RE: [GTh] Comments Invited
- Hi Mike!
Thanks for the information on cwwe.
I notice that, in the IQP's attempt to convert the Coptic to Greek, they
use agron for cwwe in 78.1.
Is cwwe, then, closely related in meaning to the Greek agros--found in
Mt 6:28 and (in the plural) in Mk 5:14? Can it ever be in the plural
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Hi Frank; you wrote:
> I notice that, in the IQP's attempt to convert the Coptic to Greek, theyYep, but the third letter of the Coptic word is that 'W' with a tail on it,
> use agron for cwwe in 78.1.
> Is cwwe, then, closely related in meaning to the Greek agros ...
which is an 'sh' sound. The standard GThomas transliteration scheme
would render it 'SW$E', pronounced (as I understand it) SOH-sheh.
> Can it ever be in the plural like agros?Sure, but the plural is formed differently in Coptic. Whereas Greek
changes the end of the root-word, Coptic leaves the root-word the
same and appends a plural article to it - 'N' in this case. Thus N-SW$E.
(The 'N' would have an overstroke, hence pronounced 'en'.)
(p.s., Let's see if a Coptic font works: N.sw¥e )
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- Hey Mike-
I haven't gone through your new revision line-by-line, by any means, but I
REALLY like the new format. Good Job, and do not quit.
Humble Maine Woodsman
||From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf
||Of Michael Grondin
||Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 5:24 PM
||Subject: [GTh] Comments Invited
||I know many of you are busy, if not on vacation, this weekend, but
||I'm rather excited about some test changes I've uploaded to my
||website, and I'm anxious to get some feedback about it. Some of
||this discussion is technical, but those to whom such talk is gobbledy-
||gook can skip over to the non-technical stuff.
||The proposed changes are in my saying-by-saying presentation,
||as currently exhibited in saying 79. (I chose that one because
||there was a minor error in the Coptic - one letter which should
||have been shown as being in a lacuna was not so shown. As it
||happens, my attention was brought to that error by the Coptic
||of L.79 used by Mark Goodacre in a paper we discussed here
||some time back.)
||To compare the old with the proposed new, go to
||and click on 79 in one-half of the screen, any other saying
||in the other half of the screen.
||The most basic change is that the English translation which
||appears at the top of each sayings-page (and which is Lambdin's,
||BTW) is now enclosed in the .htm file rather than in the .gif files.
||What this means in practice is that one can now (1) copy the verbiage
||of the translation from the screen if desired, and (2) change the size
||of it on the screen for best personal viewing (in Internet Explorer,
||medium text-size seems to work best, as far as making it roughly
||the same size as what is below it on the screen, but readers with
||bad eyesight can make it bigger.)
||Other proposed changes:
||1. Subsayings denotations changed from a, b, c, etc. (which I still
||personally prefer) to the standard 1, 2, 3, etc.
||2. Addition of April DeConick's designation as "kernel" or
||"accretion" (assuming it's either "fair use" or she gives permission.)
||[Technical talk]: The impetus for this effort was that I've recently
||been able, for the first time, to create transparent gifs on the PC
||I purchased in 2001. For reasons unknown, the software I used
||on my old PC to create my original set of transparent gifs back in
||1999 didn't work on the new PC. Nor did upgrades to the software.
||(Visitors to my site may have wondered why the copyright notice
||on most of my pages hadn't been changed since 2002. Now you
||know; it's a transparent gif.) Recently, however, I tried a new piece
||of software (LView Pro) and got it to work. And - in case anyone is
||wondering why the background of my pages looks like that on
||Paterson Brown's Metalogos site - it's because I borrowed his
||background (with his permission) for my transparent gifs.
||Any and all comments on these proposed changes are welcome,
||either offlist or on. Also any proposed improvements.
||Gospel of Thomas Homepage: http://home.epix.net/~miser17/Thomas.html
||Interlinear translation: http://www.geocities.com/mwgrondin/x_transl.htm
||Yahoo! Groups Links
- Thanks, Rick, for your encouragement. I've also received an
offlist note from old buddy Kevin Johnson that I'll answer here.
It involves the Coptic translation of Lk 11:28 that Kevin was
good enough to look up and pass along to me. (It was an
attachment to his note that would have been stripped off by
Yahoogroups, so he had to send it offlist.) Unfortunately, I was
unable to decipher the font used, so I turned to the St. Shenouda
the Archimandrite Coptic Society CD-rom that's been mentioned
The short answer to the question of how Lk 11:28 was translated
in ancient Sahidic is that it _does_ contain an equivalent of the
conjunction 'and', though not the word 'and' itself. The Coptic
reads as follows:
"More blessed are they who listen to the word of God
which (or who) keep it."
The basic relevant difference between the Sahidic translation
of Lk 11:28 and GTh 79.2 is this:
Lk 11:28 -- ET-ARE2 (which keep)
GTh79.2 -- AY-ARE2 (they [have] kept)
This confirms the subtle but significant difference between these
parallels, which is unfortunately hidden by harmonizing translations.
(There are other differences, but this one is mostly ignored.)
Mt. Clemens, MI