Long.
Word of the Day: Catachrestical
A curious colubriform snake of the genus Xyphorhynchus, from Madagascar. It is brownish red, and its nose is prolonged in the form of a sharp blade.
One of numerous species of long-winged, shrikelike birds of Australia and the East Indies, of the genus Artamus, and allied genera; called also wood swallow.
A linen roller used in dressing wounds.
Langensalza
Encyclopedia Britannica
LANGENSALZA, chief town of a circle in the government district of Erfurt, in the province of Saxony, Prussia, is situated on the Salza, about 20 miles north-east of Erfurt. It has an old castle, several schools of various grades, and three hospitals; and near it are the remains of the old monastery of Homburg. The manufacture of cloth is the chief industry, but lice, starch, and chemicals are also produced. The population of the town in 1875 numbered 9855. There is a sulphur bath iu the neighbourhood. Near Langensalza the Prussians and Hanoverians had a long and bloody engagement, June 27-29, 1866, which ultimately resulted in the capitulation of the latter.
9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 14, p. 285
[113 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
[113 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
Langland
Encyclopedia Britannica
LANGLAND, or Langley, William, the author of a remarkable poem belonging to the close of the 14th century, of which the full title is— The Vision of William concerning Piers tlιe Plowman, together with Vita de Do-wel, Do-bet, et Do·best, secundum Wit et Resoun d...
The author’s name is not quite certain, and the facts c >ncerning his life are few and scanty. As to his Christian name we are sure, from various allusions in the poem itself, and the title Visio Willelmi, &c., in many MSS.; and we may at once reject the suggestion that his name may have been Robert. In no less than three MSS. occurs the following colophon: “Explicit visio Willelmi W. de Petro Ie Plowman.” What is here meant by W. it is difficult to conjecture; but it is just possible that it may represent Wychwood (of which more presently), or Wigorniensis, i.e., of Worcester. As to the surname, we find the note that “Robert or William Langland made pers ploughman,” in a handwriting of the 15th century, on the fly-leaf of a MS. copy belonging to Lord Ashburnham; and in a Dublin MS., is the note: “Memorandum, quod Stacy de Rokayle, pater Willielmi de Langlond, qui Stacius fuit generosus, et morabatur in Schiptone-under-Whicwode, tenens domini le Spenser in comitatu Oxon., qui predictus Willielmus fecit librum qui vocatur Perys Ploughman.” Nevertheless, it would seem that Langland should rather be Langley, since there is no trace of any Langland family in the midland counties, while the Langley family were wardens of Wychwood forest in Oxfordshire between the years 1278 and 1362. The question has been fully discussed by Professor Pearson in the North British Review, April 1870, p. 244. According to Bale, our author was born at Cleobury Mortimer, which is quite consistent with the supposition that his father may have removed from that place to Shipton in Oxfordshire, as there seems to have been a real connexion between the families in those places. It must not be omitted that in the parish of Shipton-under-Wychwood there is a hamlet named Langley, from which he may have received his name.
