Come forth!

ChemincreuxChemincreux Shipmate Posts: 24
A sort of New Year Resolution, which I invite shippies to share. Let us rediscover that little, old, powerful, uncompromising word 'forth'. The dictionary declares it to be archaic, except for one or two compound words like 'forthwith' and forthright. If we cannot turn the clock back, perhaps we can at least learn to recognize the value of this half-forgotten concept - that to 'go forth' demands effort, determination, a sense of purpose and direction.

It's a much-used invigorating tool in the bible. I used to think that humankind was instructed from the outset to 'go forth and multiply'. I checked. I was wrong. We were told 'be fruitful, and multiply...' an interesting nuance, since God did tell the earth to 'put forth vegetation', and the waters to 'bring forth swarms of living creatures' and the earth to 'bring forth living creatures of every kind...'

And throughout the Old Testament God and men came forth, went forth, and were sent forth...the living world was told to get off its lazy backside - there was stuff to do, to enjoy, to make, to love, to care for, fight for, cherish.
«134

Comments

  • KwesiKwesi Shipmate
    Forth in thy name, O Lord, I go
    My daily labour to pursue,
    Thee, only thee, resolved to know
    In all I think. or speak, or do.

    Charles Wesley
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    The comic-strip Sally Forth had a clever pun as its title, but kinda went straight downhill from there.
  • SojournerSojourner Shipmate
    Wasn’t that Rick O’ Shay?

    I recall not only Sally Forth but Gay Abandon who was Rick’s squeeze ( circa 1962)
  • SojournerSojourner Shipmate
    Not to mention “ Lazarus, come forth”
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    As God said to Moses. But he came fifth and won a bag of peanuts.
  • tclunetclune Shipmate
    Martin54 wrote: »
    As God said to Moses. But he came fifth and won a bag of peanuts.

    I imagine you'll spend a few extra decades in Purgatory for that one...
  • He's wrong, anyway. It was a teapot.
  • A sort of New Year Resolution, which I invite shippies to share. Let us rediscover that little, old, powerful, uncompromising word 'forth'. The dictionary declares it to be archaic, except for one or two compound words like 'forthwith' and forthright.
    Huh? My dictionaries don’t identify “forth” as archaic, nor would I consider it archaic at all. I hear it often enough to not think anything about it. “Forthwith,” on the other hand . . . .

    If we cannot turn the clock back, perhaps we can at least learn to recognize the value of this half-forgotten concept - that to 'go forth' demands effort, determination, a sense of purpose and direction.
    The word “forth” perhaps being archaic—at least in some places according to some dictionaries—is not the same as the idea it represents being a “half-forgotten concept.” It doesn’t seem at all forgotten to me.

  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    "Forth" is not archaic in the US. Some uses are a bit elevated ("go forth" and "burst forth"), but we use the phrase "back and forth" in ordinary speech all the time.
  • A sort of New Year Resolution, which I invite shippies to share. Let us rediscover that little, old, powerful, uncompromising word 'forth'. The dictionary declares it to be archaic, except for one or two compound words like 'forthwith' and forthright. If we cannot turn the clock back, perhaps we can at least learn to recognize the value of this half-forgotten concept - that to 'go forth' demands effort, determination, a sense of purpose and direction.

    It's a much-used invigorating tool in the bible. I used to think that humankind was instructed from the outset to 'go forth and multiply'. I checked. I was wrong. We were told 'be fruitful, and multiply...' an interesting nuance, since God did tell the earth to 'put forth vegetation', and the waters to 'bring forth swarms of living creatures' and the earth to 'bring forth living creatures of every kind...'

    And throughout the Old Testament God and men came forth, went forth, and were sent forth...the living world was told to get off its lazy backside - there was stuff to do, to enjoy, to make, to love, to care for, fight for, cherish.

    "From forth the loins of these two foes a pair of star-crossed lovers take their life, whose misadventured piteous overthrows do with their death bury their parents' strife ..."
  • Ruth wrote: »
    "Forth" is not archaic in the US. Some uses are a bit elevated ("go forth" and "burst forth"), . . . .
    Yes, perhaps a bit elevated or formal, but I wouldn’t think it at all unusual to be told to “Go forth” as part of the charge at the conclusion of a service. (Though “Go out” or “Go out into” may be becoming more common, which goes to my point that even if the word “forth,” the concept is necessarily forgotten.)

