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

Re: [textualcriticism] A Brief Intro to NTTC Goals and Guidelines

Expand Messages
  • Edward Andrews
    Brian: When James says: Textual criticism is a science, not an art, he is not speaking in absolute terms. I believe you are looking at an absolute
    Message 1 of 11 , Dec 13, 2006
    • 0 Attachment

      Brian:

       

      When James says: “Textual criticism is a science, not an art,” he is not speaking in absolute terms.  I believe you are looking at an absolute definition and not allowing it to be relative.  Really, textual criticism is a science, a skill, and an art.  It is a science because its method of research can be studied and described as a system, although with checks and balances one would hope.  It is an art because at times it takes the mind of an artist to effectively convey things such as conjectural emendation that is really more than what the name makes it appear to be.  It is like the instincts of a 30-year veteran police officer at work.  He sees and feels things the rookie would not.  This is not meant to demean, but just as not all people can be exemplary artists, not a people can be exceptional textual critics.

       

      Edward Andrews

      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 10:33 AM
      Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] A Brief Intro to NTTC Goals and Guidelines

      Science is the study of things that can be replicated and exactly the same results obtained using the same componets in exactly the same way. Text is about words whose meanings have subtle differences in the mind of each individual depending on when and where the words are read. Words paint a picture in the mind of the reader and as such must, to my thinking be an art form. The analysis of the ink, paper is a science but the words no.
      Brian Boland

    • Martin Edwards
      ... Thanks. I ve printed a copy for perusal at leisure. Martin Edwards
      Message 2 of 11 , Dec 13, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "James Snapp, Jr."
        <voxverax@...> wrote:
        >
        > As some here know, I've been working on a compilation of the text of
        > Mark for a while. That project is just about over, and one of its
        > final pieces -- the star on the top of the Christmas tree, so to
        > speak -- has been the composition of an introduction to the text, the
        > text-critical approach used in the compilation, and the notation in
        > the notes (in the annotated edition, which is something like 102 full-
        > size pages long).
        >
        > Here's what I've composed so far. Comments, corrections, and
        > criticisms are welcome.
        >
        Thanks. I've printed a copy for perusal at leisure.

        Martin Edwards
      • James Miller
        ... To my thinking you ve started off in absolutely the wrong direction. Did you perhaps mean to say the opposite of this, i.e., Textual criticism is an art,
        Message 3 of 11 , Dec 13, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- "James Snapp, Jr." <voxverax@...> wrote:
          >
          > Here's what I've composed so far. Comments,
          > corrections, and
          > criticisms are welcome.
          >
          > -------------
          >
          > THE GREEK UNCIAL ARCHETYPE OF MARK
          >
          > +++ INTRODUCTION +++
          >
          > TEXTUAL CRITICISM'S GOALS AND GUIDELINES
          >
          > Textual criticism is a science, not an art.

          To my thinking you've started off in absolutely the
          wrong direction. Did you perhaps mean to say the
          opposite of this, i.e., "Textual criticism is an art,
          not a science"? I can't get any further into your
          explanation than this, if you really did intend to
          write things in the order in which they appeared in
          your post. What you're saying seems in diametric
          opposition to text criticism (admittedly mostly under
          the rubric of critical study of the LXX) as I've
          confronted and come to understand it.

          James



          ____________________________________________________________________________________
          Do you Yahoo!?
          Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
          http://new.mail.yahoo.com
        • James Snapp, Jr.
          Greetings Brian B, James M., and Edward A., Brian B - When I say, Textual criticism is a science, not an art, I mean that it is a restorative enterprise, not
          Message 4 of 11 , Dec 13, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Greetings Brian B, James M., and Edward A.,

            Brian B -

            When I say, "Textual criticism is a science, not an art," I mean that
            it is a restorative enterprise, not a creative one. The path to the
            restoration of the contents of the autograph may involve the textual
            critic's imagination and instincts, but they are employed in order
            to find something, not to create something. Any artistry in the end-
            product should be the author's artistry, not the textual critic's
            artistry.

            James M. -

            No; I really and sincerely meant to write "Textual criticism is a
            science, not an art."
            (I did mean to say "stratum" rather than "strata," though.)

            Edward A. -

            I really don't think that textual criticism is an art, because the
            normal goal of art is to produce a work of art, rather than to
            restore or repair one. An artistic instinct may be a useful thing
            for a textual critic to have (if the author was artistic, at least),
            just as an artistic instinct may be required to repair a damaged
            sculpture, but the sculpture-repairer's goal is to restore -- and,
            where pieces are missing, to faithfully re-create -- the original
            sculpture, not to engage in his own artistic expression or to express
            anything except what the sculptor displayed. Conjectural emendation
            might overlap science and art -- like the re-creation of the
            pulverized fingers of a statue might -- but conjectural emendation is
            such a teensy-tiny aspect of New Testament textual criticism, it
            doesn't seem justifiable to let it drive the classification of T.C.
            into Art.

