Posting is reserved for Verified Users.  To become a Verified User, send an email to: expertaccess@ntvmr.uni-muenster.de
​General Feedback

ECM of Mark - Notification of typos

Toggle
ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
23/08/21 15:54

Not quite sure whether anyone else has advised you of these or not, but there's a few typos on pages 92-93 of the Supplement Volume to the new ECM of Acts (under Versions - Syriac).
 

1. Page 92, left hand colmun, near end of first paragraph:
This trend is still effective in the Peshitta, which itself is a revision of the Vatus Syra and the final stage of the Old Syriac revisional development.

Vatus should of course be Vetus

2. Page 93, right hand column, second sentence of final paragraph:
One late witness only was considered (BnF30 of the 12th cent.); by its large portions of Vets Syra readings, it deserves special attention.

Vets = Vetus

3. Page 93, footnote 36:
Referring to the Old Syriac heritage in early Peshitta manuscripts, M. Black lanches the hypothesis of a Pre-Peshitta as intermediate stage between Vetus Syra and Peschitta, see M. Black, ZurGeschichte des syrischen Evangelientextes...

Peschitta = Peshitta. Guessing this is just an uncorrected Peschitta from the German equvalent on page 85.

+1 (1 Vote)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
26/08/21 12:46 as a reply to S Walch.
Thank you for pointing this out! I’ve recorded them for the next printing.
0 (0 Votes)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
26/08/21 17:41 as a reply to Greg Paulson.

No trouble. I'm afraid I'm back with a few more, albeit more formatting issues and cases of missing text, rather than typos.

1. Page 77 of Part 3 - Studies, the quoted Latin text from Irenaeus' Against Heresies (III, 10,6, 175-184 - middle of left column) includes:

Quapropter et Marcus, interpres et sectator Petri, initium Evangelicae conscriptionis fecit sic:
"Initium Evangelii Iesu Christi Filii Dei, quemadmodum scriptum est in prophetis:
Ecce mitto angelum meum ante ...."

However the English translation included seems to jump straight from as follows (= fecit sic) to Behold, I send my messenger (=Ecce mitto angelum meum):

That is why Mark, the translator and follower of Peter, also makes the beginning of his record of the Gospel as follows: "Behold, I send my messenger ..."

Don't know whether this was deliberate, but the other citations/translations don't appear to do this, so presuming it's an accidental omission.
 

2. Page 79, top of right column - has the quotation from Origen followed by the English translation, however this is separated from the Greek, and in normal type as opposed to italic:

Οὐκοῦν θεοῦ ἐστι.... ἐν τῇ πρὸς Γάλατας.
or., CRom Frg. 4 (FC 2/6, 44, 3)

Is it not the gospel of God to which Paul was set apart? But Mark talks about the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Paul himself says the same in the letter to the Galatians.
 

3. Same page and column - the quotation from Serapion does somewhat the opposite to the quotation from Irenaeus, in that the English translation contains more text than what is quoted in the Greek, which starts from διὰ τοῦτο rather than from ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τὰ as presupposed from the English translation:

διὰ τοῦτο οὔτε ἐπιστήμην τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἔξουσι... Ἠσαίᾳ τῶ προφήτῃ
Because they used to study the Gospels, their refutation was also presented from the Gospels. But they proclaim a doctrine without the Law (of Moses) because they do not want to learn, and therefore they have no knowledge of the Gospel at all because they do not accept the beginning of the Gospels: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet."

The underlying Greek for the English which is missing is: ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τὰ Εὐαγγέλια μεμελέτηται αὐτοῖς, ἐκ τῶν Εὐαγγελίων προηνέχθη ὁ ἔλεγχος. Διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ἄνομον λαλοῦσι τὸν νόμον, μὴ φιλολογοῦντες· (from Patrologia Graeca Volume 40, column 921)
(The Greek text quoted is also missing the iota-subscript in τῷ: Ἠσαίτῶ προφήτῃ)

4. Page 91, left hand column, there appears to be a random double-line break in the third paragraph:

This is probably a citation... on the other
hand, are not found in the traditon of Mt 19:29 and

are certainly inspired by the parallel in Mark's Gospel,
but have left...

 

I've not finished the rest of the Studies, but shall let you know if I find anything else.

0 (0 Votes)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
27/08/21 11:07 as a reply to S Walch.

I’ve recorded these as well. Thank you!

0 (0 Votes)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
29/09/21 16:43 as a reply to S Walch.

'fraid I have a few more. These are my last batch from my first read through of the ECM. Hopefully ones which I've missed will be picked up by others.

All the below concern the third part - Studies

Page 135, footnote 14:
in The New Testament Text in Early Christianity Proceedings of the Lille Colloquium...

In the above, from "The" to "Colloquium" should be in italics.


Page 137 - left-hand column, last paragraph before Omission of Explanatory Asides and Formulas:

Again, in Mark 11:26 where VL1 and others, including 01 and 03, omit Jesus's saying ει δε υμεις ουκ αφιετε ουδε ο πατηρ υμων ο εν τοις ουνοις αφησει τα παραπτωματα υμων, it is possible...

ουνοις should either have an upper-line over it to indicate a nomen sacrum, or be fully written out as ουρανοις.


Page 149 - left-hand column, 2nd sentence:
Colligent from colligit in Mark 13:27 might be explained in terms...

"Colligent" and "colligit" should be in italics.
 

That's my final three. :)

0 (0 Votes)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
04/10/21 09:58 as a reply to S Walch.

Thanks so much! I’ve recorded these.

+1 (1 Vote)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
09/03/22 17:55 as a reply to S Walch.

I have found just one more to let you know of:

Part 2, Supplementary Material, p. 59, under 4.7 and K:
 

K   African text. The main witness is VL 1 (Codex
     Bobiensis). Citations of Cyprian und in works of
     Ps.Cyprian have also been used.
 

Guess this is an untranslated (but clearly understandable) portion of the German side on p. 53. :)

0 (0 Votes)

RE: ECM of Mark - Notification of typos
Answer
14/03/22 12:48 as a reply to S Walch.
Thank you! I've noted it.
0 (0 Votes)