Irina I. Valuytseva, Dr. Sc. (Philology), Professor at the Department of Language Theory and Applied Linguistics, Moscow State Regional University, Russia; e-mail: irinaiv-v@mail.ru Georgy T. Khukhuni, Dr. Sc. (Philology), Professor, Head of the Department of Language Theory and English Studies, Moscow State Regional University, Russia; e-mail: khukhuni@mail.ru LINGUISTIC AND LINGUOCULTURAL ASPECTS OF BIBLE TRANSLATION: CELEBRATING THE 140th ANIIVERSARY OF SYNODAL TRANSLATION The present paper is dedicated to linguistic and linguocultural aspects of the Russian Synodal translation of the Holy Writ made in 1876. <...> The authors postulate that despite some 39 accusations against this translation (e.g. the “obsoleteness” of its language, an attempt to translate from Hebrew but “under the guidance of the Greek Bible” leading to certain eclecticism, etc.) these shortcomings can be generally justified by the history and circumstances under which the translation was made. <...> Its typological comparison with the King James Bible is provided. <...> Key words: Synodal translation, the King James Bible, Russian, Slavonic, English, translation, the original, the Bible. <...> The so-called Synodal Translation of the Holy Writ published in 1876 “with the blessing of the Sacred Governing Synod” was the first full Russian translation of the Bible text. <...> This work began in 1816, when Emperor Alexander I ordered Prince Alexander Golitsyn, President of the Russian Bible Society, to afford the Russians an opportunity to read the Bible in their native language, which would be more intelligible for them than Slavonic being used for that purpose («доставить и россиянам способ читать слово Божие на природном своём российском языке, яко вразумительнейшем для них славянского наречия, на коем книги священного Писания у нас издаются» [Флоровский, 2003]). <...> This fact raised a discussion (continued until now) about the status of the Synodal translation: may it be treated as just the “superficial editing’ of the RBS translation [Выступление…, 2011] or despite its connection with the latter, it must be actually defined as a new translation because it contains many substantive emendations [Десницкий, 2015: 226]. <...> E.g., in certain aspects, we can observe the same sort of situation in respect of the King James Bible 1611. <...> Truly (good Christian <...>