Chargement en cours…
Codex Schøyen 2650 : a Middle Egyptian Coptic witness to the early Greek text of Matthew's Gospel : a study in translation theory, Indigenous Coptic, and New Testament textual criticism /
James M. Leonard analyzes the very important early Coptic manuscript of Matthew's Gospel, Codex Schøyen. Through a careful translational analysis, he shows how its close alliance with Vaticanus and Sinaiticus helps identify an earlier text form which they mutually reflect.
| Cote: | Libro Electrónico |
|---|---|
| Auteur principal: | |
| Format: | Électronique eBook |
| Langue: | Inglés Coptic Griego Antiguo |
| Publié: |
Leiden :
BRILL,
2014.
|
| Collection: | New Testament tools, studies and documents.
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | Texto completo |
Table des matières:
- Acknowledgments; Abbreviations for Manuscripts, Editions, and Versions; Chapter 1. The Significance of Codex Schøyen and Explanations for Its Text; 1.1. Introduction; 1.1.1. The Schøyen Collection; 1.1.2. Manuscript Description; 1.1.3. Significance of Mae2; 1.2. Schenke's Thesis; 1.2.1. Overview; 1.2.2. Schenke's Case for an Alternative Vorlage; 1.3. Introduction to a Translational Explanation; 1.3.1. Formation of Translational Expectations; 1.3.2. Impact of Linguistic Milieu in Representing Greek; 1.3.3. Recent Developments in the Study of Coptic Representation of Greek.
- 1.4. Review of Secondary Literature on the Text of Mae21.4.1. Analysis of Plisch's Assessment; 1.4.2. Analysis of Baarda's Assessment; 1.4.3. Analysis of ten Kate's Assessment; 1.5. Frequently Recurring Translational Incongruities; 1.6. Conclusion; Chapter 2. Features of Mae2 Unaffected or Minimally Affected by Translation; 2.1. Introduction; 2.2. Correspondence of Pericopes, Verses and Content; 2.2.1. Correspondence of Pericopes and Verses; 2.2.2. Correspondence of Content; 2.3. Correspondence of Names; 2.4. Correspondence of References to Jesus.
- 2.4.1. Differences between NA27 and Mae2 in References to Jesus2.4.2. Mae2's Differences Compared with Other Early Versions; 2.4.3. Explanation of Differences; 2.5. Correspondence of Textual Variation; 2.5.1. Long and Short Variants in UBS4; 2.5.2. Mae2's Correspondence with NA27 Compared with Other Manuscripts; 2.6. Conclusion; Chapter 3. Syntax and Representation of Matt 5:38-6:18; 3.1. Introduction; 3.1.1. Refutation of Schenke's Thesis; 3.1.2. Analysis of 5:38-6:18; 3.2. Frequently Recurring Syntactical Elements; 3.3. State of Preservation and Schenke's Reconstruction.
- 3.4. Verse by Verse Analysis3.5. Conclusion; 3.5.1. Intraversional Analysis; 3.5.2. Synatactical Differences; 3.5.3. Correspondence with Textual Variants; Excursus: Assessment of Boismard's Analysis; Chapter 4. Syntax and Representation of Matt 12:3-27; 4.1. Introduction; 4.1.1. State of Preservation; 4.1.2. Mae2 as a Witness to Canonical"" Matthew; 4.1.3. Presentation of Analysis; 4.2. Verse by Verse Analysis; 4.3. Conclusion; 4.3.1. Syntactical Differences; 4.3.2. Correspondence with Textual Variants; Chapter 5. Syntax and Representation of Matt 28:1-20; 5.1. Introduction.
- 5.1.1. State of Preservation5.1.2. Mae2 as a Witness to Canonical"" Matthew; 5.2. Verse by Verse Analysis; 5.3. Conclusion; 5.3.1. Syntactical Differences; 5.3.2. Correspondence with Textual Variants; Chapter 6. Identification of Mae2 Allies; 6.1. Introduction; 6.1.1. Purpose; 6.1.2. Selection of Test Passages; 6.1.3. Presentation of Information in the Test Passage Charts; 6.1.4. Method for Determining Mae2 Allies; 6.1.5. Classification of Mae2 Allies; 6.1.6. Inclusion of Subvariants Having Ambiguous Support; 6.1.7. Exclusion of Ten Teststellen; 6.2. Analysis of Test Passages.