Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew Matthew (was Syriac)

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Barry" <nebarry AT verizon.net>
  • To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew Matthew (was Syriac)
  • Date: Wed, 03 Feb 2010 06:47:04 -0500



--------------------------------------------------
From: "James Christian" <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 6:20 AM
To: "Randall Buth" <randallbuth AT gmail.com>
Cc: "Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Hebrew Matthew (was Syriac)

In any case, I'm interested. Why do you think Matthew was originally
composed in Greek?

If I may interject:

1) Compare it with actual Greek translation literature, the LXX. It simply does not read like translation literature. I don't have time to quantify it for you, but do the reading yourself.

2) Compare Matthew with Matthew and Mark. Matthew makes stylistic choices which are in line with fresh composition of stock material (I am assuming Marcan priority here), but nothing which indicates that he is translating from a source language. Were he translating, I would expect the stylistic choices to be more limited, especially considering the precedent of what we would call formal equivalency translation during the period.

3) Matthew's syntax and stylistic markers are well within the parameters for the non-literary Greek of the period.

N.E. Barry Hofstetter

Fecisti nos ad te et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te...
-- Augustine, Confessions 1:1

http://mysite.verizon.net/nebarry/
http://my.opera.com/BarryHofstetter/blog/




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page