    Meanwhile, the expression “hold forth” is still very common here (the American South).

  • Alan29Alan29 Shipmate
    The RC church has this magnificent text in its prayers for the dying

    Go forth, Christian soul, from this world
    in the name of God the almighty Father,
    who created you,
    in the name of Jesus Christ,
    Son of the living God,
    who suffered for you,
    in the name of the Holy Spirit,
    who was poured out upon you,
    go forth, faithful Christian.
    May you live in peace this day,
    may your home be with God in Zion,
    with Mary, the virgin Mother of God,
    with Joseph, and all the angels and saints.

    I was privileged to use it with my mother in law as she died.
    Elgar sets it magnificently in Gerontius to a slightly different translation...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAbOgpcSEYg
  • ChemincreuxChemincreux Shipmate Posts: 24
    Well thank you all! I'm much encouraged by this. Did I misread my dictionary? I checked. No but I was certainly being economical with the truth - my apologies. It says "Adverb; archaic, except in a few set phrases and after certain verbs (come, go, set, etc). I think it's less common this side of the pond, but my favourite example of its recent use is in the last line of "Shine, Jesus, Shine": "Send forth your word, Lord, and let there be light!

    Modern bible translations, though, sometimes seem to be a bit coy when they use "go out" or simply "go" where an older version has "go forth" = it doesn't have the same 'bite' IMHO. ISTM that they "went forth" rather more enthusiastically in Old Testament times. And once you water down a powerful expression, it becomes vulnerable to further softening or idiosyncratic interpretation. Of course I may be totally wrong. Perhaps I'm getting too set in my ways.
  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    Meanwhile, the expression “hold forth” is still very common here (the American South).

    Ah, I forgot one of my favorites! I of course hold forth quite regularly.
  • KwesiKwesi Shipmate
    ......and so forth.
  • And now I have “Break Forth, O Beauteous Heavenly Light” stuck in my head.

    It could be worse. Much worse.

  • It could. I've got The Shiny Song (SJS) in mine...
    :grimace:

    (Apologies for the lack of brain-bleach, The lorry has been turned back at the border - incorrect paperwork).

    The relatively-modern hymn *Go forth and tell! O Church of God, awake!* may be the sort of thing the OPer was thinking of?
  • Rev per MinuteRev per Minute Shipmate
    edited January 1
    It seems about as likely to appear in my speech as 'whence' and 'whither', which is to say, not very likely at all. Of course, Scottish shipmates may need to use such a word on a daily basis, with trains, boats and automobiles.
  • cgichardcgichard Shipmate
    There are several adjurations along the lines of "Come forth, and depart, and absent yourself from this person", addressed to the devil in the Orthodox service for the making of a catechumen. Archaic, maybe, but very powerful to hear in context.
  • Woody Allen, while using method acting to prepare to play the role of God got into a fight with a fellow New Yorker, and instructed him to 'go forth and multiply', but not in those words.
  • ChemincreuxChemincreux Shipmate Posts: 24
    Revelation 6:2 "And I saw, and behold, a white horse,and its rider had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer." That's the RSV version, in my interlinear Greek-English New Testament. The word-for-word translation given in the column next to it, for the word εξηλθεν is "he went forth". So, presumably, the translator of the time thought "went forth" was archaic. If not, why change it?
  • ChemincreuxChemincreux Shipmate Posts: 24
    To be kind to the man (or woman) he did have a genuine problem; the verb can mean "Come" or "Go" and in each case (the verb appears again a little later) the alternative is given in a footnote. But "Came forth" or "Went forth" are equally valid, no? It's not a big thing, is it? But I ask again, if "Come forth" is still common parlance, why change it? To make it more homely for hoi polloi, perhaps?
  • ISTM that in the US it is fossilized in a few expressions, but not likely to be used in new ways. It's not "productive" as linguists say. And nobody would say "go forth" unless they were being sarcastic or mock dramatic.
  • or making a dirty joke...
  • mousethief wrote: »
    ISTM that in the US it is fossilized in a few expressions, but not likely to be used in new ways. It's not "productive" as linguists say. And nobody would say "go forth" unless they were being sarcastic or mock dramatic.
    Or, as Ruth and I suggested, being more formal, as in liturgy.

