The Life of George Borrow [59]
There were however, still the remaining four volumes to complete, and many more difficulties to overcome.
One vexation that presented itself was a difference of opinion between Borrow and Lipovzoff, who "thought proper, when the Father Almighty is addressed, to erase the personal and possessive pronouns thou or thine, as often as they occur, and in their stead to make use of the noun as the case may require. For example, 'O Father! thou art merciful' he would render, 'O Father! the Father is merciful.'" Borrow protested, but Lipovzoff, who was "a gentleman, whom the slightest contradiction never fails to incense to a most incredible degree," told him that he talked nonsense, and refused to concede anything. {138a} Lipovzoff, who had on his side the Chinese scholars and unlimited powers as official censor (from whose decree there was no appeal) over his own work, carried his point. He urged that "amongst the Chinese and Tartars, none but the dregs of society were ever addressed in the second person; and that it would be most uncouth and indecent to speak of the Almighty as if He were a servant or a slave." This difficulty of the verbal ornament of the East was one that the Bible Society had frequently met with in the past. It was rightly considered as ill-fitting a translation of the words of Christ. Simplicity of diction was to be preserved at all costs, whatever might be the rule with secular books. Mr Jowett had warned Borrow to "beware of confounding the two distinct ideas of translation and interpretation!" {138b} and also informed him that "the passion for honorific-abilitudinity is a vice of Asiatic languages, which a Scripture translator, above all others, ought to beware of countenancing." {139a}
Well might Borrow write to Mr Jowett, "How I have been enabled to maintain terms of friendship and familiarity with Mr Lipovzoff, and yet fulfil the part which those who employ me expect me to fulfil, I am much at a loss to conjecture; and yet such is really the case." {139b} On the whole, however, the two men worked harmoniously together, the censor-translator being usually amenable to editorial reason and suggestion; and Borrow was able to assure Mr Jowett that with the exception of this one instance "the word of God has been rendered into Manchu as nearly and closely as the idiom of a very singular language would permit."
Borrow's mind continued to dwell upon the project of penetrating into China and distributing the Scriptures himself. He wrote again, repeating "the assurance that I am ready to attempt anything which the Society may wish me to execute, and, at a moment's warning, will direct my course towards Canton, Pekin, or the court of the Grand Lama." {139c} The project had, however, to be abandoned. The Russian Government, desirous of maintaining friendly relations with China, declined to risk her displeasure for a missionary project in which Russia had neither interest nor reasonable expectation of gain. In agreeing to issue a passport such as Borrow desired, it stipulated that he should carry with him "not one single Manchu Bible thither." {139d} In spite of this discouragement, Borrow wrote to Mr Jowett with regard to the Chinese programme, "I AGAIN REPEAT THAT I AM AT COMMAND." {139e}
This determination on Borrow's part to become a missionary filled his mother with alarm. She had only one son now, and the very thought of his going into wild and unknown regions seemed to her tantamount to his going to his death. Mrs Clarke also expressed strong disapproval of the project. "I must tell you," she wrote, "that your letter chilled me when I read your intention of going as a Missionary or Agent, with the Manchu Scriptures in your hand, to the Tartars, the land of incalculable dangers."
By the middle of May 1835 Borrow saw the end of his labours in sight. On 3rd/15th May he wrote asking for instructions relative to the despatch of the bulk of the volumes, and also as to the disposal of the type. "As for myself," he continues, "I suppose I must return to England, as my task will be speedily
One vexation that presented itself was a difference of opinion between Borrow and Lipovzoff, who "thought proper, when the Father Almighty is addressed, to erase the personal and possessive pronouns thou or thine, as often as they occur, and in their stead to make use of the noun as the case may require. For example, 'O Father! thou art merciful' he would render, 'O Father! the Father is merciful.'" Borrow protested, but Lipovzoff, who was "a gentleman, whom the slightest contradiction never fails to incense to a most incredible degree," told him that he talked nonsense, and refused to concede anything. {138a} Lipovzoff, who had on his side the Chinese scholars and unlimited powers as official censor (from whose decree there was no appeal) over his own work, carried his point. He urged that "amongst the Chinese and Tartars, none but the dregs of society were ever addressed in the second person; and that it would be most uncouth and indecent to speak of the Almighty as if He were a servant or a slave." This difficulty of the verbal ornament of the East was one that the Bible Society had frequently met with in the past. It was rightly considered as ill-fitting a translation of the words of Christ. Simplicity of diction was to be preserved at all costs, whatever might be the rule with secular books. Mr Jowett had warned Borrow to "beware of confounding the two distinct ideas of translation and interpretation!" {138b} and also informed him that "the passion for honorific-abilitudinity is a vice of Asiatic languages, which a Scripture translator, above all others, ought to beware of countenancing." {139a}
Well might Borrow write to Mr Jowett, "How I have been enabled to maintain terms of friendship and familiarity with Mr Lipovzoff, and yet fulfil the part which those who employ me expect me to fulfil, I am much at a loss to conjecture; and yet such is really the case." {139b} On the whole, however, the two men worked harmoniously together, the censor-translator being usually amenable to editorial reason and suggestion; and Borrow was able to assure Mr Jowett that with the exception of this one instance "the word of God has been rendered into Manchu as nearly and closely as the idiom of a very singular language would permit."
Borrow's mind continued to dwell upon the project of penetrating into China and distributing the Scriptures himself. He wrote again, repeating "the assurance that I am ready to attempt anything which the Society may wish me to execute, and, at a moment's warning, will direct my course towards Canton, Pekin, or the court of the Grand Lama." {139c} The project had, however, to be abandoned. The Russian Government, desirous of maintaining friendly relations with China, declined to risk her displeasure for a missionary project in which Russia had neither interest nor reasonable expectation of gain. In agreeing to issue a passport such as Borrow desired, it stipulated that he should carry with him "not one single Manchu Bible thither." {139d} In spite of this discouragement, Borrow wrote to Mr Jowett with regard to the Chinese programme, "I AGAIN REPEAT THAT I AM AT COMMAND." {139e}
This determination on Borrow's part to become a missionary filled his mother with alarm. She had only one son now, and the very thought of his going into wild and unknown regions seemed to her tantamount to his going to his death. Mrs Clarke also expressed strong disapproval of the project. "I must tell you," she wrote, "that your letter chilled me when I read your intention of going as a Missionary or Agent, with the Manchu Scriptures in your hand, to the Tartars, the land of incalculable dangers."
By the middle of May 1835 Borrow saw the end of his labours in sight. On 3rd/15th May he wrote asking for instructions relative to the despatch of the bulk of the volumes, and also as to the disposal of the type. "As for myself," he continues, "I suppose I must return to England, as my task will be speedily