During the period associated with the rise and flourishing of the public sphere in England, concern about evil communication shifted from the danger of high-status rhetoric (“evil speeches”) to the danger of associating with low-status persons (“bad company”). The public sphere and deliberative democracy in England are thought to have developed in the seventeenth century and to have been well-established by the middle of the eighteenth century. From the middle of the sixteenth century to the late nineteenth century, the meaning of evil-communications phrase shifted from evil verbal practices, to evil communication, and then to companionship with bad persons. By the start of our current communication-enriched millennium, the evil-communication phrase has became a warning against associating with rogues and failing to live according to acclaimed social conventions (“reputable lifestyles”).
Translating the Evil-Communication Phrase
| textual form | source | date |
|---|---|---|
| φθείρουσιν ήθη χρήσθ’ όμιλίαι κακαί | Menander, as cited by Jerome in 397 CE | c. 300 BCE |
| φθείρουσιν ήθη χρήσθ’ όμιλίαι κακαί | Codex Vaticanus | c. 325 CE |
| corrumpunt mores bonos colloquia mala | Jerome's Vulgate | c. 405 CE |
| evil speeches destroy good conduct | Wycliff Bible | 1382 |
| malicious speakings corrupt good manners | Tyndale Bible | 1525 |
| evil words corrupt good manners | Great Bible | 1539 |
| evil speakings corrupt good manners | Geneva Bible | 1560 |
| evil communications corrupt good manners | Rheims Bible | 1582 |
| evil communications corrupt good manners | King James Bible | 1611 |
| evil companionships corrupt good morals | English Revised Version | 1881 |
| bad company ruins good morals | Revised Standard Version | 1946 |
| bad company corrupts good character | New International Version | 1973 |
| bad company corrupts good habits | Orr and Walther {Anchor Bible} | 1976 |
| belonging to bad gangs ruins reputable lifestyles | Thiselton {book-length scholarly commentary} | 2000 |
The evil-communication phrase occurred in a variety of ancient texts. Its long, historic voyage of interpretation suggests that public deliberation systematically disadvantages ordinary communication among low-status persons.^ Prisoners are among the lowest of low-status persons. Ordinary personal communication with prisoners has historically been devalued. High-status communication has shown little concern for the extent of imprisonment, particularly imprisonment of men.