5254[Synoptic-L] The Critical Edition of Q
- Nov 25, 2000To: John C. Poirier,
<< I may be wrong, but I always thought that the term "critical edition"
was to be taken as a single idea, *viz.* that what is "critical" is the
work of "edition", and that the work so designated was therefore implied to
be a "text-critical" edition. Am I wrong, or are there examples of other
non-text-critical "critical editions" of works? >>
I believe that you are correct that the term "critical edition" often, or
usually, implies a text-critical edition.
<< Has the IQP invented a new genre of reference work? >>
How many hypothetical reconstructions of (supposedly) non-extant texts have
<< I wonder who is responsible for the title of this book. A title like
"The Scholar's Edition of Q" would have been much better. >>
Gesh ... does the title really deserve such nitpicking? Perhaps I'm
mistaken, but it seemed to me that some of the criticism I read directed
against the title of this book, "The Critical Edition of Q," was merely a
not-so-veiled partisan disgust for another book on the Q hypothesis. After
all, the merits of this reconstruction surely don't stand and fall with the
title of their book, yes? Or is it that some people are so unaware that the
term "critical" has more than one meaning? I will note that the 10th
edition of "Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary" gives the following
meaning for the term "critical":
<< d : including variant readings and scholarly emendations (a ~ edition) >>
But it also includes:
<< c : exercising or involving careful judgment or judicious evaluation >>.
To me, the title "The Critical Edition of Q" is perfectly intelligible, the
objections to this title seem narrow minded and partisan, I can't imagine
why intelligent people should complain about it.
-Steven Craig Miller
Alton, Illinois (USA)
Synoptic-L Homepage: http://www.bham.ac.uk/theology/synoptic-l
List Owner: Synoptic-L-Owner@...
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>