From: Vincent Broman (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Oct 26 1995 - 14:13:38 EDT
> Actually, due to the work of Colwell, Clark, Streeter, Royse, and Head, it
> has been shown that due to various factors scribes were more likely to omit
> than to add to the text.
I know about the Colwell, Royse, and Head work on longer/shorter readings.
What Clark and Streeter results are you referring to?
email@example.com responded to the anonymous aolite:
> Uh, this is quite a misleading overgeneralization and distortion.
> Especially in the Synoptic Gospels texts, it is necessary to make *large*
> allowances for harmonization and other stylistic changes that may add or
> drop or whatever.
What I've seen confines itself to the pre-fourth-century papyri,
but for this question, that's certainly a cogent, specialized area.
About distortion, Dr. Hurtado, I don't quite follow what allowance
you feel should have been made for harmonization and stylistic effects.
Are you saying that the reported preponderance of deletions over additions
applies only to accidental corruptions, but the intentional corruptions
(for harmony and style) lengthen the text? The studies I saw looked at
singular readings, including perforce both kinds of corruption.
And the singular readings tended to shorten the text.
Vincent Broman Email: firstname.lastname@example.org = o
2224 33d St. Phone: +1 619 284 3775 = _ /- _
San Diego, CA 92104-5605 Starship: 32d42m22s N 117d14m13s W = (_)> (_)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:31 EDT