The internal evidence concerning the author is fuller and more satisfactory. By piecing together the various hints concerning himself which the poet gives us, we may compile the following account. His name was William (and probably Langley), and he was born about 1332 perhaps at Cleobury Mortimer in Shropshire. His father, who was doubtless a franklin or farmer, and his other friends put him to school, made a “clerk” or scholar of him, and taught him what Holy Writ meant. In 1362, at the age of about thirty, he found himself wandering upon the Malvern hills, and fell asleep beside a stream, and saw in a vision a field full of folk, i.e., this present world, and many other remarkable sights which he duly records. From this supposed circumstance he named his poem The Vision of William, though it is really a succession of visions, since he mentions several occasions on which he awoke, and afterwards again fell asleep; and he even tells us of som; adventures which befel him in his waking moments. In some of these visions there is no mention of Piers the Plowman, but in others he describes him as being the coming reformer who was to remedy all· abuses, and restore the world to a right condition. It is remarkable that Lis conception of this reformer changes from time to time, and becomes more exalted as the poem advances. At first he was no more than a ploughman, one of the true and honest labourers who are the salt of the earth; but at last he is identified with the great reformer who has come already, the regenerator of the world in the person of Jesus Christ. We may, in fact, consider Piers the Plowman as representing Christ himself, or, in the author’s own phrase—“Petrus est Christus.” If this be borne in mind, it will not be possible to make the mistake into which so many have fallen, of speaking of Piers the Plowman as being the author, not the subject, of the poem. The author may best be called William, or we may even give him the nickname of Long Will, which, as he himself tell us, was bestowed upon him from his tallness of stature,—just as the poet Gascoigne was familiarly called Long George. Though there is mention of the Malvern hills more than once near the beginning of the poem, it is abundantly clear that the poet lived for “many years in Cornhill (London), with his wife Kitte and his daughter Calote.” He seems to have come to London not long after the date of the first com mencement of his work, and to have long continued there. He describes himself as being a tall man, one who was loath to reverence lords or ladies or persons in gay apparel, and not deigning to say “God save you” to the sergeants whom he met in the street, insomuch that many people took him to be a fool. He was very poor, wore long robes, and had a shaven crown, having received the clerical tonsure. But he seems only to have taken minor orders, and earned a precarious living by singing the placebo, dirige, and seven psalms for the good of men’s souls. The fact that he was married may explain why he never rose in the church. But he had another source of livelihood in his ability to write out legal documents, and he was extremely familiar with the law courts at Westminster. His leisure time must have been entirely occupied with his devotion to his poem, which was essentially the work of his lifetime. He was not satisfied with rewriting it once, but he actually rewrote it twice; and from the abundance of the MSS. which still exist we can see its development from the earliest draught, written about 1362, to its latest form, written after 1390. It is remarkable that the intermediate form, written later than 1370, is perhaps, taken upon the whole, the best of the three.
In 1399, just before the deposition of Richard II., appeared a poem addressed to the king, who is designated as “Richard the Redeles,” i.e., devoid of counsel. This poem, occurring in only one MS., in which it is incomplete, breaking off abruptly in the middle of a page, may safely be attributed to the same author, who was, at the time, passing through Bristol. As he was then about sixty-seven years of age, we may be sure that he did not long survive the accession of Henry IV. It may here be observed that the well-known poem entitled Pierce Ploughman's Crede, though excellently written, is certainly an imitation by another hand, viz., by the anonymous author of The Plowman's Tale, which is inserted in the black-letter editions of Chaucer, though it is none of his. The Pierce Ploughman of the Crede is very different in conception from the subject of William’s vision.
As regards the poem itself, it has been already said that it exists in three forms. If we denote these by the names of A-text, B-text, and C-text, we find, of the first, twelve MSS.; of the second, sixteen; and of the third, also sixteen MSS. A few of these show confusion between the different tvpes, but they may roughly be classed as above; and it will be seen that we thus have abundance of material, a circumstance which proves the great popularity of the poem in former times. Owing to the frequent expressions which indicate a desire for reformation in religion, it was, in the time of Edward VI., considered worthy of being printed. Three impressions were printed by Robert Crowley in 1550; and one of these was badly reprinted by Owen Rogers in 1561. In 1813 the best MS. of the C-text was printed by Dr Whitaker in an expensive form. In 1842 Mr Thomas Wright printed an edition from an excellent MS. of the B-text in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge (second edition, 1856). A complete edition of all three texts was undertaken, for the Early English Text Society, by the Rev. W. W. Skeat, but is not yet finished (1881). Vols, i., ii., and iii., containing the three texts, and the poem of Richard the Redeles, appeared in 1866, 1869, and 1873 respectively, and a part of vol. iv., containing full notes to all three texts, with some indexes, in 1877.
