Wed Nov 6 13:15:43 1996

From owner-tc-list  Wed Nov  6 13:15:43 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id NAA24886; Wed, 6 Nov 1996 13:14:45 -0500
Comments: Authenticated sender is 
From: "Henry T. Carmichael" 
To: Vincent Broman , tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Date: 	Wed, 6 Nov 1996 14:11:41 +0000
Subject: Re: versions : what do you expect?
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Message-Id: <96Nov6.142054-0000_.22050-1+140@ctc-fw.ctronsoft.com>
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1065

Vincent Broman wrote:

> jwest@SunBelt.Net asked about Arabic-Greek retroversion:
> > I am simply curious, in this connection, how such a retroversion
> > accomplishes more than simply being a "targum" on a putative text?
> 
> Besides serving as a Targum on the Arabic texts, a Greek retroversion
> made with an eye on the MS/versional/patristic traditions could
> serve as a bridge in connecting the Arabic texts back to the sources
> from which they came.  Even a reader innocent of Arabic could get useful
> information from such a retroversion, even though he would be seriously
> handicapped in evaluating the information.

	An interested lurker, I have an additional question, which will probably
display my ignorance:  What grounds are there for supposing the Arabic to
have come directly from the Greek (which appears to be the reason for a
Greek retroversion)?  If there were an intermediate version (Syriac?,
something else?), and the Arabic were a rendition of *that*, would there be
any way of detecting such a translational history?

Henry Carmichael

Back