From: benlizro@ihug.co.nz   
      
   On 4/05/2024 5:42 p.m., Aidan Kehoe wrote:   
   >   
   >   Ar an ceathrú lá de mí Bealtaine, scríobh Ross Clark:   
   >   
   >   > Why "traditional date"?   
   >   >   
   >   > Because the KJV was classified as a revision rather than a fresh   
   >   > translation, it does not appear in the registry of new books known as the   
   >   > Stationers' Register....we are left without any knowledge of when in 1611   
   >   > the KJV began to be sold.... - Gordon Campbell, _Bible: The Story of the   
   >   > King James Version 1611-2011_ (quoted by Crystal)   
   >   >   
   >   > It was not a fresh translation because it often continues earlier   
   >   > translations such as that of Tyndale and Coverdale (see 20 January).   
   >   >   
   >   > But we are left without any knowledge of the whence and by whom of the   
   May 2   
   >   > "myth".   
   >   
   > I take it the second of January (or the first of February) of the subject   
   line   
   > was not intended?   
   >   
   Oops   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)