tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post8578857624927198963..comments2023-11-24T06:43:02.286+00:00Comments on Aspicientes in Jesum: Collect for Midnight MassPastor in Montehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05949810648656544072noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-87851308257505804942010-06-08T18:27:01.022+01:002010-06-08T18:27:01.022+01:00"perhaps the English was a last-minute aftert..."perhaps the English was a last-minute afterthought"<br /><br />It was indeed. I forget exactly what happened - possibly an intervention in the Governing Body - but it was in the final stages of the process of authorising the new book, which was why the change couldn't be reversed. The process was at an end so there was no opportunity to undo the silliness that had been mandated.<br /><br />The Liturgical Commission were very annoyed because it made them look illiterate, which they certainly weren't. Philip Howard of the Times wrote a rude article on the subject, which annoyed them even more.Sir Watkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02000106556898498656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-92163237384246818632010-06-08T16:28:48.343+01:002010-06-08T16:28:48.343+01:00Sir Watkin, thank you for the correction (I was go...Sir Watkin, thank you for the correction (I was going from memory). Having now got it off the shelf, I am reminded what a strange beast the 1984 book was, occupying a very inconsistent half-way house between modern and "traditional" language – happy to say "who dost" and "who art", but for some reason baulking at "who hast". (There's no problem in the Welsh, of course - perhaps the English was a last-minute afterthought.)<br /><br />Likewise, I'd be interested to see, when all the propers are finally out, how consistent ICEL is in its approach to the various problems of translation. <i>Liturgicam authenticam</i> simply enuntiated general, overarching principles; did New ICEL work out a precise and detailed set of guidelines for their work, or was it just up to whoever happened to be on duty that day to decide how to apply the principles? (Please, no repeat of the flights of "personal inspiration" which so disfigure the intercessions and selection of hymns in the Divine Office!)Williamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-20394525763385880742010-06-08T13:51:46.319+01:002010-06-08T13:51:46.319+01:00"every collect unfailingly managed"
Not..."every collect unfailingly managed"<br /><br />Not quite. This was the intention, but they missed one or two!Sir Watkinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02000106556898498656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-49983253594839465172010-06-08T12:05:23.875+01:002010-06-08T12:05:23.875+01:001570/1970: Just someone trying to get all literary...1570/1970: Just someone trying to get all literary by introducing a bit of chiasmus:<br />(1570) in terra - cognovimus / in cælo - perfruamur (A B / A B)<br />(1970) in terra - agnovimus / perfruamur - in cælo (A B / B A)Williamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-82878463607494099772010-06-08T11:56:48.828+01:002010-06-08T11:56:48.828+01:00The other thing which strikes me is 2008's &qu...The other thing which strikes me is 2008's "O God, who <i>have</i> made …". "Have" rather than "has" is grammatically correct, of course: the verb must be in the second person (unlike in, for example, the 1984 liturgy of the Church in Wales, where every collect unfailingly managed to refer to God in the <i>third</i> person straight after having addressed Him!) But it feels odd – does anyone really use English that way? ("Lamb of God, who take away …") <br /><br />In this particular instance, the word "have" could simply be omitted without injury either to grammar or accuracy. But more generally, the unfortunate truth is that modern (unlike Tudor) English is ill suited – perhaps uniquely so among modern languages – to convey the long periods and subordinate clauses typical of liturgical expression (not just in Latin).<br /><br />So what are the options?<br />• Be very literal, even at the cost of sounding stilted and unidiomatic.<br />• Do the Welsh Prayer Book thing and forget your grammar.<br />• Acquaint God with all sorts of facts about himself which might otherwise have slipped his memory ("O God, you've done this, that and the other.")<br />• Come over all Old ICEL and don't bother about what the original says.<br />Or, I suppose,<br />• Give up on modern English and stick with Tudor – or, of course, Latin!Williamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-71779990332340509792010-06-08T11:25:16.964+01:002010-06-08T11:25:16.964+01:00And also, I wonder why the change of syntax 1570/1...And also, I wonder why the change of syntax 1570/1970?Pastor in Montehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05949810648656544072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-42371228385407633452010-06-08T11:21:51.960+01:002010-06-08T11:21:51.960+01:00Yes, the same thing about perfrui struck me too.
T...Yes, the same thing about perfrui struck me too.<br />Thanks, William, for the EM version, which I'll add.Pastor in Montehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05949810648656544072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4807826652341078989.post-66140016449327516482010-06-08T11:10:11.955+01:002010-06-08T11:10:11.955+01:00English Missal [little different from Sarum]:
O Go...<i>English Missal</i> [little different from Sarum]:<br />O God, who hast made this most holy night to shine with the brightness of the true light: grant, we beseech thee; that we, who have known the mystery of his light on earth, may also attain to the fruition of his joys in heaven: Who liveth.<br /><br />Interesting to see the various attempts at rendering <i>perfrui</i> (I noticed by chance that the Big Zee had something on that the other day, in analysing the Post-Communion for Corpus Christi): "share", "rejoice in", "feast on", "obtain", "attain to", while 1975 characteristically fails to make any effort at rendering the original at all (and ASB/CW do their own thing at that point).Williamnoreply@blogger.com