/lit/ - Literature

>>14123399
Sometimes the picture with no makeup gets me harder than the inverse. I just want to punch her in the eyes and cum across the bridge of her nose.

>tfw literally can't stop perceiving women as either Mothers or Whores
Books for this feel?

>>12003537
Native language: Spanish
Fluent in: English, Portuguese
Studying in uni: German and japanese

>NRSV is more accurate than the King James

King James translates "Said in his heart" as just that. NRSV uses "he said to himself" to translate this idiom.

King James translates "seed" as just that, NRSV translates it as "semen" or "descendants"

King James translates "he knew her" as just that, NRSV uses awkward terms like "he consummated their marriage" to translate it.

King James translates "slack not thy hands" literally, NRSV changes it to "do not abandon".

King James translates "thine heart be lifted up" literally, NRSV translates it as "exalt yourself"

King James translates literally "mine eye, mine eye runneth down with water," NRSV uses "my eyes flow with tears.". Yes, that's right, they actually deleted the repetition of "my eye"--which is not just stylistic, but an expression of intense emotion--it's not the "Nevermore" of Poe's Raven, it's the "Never" of Shakespeare's King Lear.

The NRSV is like it was written for retards, it's like the emoticon Shakespeare, such a sorry piece of work. The King James version keeps the frequent use of "and" in both the Old and New Testament, the NRSV deletes the use of the word as much as possible for no reason other than a stylistic choice, which in fact impairs the writing (for an example of how "and" can be integral to a style, see Cormac McCarthy, who was heavily influenced by the King James prose).