            Yours in Christ,

            James Snapp, Jr.
            Curtisville Christian Church
            Indiana (USA)
            www.curtisvillechristian.org/BasicTC.html
          • Gie Vleugels
            Good mornig (Brussels time), There are lots of excellent textual critics without any qualities in the traditional artistic fields (poetry, music, painting
            Message 5 of 11 , Dec 14, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Good mornig (Brussels time),
              There are lots of excellent textual critics without any qualities in the 'traditional' artistic fields (poetry, music, painting ...). If we call TC an art, than it is not like the other arts at all.
              Gie Vleugels

               
              On 12/14/06, James Snapp, Jr. <voxverax@...> wrote:

              Greetings Brian B, James M., and Edward A.,

              Brian B -

              When I say, "Textual criticism is a science, not an art," I mean that
              it is a restorative enterprise, not a creative one. The path to the
              restoration of the contents of the autograph may involve the textual
              critic's imagination and instincts, but they are employed in order
              to find something, not to create something. Any artistry in the end-
              product should be the author's artistry, not the textual critic's
              artistry.

              James M. -

              No; I really and sincerely meant to write "Textual criticism is a
              science, not an art."
              (I did mean to say "stratum" rather than "strata," though.)

              Edward A. -

              I really don't think that textual criticism is an art, because the
              normal goal of art is to produce a work of art, rather than to
              restore or repair one. An artistic instinct may be a useful thing
              for a textual critic to have (if the author was artistic, at least),
              just as an artistic instinct may be required to repair a damaged
              sculpture, but the sculpture-repairer's goal is to restore -- and,
              where pieces are missing, to faithfully re-create -- the original
              sculpture, not to engage in his own artistic expression or to express
              anything except what the sculptor displayed. Conjectural emendation
              might overlap science and art -- like the re-creation of the
              pulverized fingers of a statue might -- but conjectural emendation is
              such a teensy-tiny aspect of New Testament textual criticism, it
              doesn't seem justifiable to let it drive the classification of T.C.
              into Art.

              Yours in Christ,

              James Snapp, Jr.
              Curtisville Christian Church
              Indiana (USA)
              www.curtisvillechri stian.org/BasicTC.html




              --
              Gie Vleugels

                          ><(((°>  +  <°)))><
            • yennifmit
              On the science/art thing, I think that New Testament textual criticism is a bit of both and then some more. A lot of the discipline is (or should be)
              Message 6 of 11 , Dec 14, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                On the science/art thing, I think that New Testament textual criticism
                is a bit of both and then some more. A lot of the discipline is (or
                should be) forensic--that is, concerned with collecting, weighing, and
                interpreting evidence. It is like what a judge does in a court room:
                The cop says, "The defendant drove his vehicle into mine." A witness
                says, "The officer staggered out of the hotel, got in his car, then
                drove into that man's car." The judge weighs the evidence (and the
                witnesses) then tries to decide what really happened.

                Sometimes it is easy to work out what happened, and you can be certain
                beyond reasonable doubt. Other times you might not be so certain. That
                is why it is a good idea to say how sure you are of a conclusion. The
                UBS Greek New Testament editors did this when they assigned letter
                grades (A, B, C, D) to their preferred readings.

                There is a lot of room for improvement in this area. Statistical
                analysis can be applied to the evidence. I have been at work on
                something along these lines and am almost ready to release the first
                installment.

                The art/science discussion reminds me of the internal/external
                evidence dichotomy that has been used to classify the various
                principles of NTtc. It seems to me that the art associates with the
                internal and the science with the external.

