 sj |
||
|
||
Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...'
|
|
|
Subject: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Jim Dixon Date: 02 Oct 08 - 11:01 AM I'm searching for the origin of the familiar phrase "till death do us part," also known in the alternate word order: "till death us do part." In particular, I want to know which came first? I've found "till death us do part" as part of the marriage vows in The Book of Common Prayer, published by the Church of England. The oldest text viewable with Google Book Search was published in 1765. It is also in the current version published at the Church of England web site. The phrase "till death do us part" can be found in The Divine Office for the Use of the Laity, published by the Roman Catholic Church in 1763. ...but I know the Book of Common Prayer was first published in 1549, although I suppose it might have drawn on some older sources. I have no idea how old the Catholic version of the vows might be. It occurs to me that even when liturgy was primarily in Latin, some parts must have been in the vernacular, otherwise how would people saying wedding vows know what they were assenting to? Can anyone shed any light on this? |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Paul Burke Date: 02 Oct 08 - 11:26 AM I've the strongest feeling that couples getting married always knew what they were assenting to, and that it wasn't necessarily explicitly mentioned in the service: They begged him stay, and not away, For they were not full- bound, sir- He said they might to bed tonight To tally-ho the hounds, sir! When a friend of my mother's was getting married, she repeated the line "All my worldly goods I thee endow" as "All my worldly goods, I, thee- and how!" |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: wysiwyg Date: 02 Oct 08 - 11:28 AM Nowadays we often say, "Till we are parted by death." ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: PoppaGator Date: 02 Oct 08 - 12:14 PM Before the Reformation, the Church of England, the Book of Common Prayer, etc., Western Christianity was united and the Latin language was used universally for all liturgy and sacraments, which would of course include that of matrimony. While the priest would always speak the Latin text, the congregation (or, at least, the literate members thereof) would generally be provided with some kind of translation into their local vernacular language. Whatever the original Latin phrase may be, word-order in Latin is different from that in English. "Do us" and "us do" are alternative translations of the same Latin original, and neither one could possibly be considered a "more correct" translation. Before the Reformation introduced the practice of actually conducting services in modern languages (and therefore writing definitive translations to be recited publicly), there must have been many varied informal translations in common use ~ e.g., couples making arrangements to marry would undoubtedly have the priest tell them the meanings of the Latin words and phrases they would be hearing and reciting in the ceremony. With no "official" English text having been defined (because none of the actual rites would be conducted in English), every individual parish priest would be providing his own informal translation. I can see how it might be impossible to determine which came first. It probably is possible, however, to determine the first English text to be used with ecclesiastical approval in the actual ceremony, replacing the Latin ~ just find the earliest available Church of England document. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: gnomad Date: 02 Oct 08 - 01:02 PM The phrase "till death us do part" is included in the Church of England's Book of Common Prayer. This remained substantially unchanged from 1662 (the date Anglicans generally use to refer to the 'old' order of service before the numerous 20th century alternatives) until quite recently. In fact I believe that this form of service may still be requested, although clergy willing to use it are a threatened species. A previous vernacular prayerbook was brought into use by the Act of Uniformity of 1549. The book was to a great extent the work of Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556) Archbishop of Canterbury, and did include a service for the Solemnisation of Matrimony, but I don't know whether the vital phrase was present. As I understand it, the 1662 version drew heavily on its predecessor (which had had a number of revisions in the intervening century) so the phrase may go back to Cranmer's version. I will see whether I can find out more. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: GUEST,highlandman at work Date: 02 Oct 08 - 01:50 PM justus.anglican.org has the 1549 text as "I N. take thee N. to my wedded wife, to have and to holde from this day forwarde, for better, for wurse, for richer, for poorer, in sickenes, and in health, to love and to cherishe, til death us departe: according to Goddes holy ordeinaunce: And therto I plight thee my trouth." Which probably muddlef the queftion rather than fhedding any light... -Glenn PS the wife's vow is the same except that it adds "and to obeye" after "cherishe"... |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Jim Dixon Date: 02 Oct 08 - 02:29 PM "Til death us departe"—that's a phrase I hadn't heard of, or thought of! Actually, highlandman, it does shed some light. I can now imagine a line of evolution: "Death us depart" → "Death us do part" → "Death do us part" Imagining doesn't prove it's so, of course. PoppaGator: I could dispute your assertion that neither translation could possibly be considered more correct. [Emphasis added.] It was formerly believed by many—and is still believed by some—that Latin should serve as a model for English. That was part of the rationale for teaching Latin. That's where we get our rule that infinitives should not be split. Latin infinitives are one word. Since you can't do it in Latin, you shouldn't do it in English—or so it was taught in the grammar schools. Whatever is the Latin for "do part," I imagine it is one word, and therefore (arguably) the phrase shouldn't be split by putting "us" in the middle. Now, did the translators of the prayer book follow that rule? Furthermore, is everything in the prayer book a translation of something that already existed in Latin? |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: GUEST,highlandman at work Date: 02 Oct 08 - 03:25 PM Well, it gets even better: As I understand it, the 1549 original was entirely or nearly entirely the work of Thomas Cranmer, drawing primarily on the Latin text of the Sarum rite. When I looked around for that, I found this site http://www.shipbrook.com/wedding/matrimonium.html which has everything said by the priest, and all the rubrics (stage directions if you will) in Latin, but the vows repeated by the couple are IN ENGLISH! Which bears along the lines PoppaGator was thinking above. It doesn't prove that the practice of repeating the vows in the vernacular was extant at that time, but it makes sense. I'll keep looking. -Glenn |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: GUEST Date: 02 Oct 08 - 04:55 PM From the OED definition of "depart": (Middle English departen, from Old French departir, to split, divide : de-, de- + partir, to divide (from Latin partîre, from pars, part-, part;) So the meaning of "depart" in Cranmer's time would have had more to do with separation than the modern sense of "leave". As in "til death separate us." Which makes perfectly good sense, and agrees with the import of the more modern wording. Words can be as interesting as music. Cheers -Glenn |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Jim Dixon Date: 06 Oct 08 - 11:34 AM Thanks for the link, highlandman, to The Sarum Rite. Here are the English parts:
... I N. take thee N. to my wedded husband, to haue and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sicknesse & in health, to be bonnair and buxom, in bed and boord til death vs depart, if holy Church vvil it permit, and therto I plight thee my troth. ... With this ring I thee wed, this gold and siluer I thee giue, and with my bodie I thee worshippe, & with al my worldly goodes I thee endew. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do. From: GUEST,Polly Brown Date: 06 Oct 08 - 11:54 AM Don't forget Alf Garnett, now there was a man who spoke his mind ! Warren Mitchell starred in this role in a programme of the same name throughout the 1960's and 70's. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Mr Red Date: 06 Oct 08 - 12:48 PM Nowadays we often say, "Till we are parted by death." how often? |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Partridge Date: 06 Oct 08 - 03:01 PM Are we parted by death? Yes in a physical way, but what about in a spiritual way. I don't think we are ever parted if we have real love. Its funny how a religion that talks about everlasting life would have you put something like death as an end - but its only my thoughts. love Pat xxx |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Snuffy Date: 06 Oct 08 - 07:34 PM Early death was more common in the 16th century, and "till death us depart" cleared the way for remarriage following the death of a spouse, rather than being forced to abstain henceforth by vows of eternal fidelity. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: meself Date: 07 Oct 08 - 01:06 AM And then there's the question of when the Church actually managed to corner the marriage market, and what was or wasn't said in non-church marriages ... |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: GUEST,Blackhawk Date: 02 Jul 09 - 11:10 AM I don't believe that the concept of "till death do us part" really ment that we would be parted in all that we are, but only in the physical sense, the here and now. We are still united in the spiritual sense, now and forever more if the love is true and all enduring, hense the term "Soul Mates", Secondly, I can find no where in the Bible, a referance to the phrase, "Till Death Do Us Part" or any other derivation of the phrase, which gives rise to the concept that marriage vows are forever, in the spritual sense, which again enforces the idea of the term "Soul Mates". You are "in love" not only in the physical sense but also the mind, the spirit, the heart, and the souls of each of you. You are united as ONE, now and forever more, even after the death of one or the other. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Ebbie Date: 02 Jul 09 - 01:20 PM Blackhawk, that kind of thinking might account in some cultures for the ritualistic suicide of the remaining spouse. To my mind, even if there remains a spiritual (literally!) bond between the two after the death of one, we are taught there are many different forms of love, agape being one, so surely the widowed person is free to love - and marry - again in the physical sense. It does seem odd to me that we, in this secular world, hang on to the fairly archaic vow of remaining together until death. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: gnu Date: 02 Jul 09 - 01:33 PM "And therto I plight thee my trouth." I read that as "trout" at first. Spilt my tea. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Kent Davis Date: 03 Jul 09 - 12:15 AM Guest,Blackhawk, The idea that marriage vows are, or should be, or can be, eternal is not found in the Bible. Instead, the Bible specifically says that marriage ends when one partner dies, just like "till death do us part" implies. For example, Paul writes, in Romans 7:1-3, "Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress." Similarly, in Matthew 22:23-32, when the Sadducees (who didn't believe in resurrection) were trying to make Jesus into a laughingstock with a trick question about marriage, he turned the table on them: "The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question, saying, 'Teacher, Moses said, "If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up children for his brother." Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother. So too the second and third, down to the seventh. After them all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her.' But Jesus answered them, 'You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob"? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.'" Kent |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Jim Dixon Date: 03 Jul 09 - 12:24 AM I always took the phrase "till death us do part" to mean that, when one partner dies, the other is free to remarry. It has nothing to do with an afterlife. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Darowyn Date: 03 Jul 09 - 04:29 AM That the original phrase was "death us depart" makes sense, since surely "do" whichever side of "us" it appears, is ungrammatical. "Do" would be plural. Taking the Latin syntactical model, you could conjugate the verb "to do" like this. I do Thou dost (or doest) He doth (or doeth) We do You do They do "Till death us doth part" or "Till death doth us part" would have been the correct grammar in Tudor English. Cheers Dave |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Tug the Cox Date: 03 Jul 09 - 06:24 AM Till death do us part is perfectly grammatical. It is an example of the Subjunctive mood being marked by a transference of the verb from one 'person' to another. This was once far more common. Some surviving examples include...'If I were you'. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Darowyn Date: 03 Jul 09 - 09:07 AM It might be subjunctive, I suppose- I had not thought of that, but would that not tend to imply, "Till we are parted by death, but we may not be...." If I were you('but I'm not' -implied) reflects the way the subjunctive is used in modern English, though Clerical language does occasionally use more Latinate syntax in prayers, and this could well be a hangover from formal Tudor speech. Cheers Dave |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Desert Dancer Date: 03 Jul 09 - 01:53 PM i love mudcat. thanks for this. *BG* ~ Becky in Tucson |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Tug the Cox Date: 04 Jul 09 - 06:58 AM Subjunctive covers both, darowyn, as the date of death is not known it is in the realm of the subjunctive, as would be an inagined scenario of not dying. |
|