The general contents of the poem may be inferred from a brief description of the latest text. This is divided into twenty-three passus, nominally comprising four parts, called respectively Visio de Petro Plowman, Visio de Do-wel, Visio de Do-bet, and Visio de Do-best. Here Do-bet signifies “do better” in modern English; and the author’s own explanation of the names is that he who does a kind action does well, he who teaches others to act kindly does better, but he who combines both practice and theory, both doing good himself and teaching others to do the same, does best. But the visions by no means closely correspond to these descriptions; the poet really gives us a set of eleven visions, which may be thus enumerated (1) Vision of the Field Full of Folk, of Holy Church, and of the Lady Meed (passus i.-v.); (2) Vision of the Seven Deadly Sins, and of Piers the Plowman (pass, vi.-x.); (3) Wit, Study, Clergy, and Scripture (pass, xi., xii.); (4) Fortune, Nature, Recklessness, and Reason (pass, xiii., xiv.); (5) Vision of Imaginative (pass. XV. ); (6) Conscience, Patience, and Activa-Vita (pass, xvi., xvii.); (7) Free-will, and the Tree of Charity (pass. xviiL, xix.); (8) Faith, Hope, and Charity (pass, xx.); (9) The Triumph of Piers the Plowman, i,e., the Crucifixion, Burial, and Resurrection of Jesus Christ (pass, xxi.); (10) The Vision of Grace (pase. xxii.); (11) The Vision of Antichrist (pass, xxiii.).
This bare outline gives but little idea of the real nature of the poem. The general plan of it is slight and somewhat vague, but the execution is vivid and remarkable. The author’s object was to afford himself opportunities by the way (of which he has amply availed himself) of describing the life and manners of the poorer classes; of inveighing against clerical abuses and the rapacity of the friars; of representing the miseries caused by the great pestilences then prevalent and by the hasty and ill-advised marriages consequent thereupon; and of denouncing lazy workmen and sham beggars, the corruption and bribery then too common in the law-courts, and all the numerous forms of falsehood which are at all times the fit subjects for satire and indignant exposure. In describing, for example, the seven deadly sins, he gives so exact a description of Glutton and Sloth that the readers feel that these are no mere abstractions, but drawn from the life, and it becomes hardly more difficult to realize Glutton than it is to realize Sir John Falstaff. The numerous allegorical personages so frequently introduced, such as Scripture, Clergy, Conscience, Patience, and the like, are all mouthpieces of the author himself, uttering for the most part his own sentiments, but sometimes speaking in accordance with the character which each is supposed to represent. The theological disquisitions which are occasionally introduced are somewhat dull and tedious, but the earnestness of the author’s purpose and his energy of language tend to relieve them, and there are not many passages which might have been omitted without loss. The poem is essentially one of those which improve on a second reading, and as a linguistic monument it is of very high value. Mere extracts from the poem, even if rather numerous and of some length, fail to give a fair idea of it. The whole deserves, and will repay, a careful study; indeed, there are not many single works from which a student of English literature and of the English language may derive more substantial benefit.
The metre is alliterative, and destitute of final rhyme. It is not very regular, as the author’s earnestness led him to use the fittest words rather than those which merely served the purpose of rhythm. The chief rule is that, in general, the same letter or combination of letters should, begin three emphatic syllables in the same line, as, for example, in the line which may be modernized thus: “Of all wanner of men, the wean and the rich.” Sometimes there are but two such rhyme-letters, as: “Λfight of the commons wade him to reign.” Sometimes there are four, as: “In a summer season, when soft was the sun.” There is invariably a pause, more or less distinct, in the middle of each line.
See the editions already referred to; The Deposition of Richard II., ed. T. Wright (Camden Society), which is the same poem as Richard the Redeles; warton, Hist. of Eng. Poetry; Milman, Hist, of Latin Christianity; Marsh, Lectures on English; H. Morley, English Writers, <fcc. A long and careful summary of the whole poem is given in Illustrations of English Religion, by H. Morley, ch. lii. øy. yy. g,j
9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 14, p. 285
[2,237 words — estimated reading time: 13 minutes]
[2,237 words — estimated reading time: 13 minutes]
1. LAN'GRAGE ,
A kind of loaded die.
Long since; long ago.
A game at cards.
