From: Clayton Bartholomew (c.s.bartholomew@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Sun Jun 08 1997 - 05:19:38 EDT
Carl Conrad wrote:
>>>>>>>
(I sort of assumed that "I always prefer the more
difficult reading in exegesis" refers to the text-critical maxim LECTIO
DIFFICILIOR PROBABILIOR).
>>>>>>>
Yes and no. Yes that is the source of the idea. But no, I am not talking about textual
problems. By *reading* I simply mean how the text is understood to hang to together.
What refers to what and so forth. I am suggesting perhaps the most difficult *reading*,
i.e., the most counter intuitive to the late 20th century mind is to be preferred. I think
this may relate in some way the recent discussions of logic on the list.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Or are you extracting the sense of EKKLHSIA from
hAPANTES in the last clause of 5:12? I think I'd go with APOSTOLWN in 5:12 as an
antecedent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Precisely, I am extracting the sense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'll take another Martini James, two olives please.
Is this a new cocktail named after the so-called STULOS of the Jerusalem
church? Or is it an application of a new principle of punctuation whereby
commas are based upon real verse pauses rather than upon syntax?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The difficulty arises from the lack of punctuation in the 4th century unicals. A better
reading of that sentence would be:
I'll take another martini, James, two olives please.
or if you prefer dynamic equivalence:
James! Would you please bring me another martini with two olives.
Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:18 EDT