    I guess I’m not seeing any real difference in terms of meaning between “go forth” and “go out (into).”

    I’d be interested in the take @Eutychus has from a translation standpoint.

  • Fr TeilhardFr Teilhard Shipmate
    edited January 2
    I have to post it: the Firth of Forth ...
    (This is the First time, but if necessary, I'll post it four times ...)
  • I have to post it: the Firth of Forth ...
    (This is the First time, but if necessary, I'll post it four times ...)
    I think @Rev per Minute beat you to it a few posts back. :wink:

  • Fr TeilhardFr Teilhard Shipmate
    edited January 2
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I have to post it: the Firth of Forth ...
    (This is the First time, but if necessary, I'll post it four times ...)
    I think @Rev per Minute beat you to it a few posts back. :wink:

    ??? ... I missed it ...
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited January 2
    You had to click on the link in his post:
    Of course, Scottish shipmates may need to use such a word on a daily basis, with trains, boats and automobiles.
    Though I guess technically, he referred to the bridges, not the Firth itself.

  • ChemincreuxChemincreux Shipmate Posts: 24
    Thanks - even for the Firth of Forth - I was asking for it, wasn't I? But \I think you're all missing the point which I tried to focus on in the Revelation quote. The interlinear translation has two versions - the word-by-word translation under the Greek text , and the accompanying rendition into "sensible/understandable" English, with the adjectives before instead of after the nouns, and so on. While this rearrangement is essential, I suggest that if the meaning of specific words is perfectly clear in the original, any alteration needs to be justified. The task of the translator is to pass on to the reader, as closely as possible, the meaning in the mind of the the original writer.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host
    edited January 2
    I think it’s more complicated than that. For example idiom is particularly hard to translate. The French phrase jeter un coup d'oeil is made up of words where the meaning is perfectly clear: jeter = to throw; un coup = a blow; d'oeil = of eye. Even if we add in the missing definite article which English requires, a word for word translation results in ‘to throw a blow of the eye’. This fails by a significant margin to express the meaning of the French which means ‘to glance at’ or ‘to look at’.

    While this is a striking instance, in many lesser ways a strict word for word translation can miss or obscure the meaning of the original phrase.

    ‘Forth’ has a range of meanings (forward in time, place, or order; onward; out into view; away from a specified place; abroad; out of; from), but it is also (outside a few stock phrases) rather elevated language which may go beyond the original intention. ‘I went out to empty the bins’ is (in UK English) a normal sentence. ‘I went forth to empty the bins’, while denoting exactly the same activity, has connotations of grandeur which are absurd in the context. It might have been a reasonable statement in another age when ‘forth’ was more commonly used, but it is faintly ridiculous in contemporary English.

    (I suspect that the text used in the interlinear is either AV/KJV or ASV/RV)
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited January 2
    Thanks - even for the Firth of Forth - I was asking for it, wasn't I? But \I think you're all missing the point which I tried to focus on in the Revelation quote.
    No, I don’t know that people are missing the point. My question had to do with why “go out” is any less of an accurate translation, or carries different meaning, from “go forth.” As @BroJames notes, words like “forth” and “out” can carry a variety of meanings, and there often isn’t a one-to-one correspondence between those English words and words in other languages that convey the same or similar meaning.

    To start with the assumption that each Greek word has one and only one acceptable English translation is to start with a faulty assumption. The only difference I see is one that you may lie in your interpretation: that “forth” suggests more enthusiasm than “out.” That seems to me to be a connotation you’re bringing to the words, not an inherent meaning of “forth.” To the contrary, I’d say that the point made by a number of people is that “forth,” while perhaps not archaic, carries connotations of formality or perhaps grandeur.

    I do note that Strong’s indicates that the meaning of the root of the word you’re asking about—exerchomai—is “to go or come out of.”

  • Just to prove (if proof were needed) that I am a Curmudgeonly Old Git, what the heck does all of this matter?