An old game at cards. See Loo (a).
Langton
Encyclopedia Britannica
LANGTON, Stephen (c. 1150-1228), cardinal, fortyfourth archbishop of Canterbury, was born about the middle of the 12th century; the place of his birth is unknown, but his family almost certainly belonged to Yorkshire. He had already been made a prebendary of York, most probably at an early age, when he went to France and entered the university of Paris; there he soon rose to distinction alike in philosophy and theology, and ultimately, it is said, became chancellor or at least attained high rank in the governing body. One of his fellow students and intimate friends in Paris was Lothario, the nephew of Clement HL, who when he in 1198 succeeded Celestine III. as Innocent III. forthwith appointed Langton to a post in his household. In 1206 he became cardinal priest of St Chrysogonus, a promotion on which he received the written congratulations of his sovereign King John. It was shortly after this that he first became involved in the great constitutional struggles with which his name is so honourably associated. In 1205 Hubert Walter of Canterbury had died, and there were urged at Rome the claims of two rival candidates for the vacant see,—-Reginald the subprior of Christ Church, Canterbury, who had been the sudden and unauthorized choice of a majority of the monks, and John de Gray, bishop of Norwich, whom the dissenting minority had subsequently elected with the royal sanction. Setting aside both claims, and also the appeal of the suffragans of Canterbury with the chapter, who maintained that the right of election was theirs, Innocent commanded the monks then present in Rome to proceed to a new election in his presence, Langton being the candidate set before them. Elected he accordingly was, and afterwards consecrated by the pope himself at Viterbo in June 1207. John ...immediately retaliated by banishing the monks of Canterbury, afterwards writing an angry and threatening letter to the pope. Innocent replied with firmness, but, finding John immovable, ultimately<declared his resolution to enforce submission to his will by laying England under an interdict, a resolution which was carried into effect in March 1208. For the next few years, all negotiations for his admission to his see having failed, Langton had his home in the Cistercian monastery of Pontigny near Sens in France, which thus became a principal resort of English malcontents and refugees. In the summer of 1212 he accompanied the bishops of London and Ely to Rome, and it was in consequence of their representations that deposition was passed upon John; the same prelates were also present at the great assembly of Soissons (April 1213), where a crusade against the king of England was set on foot, under the leadership of Philip of France. In the following May John made his peace, agreeing to recognize Langton, receive the exiled clergy, and restore the property which he had confiscated. Langton did not actually reach England till July, when (July 20, 1213) he performed his first episcopal act by pronouncing the absolution of the excommunicated John, who swore that all the laws of his grandfather Henry I. should be kept by all throughout the kingdom, and that all unjust laws should be utterly abolished. This oath the king was held by the archbishop to have violated almost immediately in levying war irregularly against the barons who had, not illegally, deserted him at Portsmouth; and at the meeting held in St Paul’s, London, on August 25,1214, it was Langton who produced the old charter of Henry L, and suggested the demand for its renewal, a suggestion which in the following year issued in the concession of Magna Charta at Runnymede. Soon afterwards the archbishop left England for Rome to attend the fourth Lateran council, but not before he had by the commissioners of the pope been pronounced contumacious, and declared to be suspended for his refusal to publish the excommunication of the English barons who had joined in obtaining the great charter. At Rome, where the sentence of his suspension was confirmed, he remained from November 1215 till May 1218: in September of the latter year he presided in the council held at London, where Magna Charta was solemnly confirmed; and on May 17, 1220, he officiated at the re-coronation of Henry III. In the same year the “translation” of St Thomas of Canterbury took place. Among the fragmentary notices we possess of the remainder of Langton’s life are mentioned his demand in name of the barons for royal confirmation of the charter at London in 1223. He died at Slindon on July 9, 1228.
The principal authority for the events of the life of Langton is the Chronicle of Roger of Wendover. See Hook’s Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, vol. ii.; Pearson’s History qf England, vol. ii.; and Pauli’s continuation of Lappenberg’s Geschichte von England, vol. iii.
