From: Jonathan Robie (jonathan@texcel.no)
Date: Thu Jul 02 1998 - 13:19:02 EDT
At 12:49 PM 7/2/98 -0400, Jim West wrote:
>anyone have any notion as to what the Aramaic word may have been if this
>Matthean text is an ipsissima?
Hmmmm what methodology is used to determine that? *If* there is an Aramaic
original for Matthew, which is not certain, then we don't have it. So how
do you determine what word was used in a postulated original that we do not
possess? I guess the possibilities would be (1) to supply the equivalent
word from the later Syriac manuscripts (since Syriac and Aramaic are
similar), or (2) to try to find an Aramaic word that means the same thing.
The first method would make sense if we felt that the Syriac manuscripts
were more reliable than the Greek, e.g. if it could be shown that there is
an Aramaic original and that the Syriac more closely reflects that original
than the earlier Greek manuscripts. Even then, a good answer would depend
on solid expertise in Syriac, which is not widespread.
The second method makes no more sense than doing an English translation and
using the English word to explain the original Greek.
So I guess I really don't know how we can know the answer to your question.
Jonathan
___________________________________________________________________________
Jonathan Robie jwrobie@mindspring.com
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: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to unsubscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:52 EDT