Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

tc-list Textual question about Ruth 4.1

Expand Messages
  • Matthew Anstey
    Gday everyone, I am working at the moment part-time for SIL and we are using the uncorrected proof of Ruth (BHQ) distributed at SBL last year for help with our
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 1, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Gday everyone,

      I am working at the moment part-time for SIL and we are using the
      uncorrected proof of Ruth (BHQ) distributed at SBL last year for help with
      our textual notes for a translations software package that SIL is
      developing. I was curious as to why no note is attached to "peloniy
      'almoniy" in Ruth 4.1 when I understand that the LXX, Targum, and Vulgate
      have quite different renderings of this phrase. If you could spare the time
      to
      respond it would be much appreciated.

      With regards,
      Matthew Anstey
      Regent College, Vancouver
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      on behalf of Summer Institute of Linguistics.
      BART (Biblical Analysis and Research Tool) Software Development
      Carl Follingstad, Coordinator [cfollingstad@...]
      Todd Hoatson, Programmer [Todd_Hoatson@...]
      -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    • Lund, Jerome
      The formal equivalents to the Hebrew expression reflect exegesis and do not reflect a Hebrew variant. Thus, the editors would not record it.
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 1, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        The formal equivalents to the Hebrew expression reflect exegesis and do not
        reflect a Hebrew variant. Thus, the editors would not record it.

        > ----------
        > From: Matthew Anstey[SMTP:manstey@...]
        > Reply To: tc-list@...
        > Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 1999 12:07 PM
        > To: TC-List
        > Subject: tc-list Textual question about Ruth 4.1
        >
        > Gday everyone,
        >
        > I am working at the moment part-time for SIL and we are using the
        > uncorrected proof of Ruth (BHQ) distributed at SBL last year for help with
        > our textual notes for a translations software package that SIL is
        > developing. I was curious as to why no note is attached to "peloniy
        > 'almoniy" in Ruth 4.1 when I understand that the LXX, Targum, and Vulgate
        > have quite different renderings of this phrase. If you could spare the
        > time
        > to
        > respond it would be much appreciated.
        >
        > With regards,
        > Matthew Anstey
        > Regent College, Vancouver
        > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        > on behalf of Summer Institute of Linguistics.
        > BART (Biblical Analysis and Research Tool) Software Development
        > Carl Follingstad, Coordinator [cfollingstad@...]
        > Todd Hoatson, Programmer [Todd_Hoatson@...]
        > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.