Last updated 27/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
To those interested in the translation of the Bible into Chinese it is well known that there is a manuscript of part of the New Testament in Chinese among the Sloane MSS. in the British Museum. But no exact description of this manuscript seems ever to have been published, and even its author's name was unknown till lately.
page 25 note 1 The original uses the old form with the radical 163.
page 26 note 1 Launay, A.Journal d'André Ly, Paris, 1906Google Scholar.
page 27 note 1 It is very strange, and naturally led Montucci (see below) to strange and groundless conjectures that the version of Sloane 3599 had never been known in China, that Bishop de Martillat himself should have written to Stephanus Fourmont from Ch'êng-tu on 9 August, 1741: II seroit à souhaiter, que l'étude de cette Langue vint en vogue parmi les Sçavans, ils decouvriroient dans ses Livres, des connoissances aussi utiles que curieuses, & la Religion en retireroit un avantage essentiel; ce seroit la traduction des Livres sacrés, qui manquent absolument à l'Eglise de la Chine (Fourmont, S., Linguae Sinarum . . . Grammatica Duplex, Paris, 1742, preface, p. [xli]Google Scholar). Father de Lapparent says that the Bishop had been correcting Basset's S. Matthew in 1734, with a reference to Launay, A., Su-tchuen, I, p. 73Google Scholar.
