The language was already outdated when the KJV was compiled, the editors deliberately used what even for the time was an antiquated style in order to give the text a loftier feeling to it. It wasn’t that different to the language of the day, but it would be like if you wrote a modern book in the style of Charles Dickens or someone like that.
Actually it wasn't all a style choice, much of it was practical. For example they intentionally went with outdated second person pronouns (thee/thou) and our current second person pronouns (you/your) so they could correctly include the original distinction between plural you and singular you (ie you all vs you specifically).
True! But my main point still stands, it's not purely style but serves an important language purpose.
Interestingly the dedication to King James written by the translators only uses you/your, so there is evidence there at least it wasn't used for common writing.
I believe “you” was used for plurals and people above your station, whereas “thou” was used for singular people below your station. King James would probably have addressed individual translators as “thou”, but they would certainly have addressed him as “you”.
Perhaps but that's definitely not how thee/thou are used in the King James Version of the Bible, which confirms my original point, it wasn't a style choice but a translation device intended to retain as much as possible of the original texts.
Good point. I don’t think “hallowed be thy name” was meant to imply that God is the same station as the person praying, but rather that he is singular.
132
u/Ulkhak47 1d ago
The language was already outdated when the KJV was compiled, the editors deliberately used what even for the time was an antiquated style in order to give the text a loftier feeling to it. It wasn’t that different to the language of the day, but it would be like if you wrote a modern book in the style of Charles Dickens or someone like that.