why miniscule?

James Forsyth james at bigbeing.com.au
Fri Apr 5 02:39:29 EST 2002


Hi Peter,

Perhaps one could say the same for accents as well.  Didn't uncial scripts 
dispense with them?

I personally find some cursive PHIs and KAIs inconvenient.

James Forsyth

At 04:37 PM 4/04/02 -0500, you wrote:
>Why are our modern Greek texts still in miniscule?
>Should this practice be changed?
>I can see the following advantages of changing to uncial:
>1) The text would more accurately reflect the earliest and most important
>manuscripts (and the lost autographs)
>2) It would make it easier for students to compare their printed Gk NT
>with photographs/fascimiles of the papyri and early codices
>3) Students would have to cope with only 24 letters, rather than 49 (plus
>breathings, accents etc).  No need to learn rules about beginning
>paragraphs, direct speech and names with capitals
>4) Maybe most important.  It would make the whole science of textual
>criticism easier.  For example, itacisms would be simpler to identify, it
>becomes more apparent how an epsilon and a (lunate) sigma can be confused.
>
>Responses much appreciated.
>
>Peter Smithers
>(MA Theology - Cambridge; MA Islamic Learning - Karachi)
>(Research & Training Officer)
>WORD OF LIFE
>67 Louth Road, Sheffield, S11 7AU, UK
>email: smithersp at aol.com
>
>---
>B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
>You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [james at bigbeing.com.au]
>To unsubscribe, forward this message to 
>$subst('Email.Unsub')
>To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek at franklin.oit.unc.edu




More information about the B-Greek mailing list