Can someone please affirm or deny the validity of the use of the definite article in a phrase like "in the original Greek?" I often encounter phrases like "'some word' in the original Hebrew/Latin/Greek means 'this or that.'" I know that the definite article should only be used if the word "language" follows the name of the language, but it's not the case. All examples where I've seen such phrases were written by native American English speakers.
If you write: We can see in the original Greek etc. a native speaker's mind will automatically be seeing: "in the original Greek text" or "in the original Greek version", this would not be a case of: in the original Greek language. That would make no sense at all.
So, in these cases, it refers to "the original Greek [version or text or epitaph]" or whatever the thing is. As for the grammar of it, I would call it: noun dropping. Maybe it has another name, I don't know it.
Of course, this type of phrase pre-supposed the reader of a text already has seen that it is a text, version, epitaph, inscription, etc. It is used to avoid constantly repeating the term text, version, epitaph, etc.
This applies to all standard varieties of English.