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

Why are there brackets in the NA27 text of 1 Cor 10:20?

Expand Messages
  • Dirk Jongkind
    Dear list, Is there any documentary justification for the brackets around the second QUOUSIN in 1 Cor 10:20? I cannot find one in the apparatus or in Metzger s
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 15, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear list,

      Is there any documentary justification for the brackets around the second QUOUSIN in 1 Cor 10:20? I cannot find one in the apparatus or in Metzger's Commentary.
      And would the absence of evidence make this into a conjectural emendation?

      Best
      Dirk
      -- 
      Dirk Jongkind, PhD
      Deputy Senior Tutor, St. Edmund's College
      Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
      Tyndale House
      36 Selwyn Gardens
      Cambridge, CB3 9BA		Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
      United Kingdom			Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608
      
      
    • Jan Krans
      Perhaps a reading without the second ??????? would be a conjectural emendation. I somehow like the idea. However, that is not what the brackets mean here, if
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 16, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Perhaps a reading without the second ??????? would be a conjectural emendation. I somehow like the idea. However, that is not what the brackets mean here, if you read the NA27 Introduction, p. 49* (p. 7* in the German original): they signal the uncertainty in word order.

        BTW: in my view, such use of square brackets is unhappy; compare ECM, which has a far better uncertainty marker.

        Jan Krans

        From: Dirk Jongkind <dj214@...>
        Reply-To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
        Date: Friday, 15 June 2012 16:16
        To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: [textualcriticism] Why are there brackets in the NA27 text of 1 Cor 10:20?

         

        Dear list,

        Is there any documentary justification for the brackets around the second QUOUSIN in 1 Cor 10:20? I cannot find one in the apparatus or in Metzger's Commentary.
        And would the absence of evidence make this into a conjectural emendation?

        Best
        Dirk

        -- 
        Dirk Jongkind, PhD
        Deputy Senior Tutor, St. Edmund's College
        Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
        Tyndale House
        36 Selwyn Gardens
        Cambridge, CB3 9BA		Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
        United Kingdom			Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608
        

      • Joe Lee
        It s also helpful to see the UBS4 introduction, p. 2 - If the variant is of minor grammatical significance with no appreciable bearing on translation, no note
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 16, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          It's also helpful to see the UBS4 introduction, p. 2 - "If the variant is of minor grammatical significance with no appreciable bearing on translation, no note is taken of it in the apparatus..."  The UBS 4 apparatus accounts 3 variations with different word orders and one (or two) variation with θύει (also in Textus Receptus) for 1 Cor 10.20.  

          Joe

          -----
          Joseph H. S. Lee
          joehslee@...
          joehslee@...

          "Lesen Sie dieses Buch!  Auf Griechischen! Es ist ein gutes Buch." - Martin Hengel


          On 16 Jun 2012, at 04:25, Jan Krans wrote:

           

          Perhaps a reading without the second ??????? would be a conjectural emendation. I somehow like the idea. However, that is not what the brackets mean here, if you read the NA27 Introduction, p. 49* (p. 7* in the German original): they signal the uncertainty in word order.

          BTW: in my view, such use of square brackets is unhappy; compare ECM, which has a far better uncertainty marker.

          Jan Krans

          From: Dirk Jongkind <dj214@...>
          Reply-To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
          Date: Friday, 15 June 2012 16:16
          To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
          Subject: [textualcriticism] Why are there brackets in the NA27 text of 1 Cor 10:20?

           
          Dear list,

          Is there any documentary justification for the brackets around the second QUOUSIN in 1 Cor 10:20? I cannot find one in the apparatus or in Metzger's Commentary.
          And would the absence of evidence make this into a conjectural emendation?

          Best
          Dirk
          -- 
          Dirk Jongkind, PhD
          Deputy Senior Tutor, St. Edmund's College
          Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
          Tyndale House
          36 Selwyn Gardens
          Cambridge, CB3 9BA		Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
          United Kingdom			Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608
          



