The first one is
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, if there is no love in me, I am become a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal.
It is St. Paul's words.
The second is
But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
by Tony Warren.
Can we say "i am become" or "is come"?
2007-08-03 00:50:53 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
These sentences are based on a rather outdated mode of grammar, but yes, they are correct. English has been influenced by a lot of different languages over the years. It is mainly a derivative of Germanic languages, with Celtic influences, but when the French invaded in 1066, they brought a whole host of new words and rules to the English language.
In French, verbs that speak of state (to be, to seem, to become, to move, to come, to go, etc) take the helper verb "etre" (to be) to form the past tense:
Je suis arrivé: I have arrived (literally "I AM arrived").
English took this rule to heart, especially for erudite writing, such as English translations of the Bible. So, one gets "I am become" rather than "I have become".
This usage has fallen by the wayside, but to say it is incorrect is to say that the use of "thee" and "thou" in the Bible is also incorrect. It's not incorrect, just archaic.
2007-08-03 02:49:30 · answer #1 · answered by dansinger61 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Technically, neither is gramatically correct, but we tend to let people like St. Paul and other famous figures slide when it comes to grammar. I am a high school teacher.
Hope this helps.
2007-08-03 00:57:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. Here is how they should read.
Though I speak with the tongue of an angel, if there is no love in me, then I am but a loud trumpet or a crashing cymbal.
the other should read,
But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part shall be complete.
Note the use of the present perfect in both cases.
2007-08-03 01:11:15 · answer #3 · answered by wiseguy 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I guess these two sentences were fine for the age.
BUT could you imagine talking like that now. Specially in our country with our multi-cultured society. People would have a good laugh though, which wouldn't be so bad. Lord knows, we all could use a good laugh!
JUST DON'T TALK LIKE THAT IN A JOB INTERVIEW
2007-08-03 01:49:41 · answer #4 · answered by #1 Country Girl 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the time period in which these were written, they were correct. We no longer speak like that, but quotes always stay as they were originally written.
2007-08-03 01:16:52 · answer #5 · answered by Kat v 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think they are grammatically correct, but would not be acceptable today. The usage of "become" is dated as used here. However, it might be acceptable in poetry even today.
2007-08-03 01:00:21 · answer #6 · answered by ghouly05 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that's #a million. The U.S. state of Alaska. it isn't the United State of Alaska by using fact there is not any such entity. First, the reference is to the rustic the united states, so as that would desire to be spelled out.
2016-10-01 07:46:31 · answer #7 · answered by earles 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When you consider the time in which these were written, they are perfectly correct. I wouldn't want to mess with God-inspired words anyway!
2007-08-03 01:11:08 · answer #8 · answered by Sherry K 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Neither is right, but if these are direct quotes then you have to go with what they say.
2007-08-03 01:00:29 · answer #9 · answered by newsgal03 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
they are close enough so that you get the message.
2007-08-03 00:54:22 · answer #10 · answered by nvrrong 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