Receive our blog posts in your email by filling out the form at the bottom of this page.
It was in trying to fulfill my responsibilities as pastor of a Presbyterian Church in the farming country of Pennsylvania that I first became interested in the question of what worship according to the Reformed tradition should be. As I tried to search out the meaning of Reformed worship, I became more and more convinced that I must travel to those lands in which the Reformation had taken place, learn the languages the Reformers spoke and search the documents they left behind. So it was that I found myself living as a foreigner in Europe for almost seven years. -- Hughes Oliphant Old, preface to "The Patristic Roots of Reformed Worship”
Most of us do well to know our primary language sufficiently to communicate with those around us. Bilingual ability is a great blessing. In keeping with the Presbyterian tradition of promoting a learned and educated ministry, ministers do well to know their primary language, plus Hebrew and Greek. Latin was the language of scholars of the past, and knowledge of same has its significant benefits today. But there are some whose linguistic abilities are so special as to be regarded as extraordinary gifts.
Among our Log College Press authors, there are many who could be highlighted as noteworthy in this area. James Robert Boyd, for example, was fluent in six languages. There are many missionaries whose fluency in native tongues led them to write grammar-dictionaries that have since served as valuable reference works. B.B. Warfield knew — besides English, Hebrew and Greek — Latin, German, French, and certainly had some familiarity with Dutch, if not more. Isidor Loewenthal, the famous missionary and Bible translator, who was born in Poland, educated at Princeton and died in India, “could preach with facility in the Pushtu, Persian, Hindustani and Arabic languages.” According to one biography, he was “a master of the classical languages of Europe as well as of Hebrew and its cognate languages Arabic and Chaldee.” Robert Dick Wilson is said to have mastered 45 languages. Many more examples could be given, but there is one particular gifted linguist which we intend to highlight especially today.
We can thank Henry C. Alexander for the detailed list which follows concerning his uncle Joseph Addison Alexander’s knowledge of languages (Henry C. Alexander, The Life of Joseph Addison Alexander, Vol. 2, pp. 862-865).
Arabic: of which he was a consummate master, from a child, and wrote with some ease, but which he could scarcely be said to speak.
Hebrew: ditto.
Latin: which he knew profoundly, from a child, and wrote and spoke.
Persian: which he knew intimately, from a child, and wrote, but did not speak.
Syriac: which he knew intimately, from a child, and perhaps wrote, but did not speak.
Chaldee: which he knew as well, or nearly as well, as he did Hebrew, and read with rapidity without a lexicon.
Greek: which he knew profoundly, from a child, and wrote, but did not attempt to speak.
Italian: which he read with the same facility he did English, and spoke.
German: which he knew profoundly, from his youth, and wrote and spoke.
Spanish: which he knew thoroughly, and probably wrote and spoke.
French: which he read, wrote and spoke with ease.
English: which he knew no less profoundly than familiarly.
Ethiopic: which he knew philologically and profoundly, and could read without difficulty.
Chinese: of which, in its innumerable details, he had but a smattering, but knew pretty well philologically.
Romaic: which he read and wrote with ease.
Portuguese: which he read with ease, but perhaps did not attempt to speak.
Danish: which he says he soon “read fluently with a dictionary,” and probably in time, without one.
Turkish; and
Sanscrit: which (soon after he acquired them) he says were “becoming quite familiar,” and doubtless became more so.
Polish: which he read with ease, though probably with the aid of the lexicon.
Malay: which he began in connection with Chinese, and probably read with a dictionary.
Coptic: which he knew philologically and, I think, profoundly, and read, though perhaps not with ease.
Swedish: which he read with ease; at least with the dictionary.
Dutch: which he read, perhaps with ease; at least with the dictionary.
He no doubt had an inkling of the nature, and a glimpse into the structure of many others, which he has not named, and knew part of the vocabulary of others.
Summary: He knew profoundly, not only philologically but linguistically, i.e., read, wrote, and spoke well —
English.
Latin.
German.
French.
(Almost certainly) Italian.
(Almost certainly) Spanish.
(Probably) Portuguese.
It is quite possible that he knew several others in this way. He knew profoundly as a philologist, and read without helps, and wrote, but did not speak — i.e., not familiarly —
Arabic.
Hebrew.
Persian.
Greek (which, however, he may have spoken a little.)
Romaic: ditto.
Chaldee: which he knew as well, or nearly as well, as he did Hebrew, and read with rapidity without a lexicon.
(Probably) Ethiopic, which he certainly read, though perhaps with difficulty.
(Probably) Dutch, which he certainly read, though perhaps not with ease.
(Possibly) Sanscrit, which he certainly read, though perhaps with some difficulty.
(Possibly) Syraic, which he read with perfect ease, but probably did not write.
(Possibly) Coptic, which he read, and I think easily, but probably did not write.
(Possibly) Danish, which he read without a lexicon, but probably did not write.
(Probably) Flemish.
(Possibly) Norwegian.
He knew profoundly as a philologist, and read with ease with the help of lexicons —
Polish: which it is barely possible he came to read without a dictionary, and even to write.
Swedish: ditto.
He knew well philologically, and pretty well I suppose, but had but a smattering of its details:
Chinese: and 2, I think he had some knowledge of Hindostanee.
He also had a masterly acquaintance with the Rabbinical Hebrew, and several dialects of languages which are mentioned in this catalogue.
He no doubt, too, had some slight acquaintance with several other proper languages, as distinguished from mere dialectical variations of one language. He may, indeed, have acquired a few languages of which there is no record.
He was thus a perfect master of probably eight or ten languages; though it is not possible to determine in every instance precisely what ones. Dr. Sears testifies, that when a student in Germany he spoke about as many as Tholuck, which was at least six. He knew profoundly, as a philologist, and wrote, certainly thirteen, probably fourteen or fifteen, possibly nineteen, or even by chance, over twenty. He knew profoundly as a philologist at least, and read with ease, with the help of the lexicons, almost certainly twenty-one, and well, probably twenty-four. He knew in all, at least slightly, and in one way or another, probably between twenty-five and thirty. He knew, at least well enough for him to claim to know something of them, twenty-five, including English, and excluding mere dialectical variations of any one language.
And herein is an insight to J. Addison Alexander’s extensive linguistic knowledge which is evident in his articles, Biblical commentaries, and other writings. What a gift to know languages, and what a blessing to readers even today who benefit from such knowledge. In the words of Roger Bacon (Opus Tertium), “Knowledge of languages is the first gateway to wisdom.”