        • rslocc
          Precisely! They are documenting (by way of brackets) their uncertainty of word order. Namely, whether Thuousin should follow after Daimoniois ( as; D F G
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 17, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Precisely! They are documenting (by way of brackets) their uncertainty of word order. Namely, whether 'Thuousin' should follow after 'Daimoniois' ( as; D F G K Byz. Epiph. Euseb. ms. Ambrosias. Chrys. Italic Vulg. Pesh.) or 'Thew' (as; Aleph A B C P 33 Marcion acc. to Epiph. Orig.lat. Euseb. Cop.sah.). The latter is the method of Lach., Treg., Alf., W.&H., etc. I personally see no reason to divert from the common text and word order here (as usual). I must agree with Jan that the brackets are 'unhappy' in this place, for in nearly all instances they indicate omission/interpolation (not word order) and this inconsistency was surely the cause of the initial question by Mr. Jongkind.
            > -Matthew M.Rose


            >

            > On 16 Jun 2012, at 04:25, Jan Krans wrote


            > > Perhaps a reading without the second ??????? would be a conjectural emendation. I somehow like the idea. However, that is not what the brackets mean here, if you read the NA27 Introduction, p. 49* (p. 7* in the German original): they signal the uncertainty in word order.
            > >
            > > BTW: in my view, such use of square brackets is unhappy; compare ECM, which has a far better uncertainty marker.
            > >
            > > Jan Krans
            > >
            > > From: Dirk Jongkind <dj214@...>
            > > Reply-To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
            > > Date: Friday, 15 June 2012 16:16
            > > To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
            > > Subject: [textualcriticism] Why are there brackets in the NA27 text of 1 Cor 10:20?
            > >
            > >
            > > Dear list,
            > >
            > > Is there any documentary justification for the brackets around the second QUOUSIN in 1 Cor 10:20? I cannot find one in the apparatus or in Metzger's Commentary.
            > > And would the absence of evidence make this into a conjectural emendation?
            > >
            > > Best
            > > Dirk
            > > --
            > > Dirk Jongkind, PhD
            > > Deputy Senior Tutor, St. Edmund's College
            > > Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
            > > Tyndale House
            > > 36 Selwyn Gardens
            > > Cambridge, CB3 9BA Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
            > > United Kingdom Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
          • Dirk Jongkind
            Thanks for the clarifications. Frankly, before posting I had only checked the Latin explanation of the critical signs at the back of my NA27 (easier to access
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 18, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Thanks for the clarifications. Frankly, before posting I had only checked the Latin explanation of the critical signs at the back of my NA27 (easier to access than the Intro), which I read as suggesting that brackets indicated that the 'presence of' the enclosed words in the NT text could be questioned. I shouldn't have filled in the blanks.

              [ ] ita includuntur verba etc, quae num de textu N.i T.i sint dubitari potest

              Thanks, all helpful.

              Dirk




              ... I must agree with Jan that the brackets are 'unhappy' in this place, for in nearly all instances they indicate omission/interpolation (not word order) and this inconsistency was surely the cause of the initial question by Mr. Jongkind.

              > -Matthew M.Rose

              >

              > On 16 Jun 2012, at 04:25, Jan Krans wrote

              > > Perhaps a reading without the second ??????? would be a conjectural emendation. I somehow like the idea. However, that is not what the brackets mean here, if you read the NA27 Introduction, p. 49* (p. 7* in the German original): they signal the uncertainty in word order.
              > >
              > > BTW: in my view, such use of square brackets is unhappy; compare ECM, which has a far better uncertainty marker.
              > >
              > > Jan Krans
              > >
              > > From: Dirk Jongkind <dj214@...>
              > > Reply-To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
              > > Date: Friday, 15 June 2012 16:16
              > > To: "textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com" <textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com>
              > > Subject: [textualcriticism] Why are there brackets in the NA27 text of 1 Cor 10:20?
              > >
              > >
              > > Dear list,
              > >
              > > Is there any documentary justification for the brackets around the second QUOUSIN in 1 Cor 10:20? I cannot find one in the apparatus or in Metzger's Commentary.
              > > And would the absence of evidence make this into a conjectural emendation?
              > >
              > > Best
              > > Dirk
              > > --
              > > Dirk Jongkind, PhD
              > > Deputy Senior Tutor, St. Edmund's College
              > > Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
              > > Tyndale House
              > > 36 Selwyn Gardens
              > > Cambridge, CB3 9BA Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
              > > United Kingdom Fax: (UK) 01223 566608
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >


              -- 
              Dirk Jongkind, PhD
              Deputy Senior Tutor, St. Edmund's College
              Research Fellow in New Testament Text and Language
              Tyndale House
              36 Selwyn Gardens
              Cambridge, CB3 9BA		Phone:(UK) 01223 566603
              United Kingdom			Fax:  (UK) 01223 566608
              
              


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.