    There are more important things to be worried about, such as the correct use of the Oxford comma, or the correct use of the apostrophe.
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    I’d be interested in the take @Eutychus has from a translation standpoint.

    As far as I'm concerned it's archaic, preserved only in idiomatic phrases, and has no difference in meaning from "go out (into)", and so far as I know (which is not very far) there is no Greek term corresponding specifically to the English term "forth".
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    I think the difference between using a current standard term and using an archaic term is a difference in meaning even if it isn't a difference in denotation.
  • We're "on a roll" as they say,
    so here now is
    The Fourth Firth of Forth ...
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    Dafyd wrote: »
    I think the difference between using a current standard term and using an archaic term is a difference in meaning even if it isn't a difference in denotation.

    It's a difference of register. It makes it sound more noble than it originally did.

    I'm reminded of @mousethief's complaint many years ago about Gandalf's declaration about the capital of Rohan: "Edoras, and the Golden Hall of Meduseld. There dwells Theoden, King of Rohan" which as he had it, as I recall, could more simply be put: That is Edoras, and the golden hall is called Meduseld. Theoden King of Rohan lives there".
  • The Lord said unto John, "Come forth and receive eternal life."

    But alas John came fifth, so he won the toaster.
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    edited January 2
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Dafyd wrote: »
    I think the difference between using a current standard term and using an archaic term is a difference in meaning even if it isn't a difference in denotation.

    It's a difference of register. It makes it sound more noble than it originally did.

    I'm reminded of @mousethief's complaint many years ago about Gandalf's declaration about the capital of Rohan: "Edoras, and the Golden Hall of Meduseld. There dwells Theoden, King of Rohan" which as he had it, as I recall, could more simply be put: That is Edoras, and the golden hall is called Meduseld. Theoden King of Rohan lives there".
    But as Theoden's real estate agent used to say, "Why settle for just living, when you can dwell?"

    (eta: punching it up a bit)
  • I don't think "forth" is so much elevated as old.
  • mousethief wrote: »
    I don't think "forth" is so much elevated as old.
    I’d say this is an instance of “old” and “elevated” going hand-in-hand.

  • ChemincreuxChemincreux Shipmate Posts: 24
    Why the hell does it matter? A very reasonable response and I apologise for my confrontational "You're all missing the point!" Some of you have certainly grasped it, and may well understand that it's important (to me), I'm saying that it isn't just a personal foible. It matters to all of us in some measure. Are all bible translations of equal value, of equal effectiveness in transmitting to their readers what the original (or at least, ancient) writers are telling us? The particular instance I use is one that ought not to raise the temperature of debate. It was chosen to establish a principle.
    Do you read poetry? Did you ever hear a decent poet allow that the odd word here or there doesn't matter?
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited January 3
    The particular instance I use is one that ought not to raise the temperature of debate. It was chosen to establish a principle.
    But you still haven’t really explained why “he went forth” is a more accurate translation of the Greek than “he went out,” or what you think is lost by using the latter rather than the former. So it’s not particularly clear what principle you’re trying to establish.

  • Why the hell does it matter? A very reasonable response and I apologise for my confrontational "You're all missing the point!" Some of you have certainly grasped it, and may well understand that it's important (to me), I'm saying that it isn't just a personal foible. It matters to all of us in some measure. Are all bible translations of equal value, of equal effectiveness in transmitting to their readers what the original (or at least, ancient) writers are telling us? The particular instance I use is one that ought not to raise the temperature of debate. It was chosen to establish a principle.
    Do you read poetry? Did you ever hear a decent poet allow that the odd word here or there doesn't matter?

    One of the problems any would-be translator faces is not only finding *the* correct word to express (1) the meaning of the word being translated, but also, one hopes, (2) what the writer intended to say (which may mean that the context is as important as -- or sometimes even more so than -- a particular choice of a word ... This can be an especially *tricky* bit since many words don't have a single hard-fast "meaning" but may represent a range of meanings ...

