Showing posts with label Bible Translator. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bible Translator. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 09, 2009
Text-Critical Articles and Reviews in The Bible Translator
Jan Krans over at the Amsterdam NT Weblog has compiled "a selection of text-critical articles and reviews from The Bible Translator 1950-2000."
Friday, June 12, 2009
A New Rating System for UBS GNT
United Bible Societies are ahead of their time! The July issue of Bible Translator (Technical Papers) is already out, just in time for the TTW –Triennial Translation Workshop, which is being held in Bangkok right now.
In this issue I propose a new rating system for Greek New Testament editions. It is a revised version of a proposal that was included in my monograph on Jude.
Tommy Wasserman. "Proposal for a New Rating System in Greek New Testament Editions." Bible Translator 2009 60/3:140-157.
Summary:
Various rating systems have been employed in critical editions of the Greek New Testament ever since the eighteenth century. The current letter-rating systems in the UBS Greek New Testament editions have been subject to severe critique ever since they first appeared in the first edition of 1966. In my experience, however, there is still a need for this kind of basic guidance among Bible translators and students of the New Testament.
In this article, I present a new descriptive rating system based on the generally accepted principles of textual criticism that takes into account external and internal evidence. This, in itself, is a pedagogical advantage that may enhance the individual learning process and the increased engagement with the textual problem in question. The rating will show the state of the evidence from the perspective of the editor(s), and, at the same time, it will invite the users of the edition to struggle with this same evidence on their own.
Thus, the following symbols are used to describe the evidence:
{e + i}
External and internal evidence unequivocally support the adopted variant reading.
{e > i}
External evidence favors the adopted variant reading, whereas internal evidence is ambiguous.
{e < i}
External evidence is ambiguous, whereas internal evidence favors the adopted variant reading.
{e = i}
External and internal evidence are balanced or, alternatively, external evidence favors one variant reading, internal evidence another.
(The latter symbol is roughly equivalent to the bold dot in the ECM.)
In the article I provide several examples of these various ratings in variation-units in the Epistle of Jude. Scholars and editors can use this system when they make textual decisions in any given unit of variation, weighing external and internal evidence, however they are perceived. I propose it for the future editions of the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament.
In this issue I propose a new rating system for Greek New Testament editions. It is a revised version of a proposal that was included in my monograph on Jude. Tommy Wasserman. "Proposal for a New Rating System in Greek New Testament Editions." Bible Translator 2009 60/3:140-157.
Summary:
Various rating systems have been employed in critical editions of the Greek New Testament ever since the eighteenth century. The current letter-rating systems in the UBS Greek New Testament editions have been subject to severe critique ever since they first appeared in the first edition of 1966. In my experience, however, there is still a need for this kind of basic guidance among Bible translators and students of the New Testament.
In this article, I present a new descriptive rating system based on the generally accepted principles of textual criticism that takes into account external and internal evidence. This, in itself, is a pedagogical advantage that may enhance the individual learning process and the increased engagement with the textual problem in question. The rating will show the state of the evidence from the perspective of the editor(s), and, at the same time, it will invite the users of the edition to struggle with this same evidence on their own.
Thus, the following symbols are used to describe the evidence:
{e + i}
External and internal evidence unequivocally support the adopted variant reading.
{e > i}
External evidence favors the adopted variant reading, whereas internal evidence is ambiguous.
{e < i}
External evidence is ambiguous, whereas internal evidence favors the adopted variant reading.
{e = i}
External and internal evidence are balanced or, alternatively, external evidence favors one variant reading, internal evidence another.
(The latter symbol is roughly equivalent to the bold dot in the ECM.)
In the article I provide several examples of these various ratings in variation-units in the Epistle of Jude. Scholars and editors can use this system when they make textual decisions in any given unit of variation, weighing external and internal evidence, however they are perceived. I propose it for the future editions of the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)