Talk:Middle English Bible translations

Effect of the printing press
The article says: All translations of this time period were from Latin or French. Greek and Hebrew texts would become available with the development of the Johann Gutenberg's movable-type printing press which coincided with the development of Early Modern English, making English a literary language, and would lead to a great increase in the number of translations of the Bible in the Early Modern English era. What's the link between invention of printing press and source languages? Jonah (talk) 16:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * There were (and are) a limited number of source-language texts in manuscript form. The printing press made it more feasible to produce and distribute both source-language and translated texts. ~ MD Otley (talk) 16:24, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Vaticanus manuscript
The article says: However during the 20th Century there were more than one hundred English translations, and they were all based heavily on the Vaticanus Greek text in opposition to the New Testament Greek text that Erasmus viewed as pure and traditional. This seems somewhat unlikely in the 20th century, but even if true bears little reference to middle English translations. Epideme (talk) 00:23, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Epideme is right. The 20th century is hardly speaking Middle English. The remark quoted was probably put in to attack the belittling of the Vaticanus manuscript immediately above at the time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.41.10 (talk) 09:43, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Vulgate, etc.
"Since the proclamation of the Latin Vulgate as authentic by the Council of Trent, there had been little new study of the original Biblical languages in Europe." The verb tense here implies that this occurred prior to the time period under discussion, but the Council of Trent occurred afterward, in response to the Protestant Reformation. I'm going to remove it and smooth out the next sentence. ~ MD Otley (talk) 16:30, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Honestly, I'm not sure there's much worth saving. This section isn't supposed to be a preview of coming attractions, but an analysis of the legacy of the ME translations. They aren't even mentioned! This should be about any memorials to Wycliffe and "his" translation or how future translators leaned on their work. ~ MD Otley (talk) 17:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Wycliff's Bible
The paragraph "Since the Wycliffe Bible conformed fully to Catholic teaching, it was rightly considered to be an unauthorized Roman Catholic version of the Vulgate text but with heretical preface and notes added. This slightly misleading view was held by many Catholic commentators, including Thomas More - and has continued to create confusion on the meaning of an authorised version of the Bible and the purpose of authorising an  orthodox context for its translation."

This is not NPOV (words such as "rightly", "slightly misleading"), uncited (who has this "great confusion"?) and is unclear (what is the "meaning .. and purpose of authorizing an orthodoc context for its translation"?

So I am trimming it of this material. If someone can correct it to clarify, please revert and fix. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 10:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)