[B-Greek] LXX Source Texts

Steve Puluka spuluka at hotmail.com
Thu Apr 15 06:37:44 EDT 2004


----- Original Message -----
Philip Engmann (phil-eng at ighmail.com)

> The problem I have right now is that I have already assumed, for my
> thesis of 9 selected LXX/MT variant texts  that:
>
> (i)  the parent LXX Hebrew consonantal texts are no longer extant, and
> that
>
> (ii) the MT consonantal text forms a good substitute for the parent LXX
> Hebrew consonantal texts.
>
> And then gone ahead to grammatically critique the LXX translations based
> on the fact that the MT consonantal text is essentially the source text
> of the LXX.
>
> The problem is that my supervisor asks now,
>
> "Do you know what the LXX parent text or texts were?"  or,
>
> "Are you assuming that the LXX was translated from the MT consonantal
> text?"

My experience with some professors is they are loath to accept just about
ANY argument from silence.  And I can only image that this increases with
the level of the paper in which the argument is made with a thesis or
dissertation being at the top of the list.

Perhaps he would accept the thesis if you outline the possibilities for the
missing parent text for each verse?  One of which would be what you have
already done.  Another a retro translation of the Greek back to Hebrew.
Depending on the book in the LXX this has already been done.  Tov has a
volume on Baruch for example, that I recall using a few years back.

Perhaps simply clearly pointing out that the text under discussion is
missing in the Hebrew form and that your analysis is ONE possible scenario
on the translation in question would suffice.  Rather than saying the
assumption is MT until proven otherwise.

Good luck with your work.

Steve Puluka
Masters Student SS Cyril & Methodius Seminary, Pittsburgh
Cantor in the Carpatho-Rusyn tradition
http://www.geocities.com/spuluka



More information about the B-Greek mailing list