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

Re: A Brief Intro to NTTC Goals and Guidelines

Expand Messages
  • Martin Edwards
    ... Thanks. I ve printed a copy for perusal at leisure. Martin Edwards
    Message 1 of 11 , Dec 13, 2006
      --- 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 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 2 of 11 , Dec 13, 2006
        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 3 of 11 , Dec 14, 2006
          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 4 of 11 , Dec 14, 2006
            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 5 of 11 , Dec 14, 2006
               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 6 of 11 , Dec 15, 2006
                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 7 of 11 , Dec 15, 2006
                  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.