    A non-Biblical language example ...
    My favorite German word is "ausgezeichnet," which is generally translated into English as, "excellent" ... but that is a very pale imitation of the actual *meaning* ... "Ein Zeichen" is a "sign," as per, say, an "exclamation point" ... So, "ausgezeichnet" best translates as "so good, there is no sign for it" ...
  • Dave WDave W Shipmate
    "Ausgezeichnet" is just the past participle of the verb "auszeichnen" which means "to distinguish" or "to honor" - more literally, to mark out.
  • My two sents ...
    But ... In actual usage, "to go out" is a mamby-pamby phrase about a change of physical location, while, "to go forth" carries the implication of a bold purposefulness ... "to go forth into battle," etc. ...
  • In actual usage, "to go out" is a mamby-pamby phrase about a change of physical location, while, "to go forth" carries the implication of a bold purposefulness ... "to go forth into battle," etc. ...
    Not so sure I agree. At the end of the service Sunday after Sunday, I am charged with these words:

    Go out into the world in peace;
    have courage;
    hold on to what is good;
    return no one evil for evil;
    strengthen the fainthearted;
    support the weak,
    and help the suffering;
    honor all people;
    love and serve the Lord,
    rejoicing in the power of the Holy Spirit.

    Nothing namby-pamby about that to my mind.

    But even if “go forth” does have an implication of bold purposefulness that “go out” lacks, is that same bold purposefulness implied by the Greek exēlthen? And if it is not, then on what basis is “went out” a less accurate translation than “went forth,” as seems to be suggested in this thread?

  • If we didn't have the word "forth" would a translator go, "Well hell, there's no good way to translate exēlthen with just one word. I'll have to say to boldly go out." ?
  • Why the hell does it matter? A very reasonable response and I apologise for my confrontational "You're all missing the point!" Some of you have certainly grasped it, and may well understand that it's important (to me), I'm saying that it isn't just a personal foible. It matters to all of us in some measure. Are all bible translations of equal value, of equal effectiveness in transmitting to their readers what the original (or at least, ancient) writers are telling us? The particular instance I use is one that ought not to raise the temperature of debate. It was chosen to establish a principle.
    Do you read poetry? Did you ever hear a decent poet allow that the odd word here or there doesn't matter?

    Accurate translation is important, but is it possible? I suppose it is a little more possible with the NT, but still. As @BroJames says you can translate the words, but absent the context, not only on the page but in the cultural setting of the writer, that's not enough.

    Even today, with all the attention I have put into understanding American politics, names and places which would bring a whole set of ideas with them are lost on me. I understand it when people say McCarthy. But what other totemic words pass me by, full of meaning to those who know? I can immerse myself in the language and ideas of America, but there will still be things that I miss, and I am of our time. How many more shades of meaning have been lost over the centuries since Revelation was composed?

    I imagine reading Homer is a similar experience.
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    A non-Biblical language example ...
    My favorite German word is "ausgezeichnet," which is generally translated into English as, "excellent" ... but that is a very pale imitation of the actual *meaning* ... "Ein Zeichen" is a "sign," as per, say, an "exclamation point" ... So, "ausgezeichnet" best translates as "so good, there is no sign for it" ...
    That is overtranslation.
    Simon Toad wrote: »
    Accurate translation is important, but is it possible?
    Traduire, c'est interpreter; 'to translate is to interpret' (and even that doesn't quite get the flavour of the original).

    The problem with 'go forth' is that in contemporary English it has acquired overtones (referred to here in terms of an extra sense of purposefulness, or destiny, or some such) that, so far as I'm aware, simply aren't there in the original. I can think of no straightforward way of rendering the sense attributed to it in the OP in French.

    There might be legitimate uses for that translation (for instance, a more poetic and thus more memorable rendering, as in the chorus "you shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace...") but a conscientious translator, especially of Scripture, should take care to avoid adding unnecessary or misleading layers of meaning1.

    Similarly, preachers should take care to ensure their exposition isn't founded on the connotations of the word used in their favourite translation rather than those of the source word, especially if some analysis reveals that its translation into other modern languages has none of the same connotations. I have had to discard what I thought were many fine expository points over the years due to this process2.

    1I do believe however that Bible translation is legitimate and that Scripture, and revelation, is designed to be translated. But that's another topic.

    2Trivial recent example: don't make much of King Lemuel being from Massa before checking a few other translations.
Sign In or Register to comment.