Subject: 'Till death do we part' From: Genie Date: 04 Jul 09 - 10:26 PM "Till death do us part," "Till death us do part," "Till death parts us," etc. -- they all make sense and seem to me to be quite interchangeable (and gramattically acceptable). However, there are several fairly recent country songs that use the phrase "Till death do we part. (Not sure whether they mean for a comma to be after the word "death" or not.) This seems to me to make no sense either grammatically or in terms of meaning. If they mean "till death parts us," then it's horrible grammar to say "till death parts we." But if that's not what they mean, it seems they'd be saying "We part until death." -- Hardly a sentiment fitting a wedding. I don't know who came up with this silly twist, or why, but it's like chalk on a blackboard whenever I hear it. G |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Snuffy Date: 05 Jul 09 - 07:19 PM A similar use of the subjunctive may be "Till Kingdom come" |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: jeffp Date: 05 Jul 09 - 08:26 PM This is a wonderful discussion. I thank you all for bringing the old texts to my attention. I am getting married in October and we are observing some very old traditions in the ceremony. I do believe we will draw from this in writing our vows. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: GUEST,Char in Seattle Date: 20 Mar 11 - 10:26 PM Thank you, Snuffy. I read somewhere that "til death do us part" (in whatever word order you use) was coined when people didn't live as long as they do these days, thus freeing the widow(er) to marry again. It's unusual these days to stay together for decades. People "grow apart" and have nothing in common; why stay together and be miserable? This is just my take on the subject. Thanks for your time, all. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: MGM·Lion Date: 21 Mar 11 - 12:52 AM For interest, another frequent current use of the subjunctive is "God Save The Queen". ~Michael~ |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Mrs.Duck Date: 21 Mar 11 - 09:42 AM It's unusual these days to stay together for decades. Not as unusual as you might think and sadly some just give up too easily without trying to make a marriage work. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: GUEST,Ralph Date: 23 Mar 13 - 05:28 AM 'For interest, another frequent current use of the subjunctive is "God Save The Queen". ~Michael~' (I always took "God Save The Queen" to mean "May God Save The Queen", which has nothing to do with the subjunctive.) What makes most sense to me is that the precursor, which is grammatically correct, is "till death us doth part" (thanks, Dave). Am unconvinced of the subjunctive argument for the same reasons as is Darowyn. "Till death us departe" also sounds quite plausible. |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: MGM·Lion Date: 23 Mar 13 - 07:26 AM No, Ralph; it has everything to do with the subjunctive. I fear you make it appear that you don't know quite what a subjunctive is: ~~ one use is to imply the imperative 'may'or 'let' to indicate a desired outcome: so, you are right, it does mean "May [or let] God save the Queen", expressed via the use of the subjunctive. As wikipedia puts it: 'The present subjunctive is used [for] imperatives ... (using the 3rd person), and general statements of desire.' What is "God save the Queen", or, in your alternative synonymous version, "May God save the Queen", but 'general statements of desire'? ~M~ |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Mar 13 - 09:17 AM As in The Parting Glass - "Goodnight and joy be with you all." ......................... Do people ever get married with vows that include something like "Until maybe we are fed up with each other"? |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Airymouse Date: 23 Mar 13 - 09:48 AM I'm no help where Church is involved, but I think I can shed some light on the subjunctive mood. We used to use the subjunctive mood to indicate indefinite future. That is why "do" is in the subjunctive: we know death will (de)part us, but we don't know when. Similarly, in "O Come O come Emanuel" the first line ends, "until the Son of God APPEAR", because those of you who believe in the 2nd coming know He will appear, but you don't know when. "God save the Queen" uses the subjunctive to indicate wish or desire. It is the same use as "God damn it". We aren't using the imperative mood to order God to damn it, we are using the subjunctive mood because we wish God to damn it. Here is a more church related example: "God rest you merry, gentlemen". "Rest" is in the subjunctive mood, because we are wishing that God keeps the gentlemen merry. The subjunctive of direct discourse has departed- the only example I know is J.J. Niles's version of The False Knight on the Road", which begins,"Oh where BE you going," said the knight on the road"- but there are a few other uses of the subjunctive still kicking around: dream "I dreamed I were on a tropical island" supposition contrary to fact "if the concert were on Friday, I would go." mandative subjunctive (about to depart, I think) "It is required that the applicant BE 18 years of age and that he POSSESS a valid driver's license." |
|
Subject: RE: Origins: 'Till death do us part' or '...us do...' From: Bill D Date: 23 Mar 13 - 09:51 AM What? *gasp*... you mean the word is not "debt"? |
| Translate Thread |