9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 14, p. 286
[814 words — estimated reading time: 5 minutes]
[814 words — estimated reading time: 5 minutes]
1. Human speech; the expression of ideas by words or significant articulate sounds, for the communication of thoughts. language consists in the oral utterance of sounds, which usage has made the representatives of ideas. When two or more persons customarily annex the same sounds to the same ideas, the expression of these sounds by one person communicates his ideas to another. This is the primary sense of language the use of which is to communicate the thoughts of one person to another through the organs of hearing. Articulate sounds are represented by letters, marks or characters which form words. Hence language consists also in
2. Words duly arranged in sentences, written, printed or engraved, and exhibited to the eye.
3. The speech or expression of ideas peculiar to a particular nation. Men had originally one and the same language but the tribes or families of men, since their dispersion, have distinct languages.
4. Style; manner of expression.
5. Others for language all their care express.
6. The inarticulate sounds by which irrational animals express their feelings and wants. Each species of animals has peculiar sounds, which are uttered instinctively, and are understood by its own species, and its own species only.
7. Any manner of expressing thoughts. Thus we speak of the language of the eye, a language very expressive and intelligible.
8. A nation, as distinguished by their speech. Daniel 3:29 .
1. Any means of conveying or communicating ideas; specifically, human speech; the expression of ideas by the voice; sounds, expressive of thought, articulated by the organs of the throat and mouth.
2. The expression of ideas by writing, or any other instrumentality.
3. The forms of speech, or the methods of expressing ideas, peculiar to a particular nation.
4. The characteristic mode of arranging words, peculiar to an individual speaker or writer; manner of expression; style.
5. The inarticulate sounds by which animals inferior to man express their feelings or their wants.
6. The suggestion, by objects, actions, or conditions, of ideas associated therewith; as, the language of flowers.
7. The vocabulary and phraseology belonging to an art or department of knowledge; as, medical language; the language of chemistry or theology.
8. A race, as distinguished by its speech.
To communicate by language; to express in language.
Language
Encyclopedia Britannica
LANGUAGE. See Philology.
9th ed. Encyclopædia Britannica, vol. 14, p. 287
[3 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
[3 words — estimated reading time: 1 minute]
Language
Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary
the faculty of human speech, concerning the origin of which there have been entertained different opinions among philosophers and learned men. The Mosaic history, which gives us an account of the formation and first occupations of man, represents him as being immediately capable of conversing with his Maker; of giving names to the various tribes and classes of animals; and of reasoning consecutively, and in perfectly appropriate terms, concerning his own situation, and the relation he stood in to the other creatures. As in man’s first attempt at speech, according to this account, there appear no crudeness of conception, no barrenness of ideas, and no inexpressive or unappropriate terms, we must certainly infer, that God who made and endued him with corporeal and mental powers perfectly suited to his state and condition in life, endued him, also, not only with the faculty of speech, but with speech or language itself; which latter was as necessary to his comfort, and to the perfection and end of his being, as any other power or faculty which his Creator thought proper to bestow upon him. Among the antediluvians there was but one language; and even now the indications that the various languages of the earth have had one common source are very convincing. Whether this primitive language was the same with any of the languages of which we have still any remains, has been a subject of much dispute. That the primitive language continued at least till the dispersion of mankind, consequent upon the building of Babel, there seems little reason to doubt. When, by an immediate interposition of divine power, the language of men was confounded, we are not informed to what extent this confusion of tongues prevailed. Under the article _Confusion of Tongues_ some reasons are given to ...show that the primitive language was not lost at that event, but continued in the form of the Hebrew. There are, however, other opinions on the oft disputed subject as to the primitive language. The Armenians allege, that as the ark rested in their country, Noah and his children must have remained there a considerable time, before the lower and marshy country of Chaldea could be fit to receive them; and it is therefore reasonable to suppose they left their language there, which was probably the very same that Adam spoke. Some have fancied the Greek the most ancient tongue, because of its extent and copiousness. The Teutonic, or that dialect of it which is spoken in the Lower Germany and Brabant, has found a strenuous patron in Geropius Becanus, who endeavours to derive even the Hebrew itself from that tongue. The pretensions of the Chinese to this honour have been allowed by several Europeans. The patrons of this opinion endeavour to support it, partly, by the great antiquity of the Chinese, and their having preserved themselves so many ages from any considerable mixture or intercourse with other nations. It is a notion advanced by Dr. Allix, and maintained by Mr. Whiston, with his usual tenacity and fervour, that the Chinese are the posterity of Noah, by his children born after the flood; and that Fohi, the first king of China, was Noah. As for those