                Best

                Tim Finney

                --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "James Snapp, Jr."
                <voxverax@...> wrote:
                >
                > Greetings Brian B, James M., and Edward A.,
                >
                > Brian B -
                >
                > When I say, "Textual criticism is a science, not an art," I mean that
                > it is a restorative enterprise, not a creative one. The path to the
                > restoration of the contents of the autograph may involve the textual
                > critic's imagination and instincts, but they are employed in order
                > to find something, not to create something. Any artistry in the end-
                > product should be the author's artistry, not the textual critic's
                > artistry.
                >
                > James M. -
                >
                > No; I really and sincerely meant to write "Textual criticism is a
                > science, not an art."
                > (I did mean to say "stratum" rather than "strata," though.)
                >
                > Edward A. -
                >
                > I really don't think that textual criticism is an art, because the
                > normal goal of art is to produce a work of art, rather than to
                > restore or repair one. An artistic instinct may be a useful thing
                > for a textual critic to have (if the author was artistic, at least),
                > just as an artistic instinct may be required to repair a damaged
                > sculpture, but the sculpture-repairer's goal is to restore -- and,
                > where pieces are missing, to faithfully re-create -- the original
                > sculpture, not to engage in his own artistic expression or to express
                > anything except what the sculptor displayed. Conjectural emendation
                > might overlap science and art -- like the re-creation of the
                > pulverized fingers of a statue might -- but conjectural emendation is
                > such a teensy-tiny aspect of New Testament textual criticism, it
                > doesn't seem justifiable to let it drive the classification of T.C.
                > into Art.
                >
                > Yours in Christ,
                >
                > James Snapp, Jr.
                > Curtisville Christian Church
                > Indiana (USA)
                > www.curtisvillechristian.org/BasicTC.html
                >
              • brian.boland.dslw@oneteldsl8.net
                James Snapp, Jr. -said When I say, Textual criticism is a science, not an art, I mean that it is a restorative enterprise, not a creative one. The path to
                Message 7 of 11 , Dec 14, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                   James Snapp, Jr. -said
                  "When I say, "Textual criticism is a science, not an art," I mean that it is a restorative enterprise, not a creative one. The path to the restoration of the contents of the autograph may involve the textual
                  critic's imagination and instincts, but they are employed in order to find something, not to create something. Any artistry in the end-product should be the author's artistry, not the textual critic's
                  artistry."
                  Brian Boland replies -
                  When a painting is being renovated, it is a very difficult decision to remove some earlier restoration work to seek for the original [which may not be there !] There are no absolutes in the decision, so in that respect it must be an art !!!
                  When a structure is designed whether a bridge, skyscraper or auto  the overall shape that is developed by the imagination is a form of art  The science then determines the details on how it stand up against the rigours of daily life.To restore a Model T Ford to its former condition should be accomplished without any imagination of the restorer just a highly skillful one of copying the original build techniques. ie just science
                  Rufinus rewrote Tertullian's work, at Jerome's great displeasure because, he said, Tertullian asked questions, but Romans need answers. There was then at that time a desire to remove uncertainity in scriptual discussion and provide a firm basis of belief. It seems then it MAY have led to pressure being put on textural copying houses to standardise texts in much the same way as the KJV was endorsed in the English speaking world.The macro understanding of the text generation system may then have a bigger impact on the texts we now have before us than the examination of the minutiae of the copying pecularities of single scribes. Whether this "humanity" is called an art or science depends on where your cultural roots lie
                  Brian j
                  __BBBbbbbbbb,_Brian j._,___
                • Viktor Golinets
                  Yesterday a page of the Codex Sinaiticus was displayed in the Leipzig University Library. It is the page 23 of folios that are in the Leipzig University
                  Message 8 of 11 , Dec 15, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yesterday a page of the Codex Sinaiticus was displayed in the Leipzig
                    University Library. It is the page 23 of folios that are in the Leipzig
                    University Library and it contains the text from the Book of Jeremiah
                    17.8b-18.6a. (A snap shot of the page is attached.)
                      In a short lecture the history of the codex was sketched and the
                    international Codex Sinaiticus project was introduced.
                      
                      See details under
                      http://db.uni-leipzig.de/aktuell/index.php?pmnummer=2006371


                    Viktor Golinets, M.A.

                    Altorientalisches Institut
                    Universität Leipzig

                    Institut für Semitistik
                    Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München


                    Yahoo! 360° – Bloggen und Leute treffen. Erstellen Sie jetzt Ihre eigene Seite – kostenlos!.
                  • Peter M. Head
                    Thanks for this news. It is a pity that all the partners to the Sinaiticus project seem to have adopted this idea for publicity purposes that Sinaiticus is
                    Message 9 of 11 , Dec 15, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thanks for this news.

                      It is a pity that all the partners to the Sinaiticus project seem to have adopted this idea for publicity purposes that Sinaiticus is 'the oldest Bible in the world' - "die älteste Bibel der Welt" - which it plainly isn't. I'm quite happy with "eines der bedeutendsten Bibelmanuskripte der Welt" - no one could disagree with that.

                      For the British Library on the "World's oldest Bible" see http://www.bl.uk/news/2005/pressrelease20050311.html


                      Cheers

                      Peter

                      At 09:19 15/12/2006, you wrote:
                      Yesterday a page of the Codex Sinaiticus was displayed in the Leipzig
                      University Library. It is the page 23 of folios that are in the Leipzig
                      University Library and it contains the text from the Book of Jeremiah
                      17.8b-18.6a. (A snap shot of the page is attached.)
                        In a short lecture the history of the codex was sketched and the
                      international Codex Sinaiticus project was introduced.
                        
                        See details under
                        http://db.uni-leipzig.de/aktuell/index.php?pmnummer=2006371


                      Viktor Golinets, M.A.

                      Altorientalisches Institut
                      Universität Leipzig

                      Institut für Semitistik
                      Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, München


                      Yahoo! 360° – Bloggen und Leute treffen. Erstellen Sie jetzt Ihre eigene Seite – kostenlos!.

                      Peter M. Head, PhD
                      Sir Kirby Laing Senior Lecturer in New Testament
                      Tyndale House
                      36 Selwyn Gardens
                      Cambridge CB3 9BA
                      01223 566601
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.