Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Recent history of vi Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2025 14:23:20 +0100 Lines: 48 Message-ID: <830j0mxn2u.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> References: <10ga6r1$7ph$1@news.misty.com> <10gpatq$jpt$3@news.misty.com> <69334624$0$11430$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <10h175s$2b64m$19@dont-email.me> <10h4noh$3n4no$4@dont-email.me> <10h5a1j$3rsmf$1@dont-email.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 80QpAZ7WKYe9NjLoL/rHEQXlcyrS3bQxwwJodghEbottH4F7AD X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:cWunHFnbceLp/MffeATzkybo/5c= sha256:Gi+LLefmgODbux+X6jlyJSaBV6/aNkOFMbKKT7VK/u4= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: <10h5a1j$3rsmf$1@dont-email.me> Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:78493 alt.folklore.computers:232450 On 2025-12-08 02:35, Rich wrote: > In comp.os.linux.misc Alexander Schreiber wrote: >> The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>> On 07/12/2025 19:12, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>>> rbowman writes: >>>>> On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 16:31:23 +0100, Alexander Schreiber wrote: >>>> >>>>> Semi-apropos I was reading an essay by Herbert Spencer last night. He >>>>> questioned the British educational system that taught Greek and Latin >>>>> because that's what 'educated' people learned even though they had limited >>>>> utility in later life. >>>> >>>> Latin is useful for several reasons; it helps make sense of english, for starters, >>>> and it certainly helps when subsequently learning latin-derived (Romance) languages. >>> >>> The point about Latin and Greek is that all science mathematics, >>> philosophy and the bible used to be written in it because it was that >>> language of an educated European. >> >> The bible was not written in Latin because that was the language of an >> educated European, it was written in Latin because that was the language >> the clergy (from the lowest monk to the pope) learned and spoke and it >> conventiently was a language that most of the people didn't speak, so >> they needed the clergy as "interpreters". > > The reason is likely simpler than that. Most books of the Bible are > very old, predating modern languages. So it could only have been > originally written down using a written language that existed at the > time of that writing. At the time, the choices might have been Latin > and/or Greek as languages, and given the impact the Romans had on the > proto religion that came to be known as Christanity, and the Romans > subsequent embrace of the same, having the bible books written in (or > translated into -- the more likely possibility) Latin because of the > Roman empire embrace of Christanity is much more likely the reason than > the "elites" wanting to be sure the mere peasants could not read it. > > Of course, once Christanity spread across Europe, the elites > maintaining their elite status by keeping the bible in a language only > spoken by the "properly educated highbrows" clearly is why it remained > untranslated to other languages for so long. I have a catholic bible in 6 thick tomes from about 1850 which has one column in latin, taken from the vulgata, and another column in Spanish. Then the bottom half are foot notes. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;