which are called the oriental languages, they have each their partisans. The generality of eastern writers allow the preference to the Syriac, except the Jews, who assert the antiquity of the Hebrew with the greatest warmth; and with them several Christian writers agree, particularly Chrysostom, Austin, Origen, and Jerome, among the ancients; and among the moderns, Bochart, Heidegger, Selden, and Buxtorf. The Sanscrit has also put in its claims; and some have thought that the Pali bears the character of the highest antiquity. All these are however useless speculations. The only point worth contending for is, that language was conveyed at once to the first pair in sufficient degree for intellectual intercourse with each other, and devotional intercourse with God; and that man was not left, as infidel writers have been pleased to say, to form it for himself out of rude and instinctive sounds. On this subject the remarks of Delaney are conclusive: “That God made man a sociable creature, does not need to be proved; and that when he made him such, he withheld nothing from him that was in any wise necessary for his well being in society, is a clear consequence from the wisdom and goodness of God; and if he withheld nothing any way necessary to his well being, much less would he withhold from him that which is the instrument of the greatest happiness a reasonable creature is capable of in this world. If the Lord God made ‘Adam a help meet for him,’ because ‘it was not good for man to be alone,’ can we imagine he would leave him unfurnished with the means to make that help useful and delightful to him? If it was not good for him to be alone, certainly neither was it good for him to have a companion to whom he could not readily communicate his thoughts, with whom he could neither ease his anxieties, nor divide or double his joys, by a kind, a friendly, a reasonable, a religious conversation; and how he could do this in any degree of perfection, or to any height of rational happiness, is utterly inconceivable without the use of speech. “If it be said, that the human organs being admirably fitted for the formation of articulate sounds, these, with the help of reason, might in time lead men to the use of language. I own it imaginable that they might: but still, till that end were attained in perfection, which possibly might not be in a series of many generations, it must be owned that brutes were better dealt by, and could better attain all the ends of their creation. And if that be absurd to be supposed, certainly the other is not less absurd to be believed. Nay, I think it justly doubtful, whether, without inspiration from God in this point, man could ever attain the true ends of his being; at least, if we may judge in this case, by the example of those nations who, being destitute of the advantages of a perfect language, are, in all probability, from the misfortune of that sole defect, sunk into the lowest condition of barbarism and brutality. And as to the perfection in which the human organs are framed and fitted for the formation of articulate sounds, this is clearly an argument for believing that God immediately blessed man with the use of speech, and gave him wherewithal to exert those organs to their proper ends; for this is surely as credible, as that when he gave him an appetite for food, and proper organs to eat and to digest it, he did not leave him to seek painfully for a necessary supply, (till his offence had made such a search his curse and punishment,) but placed him at once in the midst of abundant plenty. The consequence from all which is, that the perfection and felicity of man, and the wisdom and goodness of God, necessarily required that Adam should be supernaturally endowed with the knowledge and use of language. And therefore, as certain as it can be, that man was made perfect and happy, and that God is wise and good; so certain is it, that, when Adam and Eve were formed, they were immediately enabled by God to converse and communicate their thoughts, in all the perfection of language necessary to all the ends of their creation. And as this was the conduct most becoming the goodness of God, so we are assured from Moses, that it was that to which his infinite wisdom determined him; for we find that Adam gave names to all the creatures before Eve was formed; and, consequently, before necessity taught him the use of speech.” It is true that many languages bear marks of being raised to their improved state from rude and imperfect elements, and that all are capable of being enriched and rendered more exact; and it is this which has given some colour to those theories which trace all language itself up from elemental sounds, as the necessities of men, their increasing knowledge, and their imagination led to the invention of new words and combinations. All this is, however, consistent with the Scripture fact, that language was taught at first by God to our first parents. The dispersion of mankind carried many tribes to great distances, and wars still farther scattered them, and often into wide regions where they were farther dispersed to live chiefly by the chase, by fishing, or at best but an imperfect agriculture. In various degrees we know they lost useful arts; and for the same reasons they would lose much of their original language; those terms being chiefly retained which their immediate necessities, and the common affairs of a gross life, kept in use. But when civilization again overtook these portions of mankind, and kingdoms and empires were founded among them, or they became integral parts of the old empires, then their intercourse with each other becoming more rapid, and artificial, and intellectual, their language was put into a new process of improvement, and to the eye of the critic would exhibit the various stages of advancement; and in many it would be pushed beyond that perfection which it had when it first began to deteriorate. See LETTERS.
Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary
[1,578 words — estimated reading time: 10 minutes]
[1,578 words — estimated reading time: 10 minutes]
One whose profession is to teach languages.
Having a language; as many languaged nations.
Having a language; skilled in language; -- chiefly used in composition.
Lacking or wanting language; speechless; silent.
of Language
Langue d'oc
Webster's Dictionary 1913
No thesaurus entries found for "lang".
King James Bible KJV Bible
Berean Standard Bible BSB Bible
50 KJV and 40 BSB verses contain “lang” — showing the first 20. Show all 65 verses (searchable)
By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.
From these, the maritime peoples separated into their territories, according to their languages, by clans within their nations.
And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
Now the whole world had one language and a common form of speech.
And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
And the LORD said, “If they have begun to do this as one people speaking the same language, then nothing they devise will be beyond them.
Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
That is why it is called Babel, for there the LORD confused the language of the whole world, and from that place the LORD scattered them over the face of all the earth.
The LORD shall bring a nation against thee from far, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flieth; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand;
For he sent letters into all the king’s provinces, into every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language, that every man should bear rule in his own house, and that it should be published according to the language of every people.
He sent letters to all the provinces of the kingdom, to each province in its own script and to each people in their own language, proclaiming that every man should be master of his own household.
Then were the king’s scribes called on the thirteenth day of the first month, and there was written according to all that Haman had commanded unto the king’s lieutenants, and to the governors that were over every province, and to the rulers of every people of every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language; in the name of king Ahasuerus was it written, and sealed with the king’s ring.
On the thirteenth day of the first month, the royal scribes were summoned and the order was written exactly as Haman commanded the royal satraps, the governors of each province, and the officials of each people, in the script of each province and the language of every people. It was written in the name of King Xerxes and sealed with the royal signet ring.
Then were the king’s scribes called at that time in the third month, that is, the month Sivan, on the three and twentieth day thereof; and it was written according to all that Mordecai commanded unto the Jews, and to the lieutenants, and the deputies and rulers of the provinces which are from India unto Ethiopia, an hundred twenty and seven provinces, unto every province according to the writing thereof, and unto every people after their language, and to the Jews according to their writing, and according to their language.
At once the royal scribes were summoned, and on the twenty-third day of the third month (the month of Sivan), they recorded all of Mordecai’s orders to the Jews and to the satraps, governors, and princes of the 127 provinces from India to Cush—writing to each province in its own script, to every people in their own language, and to the Jews in their own script and language.
There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
Without speech or language, without a sound to be heard,
The LORD will strengthen him upon the bed of languishing: thou wilt make all his bed in his sickness.
The LORD will sustain him on his bed of illness and restore him from his bed of sickness.
This he ordained in Joseph for a testimony, when he went out through the land of Egypt: where I heard a language that I understood not.
He ordained it as a testimony for Joseph when he went out over the land of Egypt, where I heard an unfamiliar language:
When Israel went out of Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of strange language;
When Israel departed from Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of foreign tongue,