tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post112353555290796287..comments2023-10-20T07:28:50.948-07:00Comments on Better Bibles Blog: ESV and inadequacy of reading level testsWayne Lemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-1123548293705109282005-08-08T17:44:00.000-07:002005-08-08T17:44:00.000-07:00Good questions, Kim. Unfortunately, I don't have a...Good questions, Kim. Unfortunately, I don't have any background information to be able to answer them. Hopefully, other visitors to this blog might, though.<BR/><BR/>Keep 'em comin'. There's nothing like good questions!Wayne Lemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-1123547704153156892005-08-08T17:35:00.000-07:002005-08-08T17:35:00.000-07:00I'm curious about something, Wayne, and maybe you ...I'm curious about something, Wayne, and maybe you could shed some light on this for me.<BR/><BR/>As I was reading your discussion about the difficulty of reading Shakespearean text, I remembered something one of my university professors said with regard to reading Shakespeare. She encouraged us all to read it out loud. She claimed that it aided our understanding. My professor for 17th Century Non-Dramatic Literature - sacred poetry - said the same thing. <BR/><BR/>When I think of reading the King James Version, which uses language more similar to Shakespeare and Donne, I wonder of some of the translation efforts made by those translators were undertaken with the intention of the text being read aloud. Literacy was not common for the majority of people at the time, and most people probably only ever heard scripture as opposed to reading it. <BR/><BR/>Do you think that the way the King James was translated differs in part because the oral tradition of hearing text was more prevalent at that time?Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02288648996304246570noreply@blogger.com