have been. In all the remaining languages, the text reads (or can perfectly be understood as): 'Bartholomew, that particular Orthodox Patriarch who...' (As for Polish, its grammar has no articles, with context being the key to understanding).
ReplyDeleteHaving checked all the available language versions, it's evident that someone has quite simply botched the English translation, only this one - by introducing a comma where it shouldn't have been. In all the remaining languages, the text reads (or can perfectly be understood as): 'Bartholomew, that particular Orthodox Patriarch who...' (As for Polish, its grammar has no articles, with context being the key to understanding).
ReplyDeleteInteresting. When I read Tooty-Frooty first I spotted this howler. Then yesterday I read your post with consequent affirmative joy.
ReplyDeleteToday I am not so sure. After all, we say "Joseph, the carpenter" - and there are many. Depends what mood you're in when you read it.
The point is that we are having this discussion, so even if this point is not valid, the fact remains that vernacular texts are imprecise (particularly Italian) and the lack of a normative text is just plain wrong.
IF (and it's a bad idea) the Church is going to go vernacular, then She will have devise a special language like legal English (funny syntax, no commas) and then expand the canon lawyers many-fold.
In the seventh chapter of "Teach Yourself Biblical Hebrew", there is a very relevant paragraph (albeit one which, in quoting, I am comparing greater things to lesser - something I do not like to do, but it is what it is) ....
ReplyDeleteI quote the paragraph in full: it can be found in original form on pages 47 and 48 of "Teach Yourself Biblical Hebrew," by R.K. Harrison, Ph.D, D.D., Hodder & Stoughton Limited, Impression Number 33, 2005:
***The article in Hebrew may be used demonstratively, e.g., "He - yodh -holem - mem" (heyom) means "this day" or "to-day". The vocative is also expressed by the article on occasions, as "He -Beth - Surekh - Lamedh" (commenter's note - I dropped the translation, and don't say that out loud in anything but a disparaging way, please trust me on that), and is sometimes used generically to designate the member of a class where English usage would lead us to expect an indefinite article, e.g., "an enemy" in Hebrew is 'ha-oyebh'. The article is also attached to an attributive adjective qualifying a definite noun. So "the good man" would be "the man, the good one". A further distinctive use of the article is with proper names, to show the individual is supreme in His (lower class h in the original - the typographical standards of English publishing, back in the day, were rather low) class , e.g. ,
"God" is "Ha- elohim" (commenter's note - the e before the l is not fully pronounced as a separate vowel, but rather elongates the previous vowel). ****
That being said, I have to say, WHILE I COMPLETELY DISAPPROVE OF POOR FATHER BERGOGLIO's, poor BISHOP BERGOGLIO's, poor CARDINAL BERGOGLIO's, and poor Pope Francis's apparently complete inability to understand that he lacks empathy in so many ways - for the unborn who he has always abandoned, in primis, but also in many other ways ---- I have to say he tries a little harder than his critics think to be insightful. The poor overweight old man is not a completely lost cause, and I hope he prays for me as much as I pray for him.
(and no I do not care if this comment is posted or not. I left those concerns behind long ago.)
Like I said, I do not like comparing greater things to lesser, and I hope you appreciate my efforts. If you don't, well, that is totally fine too. God loves us all, very very much.
I’ve heard of the Johannine comma and the Oxford comma. Egads, now we have to struggle with the Tutti Frutti comma.
ReplyDelete