Why did the KJV translate Jeremiah 29:11 as "to give you an expected end"? I ran across the KJV translation of Jeremiah 29:11 on Facebook today and was struck by a seeming contradiction in the way the last part was translated. Here is the verse alongside other modern translations for comparison:

Jeremiah 29:11
KJV: For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.
NIV: For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.
NLT: For I know the plans I have for you,” says the Lord. “They are plans for good and not for disaster, to give you a future and a hope.
ESV: For I know the plans I have for you, declares the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.
NKJV: For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope.

What I found odd was that the KJV translates the last few words as &quot;an expected end&quot; which, to me, implies an actual end, not a non-end as the other translations imply. Especially notable is how the KJV and NKJV have near-identical phrasings except for that last bit. Thus, my question is: why is it translated that way in the King James Version?
This may not be the best answer, but, as @warrend pointed out, I don't think that there's any definitive reasoning.

However, looking at the original Hebrew for the passage, we see:



(from the Online Hebrew Interlinear Bible)

The original Hebrew here for that phrase "expected end" is achrith uthque.  The original wording appears to have two words associated with the one concept.  

I found some margin notes in the Geneva Bible (1611) that shows that the translators had some trouble interpreting this.  They decided on "expected end", however they realized that the Hebrew would be better translated as "ende and expadation" (in King James English).

Unfortunately, we don't know why they chose "expected end" over "end and expectations".  

[pure speculation] I suspect that in English at that time "to give an end" and "to give a future" were probably similar in meaning.  

In light of modern translations, it seems pretty clear that "a future and hope" is a much better translation then "an end and expectation" (or even "expected end").

Ultimately, we won't be able to know the minds of the translators and, without serious historical searching, we probably won't understand their usage of these words.  However, there's some idea of where it might have come from.