Sat Jan 4 12:20:22 1997

From owner-tc-list  Sat Jan  4 12:20:22 1997
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id MAA13090; Sat, 4 Jan 1997 12:19:16 -0500
X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <970104120546_2088203240@emout02.mail.aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 11:17:56 -0700
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: "Robert B. Waltz" 
Subject: Re: Byz or M text translation
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 1345

On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Rich Elliott (REElliott@aol.com) wrote:

>Dear colleagues:
>
>In light of the discussion of Mike Arcieri and Julian Goldberg Re. the Maj.
>text, has anyone any comments on a volume that I have found somewhat at odds
>with itself;  the title is: THE INTERLINEAR GREEK - ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT
> The Nestle Greek text with a Literal English Translation. 
>
>The margianal text is the King James (as is the interlinear yet the Greek is
>Nestle!).
>So, go figure.  By the way the author is Alfred Marshall D. Litt.  Samuel
>Bagster & Sons 1959.
>
>Any Comments?

There are any number of these Marshall volumes. I have a Marshall text
with the RSV alongside. There's also one with the NIV, and I believe there's
one with the NIV and NRSV. It just seems to be a publishing trick: Take the
Marshall interlinear, put another text alongside of it, and see if you can
get somebody to but it....

On the other hand, I think the Marshall interlinear is fairly good.
I personally like it better than the other NRSV interlinear --
though I wish they would re-typeset it.

My humble opinions, of course.

-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

                  Robert B. Waltz
               waltzmn@skypoint.com

Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn

Back