Subject: Re: New TR

From: "DC PARKER" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 14:11:43 GMT

In reply to Jim West:

1.  Length and detail are too entirely different matters.  

2.  You've changed the subject.  Translators may use the UBS/NA27 
text - though they may adopt readings in the apparatus.  But they are 
not necessarily, and in that tole are not primarily, textual critics.

I did not write that there were textual critics 'who do not work with 
NA27 as the base' (whatever 'base means' here), but that 'I know of no textual critic who is 
satisfied with a printed edition'.  Of course I use NA27 to look  up 
readings and for teaching.  But I am in continuous critical debate 
with its text, and so is every textual critic.  I use many other 
printed texts and apparatus critici as well.  They all have their 
strengths and weaknesses, and part of our discipline is to know and 
understand them.  That is what I meant by 'I know of no textual 
critic who is satisfied with a printed edition'.

DC PARKER
DEPT OF THEOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM
TEL. 0121-414 3613
FAX  0121-414 6866
E-MAIL [email-masked]

---

From: ANDREW SMITH <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 10:33:36 -0400 (EDT)

On Wed, 7 May 1997, DC PARKER wrote:

> Translators may use the UBS/NA27 

Yes! We must distinguish between TCers and translators (and their
respective motives).