Sat Nov 23 16:44:34 1996

From owner-tc-list  Sat Nov 23 16:44:34 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA00815; Sat, 23 Nov 1996 16:43:45 -0500
Date: 23 Nov 96 18:10:51 +0100
Subject: Re: Two variants of Sinai Arabic 71
From: "Jean Valentin" 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
X-Mailer: Cyberdog/1.2
Message-Id: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 468

Ulrich Schmid wrote:

> As far as I can see, the most likely explanation for the omission of Mk
> 7,34 is 
> Homoioteleuton in the Greek Vorlage:
> KAIHNOIGHSAN...; MS 1424 
> omitted KAILEGEI AUTW...
> Within the paratactic (KAI...KAI...KAI...) parts of Mark this type of 
> homoioteleuton is not uncommon

I agree that this is surely the best explanation, and probably also another
proof of the carelessness of the translator.

Back