From: Jonathan Robie (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Sep 04 1998 - 12:01:42 EDT
I'd like to invite you to do something just a little out of the normal
scope of B-Greek (and I hope the chairs don't kill me for this...but I
don't think there's another list where this can really be discussed): could
you please take any one verse where you are confident that you can
reconstruct an Aramaic original that is more reliable than the Greek, and
show me the methodology you use to convince yourself that your
reconstruction is better than any of the available manuscripts?
At 10:25 AM 9/4/98 -0700, Jack Kilmon wrote:
>As an example, in my opinion the 1st beatitude is safe for "back-
>translation" (retroversion) while the 9th would be only a translation.
Perhaps you could use this as an example. I'd really like to understand how
a retroversion can be more accurate than the text from which it is
reconstructed. I'd also like to know how you can be sure that there *is* an
Aramaic original underlying a particular Greek saying. Please respond in
sufficient detail that I can carefully trace your argument.
Jonathan Robie firstname.lastname@example.org
Little Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine
Little Greek 101: http://sunsite.unc.edu/koine/greek/lessons
B-Greek Home Page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek
B-Greek Archives: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek/archives
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [email@example.com] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:58 EDT