dwashbur at nyx.net
Thu Sep 23 11:22:43 EDT 1999
> The BHS remedied most of the mentioned problems, but the principle that
> Sperber criticised is also seen in this text - but now in the *footnotes*.
> If you make a study of these footnotes, it will become clear that their
> basic criterion is grammar rather than text. Be particularly cautious when
> you just find "l" ("legendum"-"read") without any quotations, or when you
> find "l" together with meaningless information, as in Jer 27:18. Here we
> find the following footnote: " "l" (read) YFB)W, vel ("or") c ("with") pc
> MSS ("a few, i.e. 3-10 manuscripts) B). No evidence is quoted for the
> suggestion YFB)W, and no particular manuscripts are quoted for the
> suggestion B). So what is the reason for this footnote? GRAMMAR!
You caught me again. Obviously, I didn't read the footnote closely
enough because I missed the "vel." For reasons I couldn't possibly
explain except a combination of exhaustion and other factors I
won't go into, I read the note wrong. Do me a big favor and ignore
what I wrote before about the variant reading. Apologies to all for
my lack of scholarly care in reading.
"Ich veranlassenarbeitenworken mein Mojo."
More information about the b-hebrew