Читать книгу Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) - Группа авторов, Nestle-Aland - Страница 70

Here the signs and symbols which are explained more fully in the introduction are listed with brief explanations. The Latin abbreviations are also given in expanded form.

1 Novum Testamentum Graecum - Editio Critica Maior IV. The Catholic Letters, ed. B. Aland, K. Aland†, G. Mink, H. Strutwolf, K. Wachtel. Stuttgart: German Bible Society, 2nd rev. edition 2013.

2 See now Gerd Mink: Contamination, Coherence, and Coincidence in Textual Transmission: The Coherence-Based Genealogical Method (CBGM) as a Complement and Corrective to Existing Approaches. In: K. Wachtel and M. Holmes (ed.), The Textual History of the Greek New Testament (SBL Text-Critical Studies 8), Atlanta 2011, pp. 141-216.

3 See ECM IV/2 (Supplementary Material), 2nd rev. edition 2012, pp. 10-18.

4 The symbol “Byz” is not used in the ECM at such passages.

5 2427 is a remarkable exception, as Stephen C. Carlson proved this manuscript to be a copy of the Gospel of Mark according to Buttmann's 1860 edition. (See Stephen C. Carlson, ‘Archaic Mark’ (MS 2427) and the Finding of a Manuscript Fake, SBL Forum, n.p. [cited Aug 2006]. Online: http://sbl-site.org/Article.aspx?ArticleID=577.)

6 When listing the contents of a fragment a verse is described as extant if a single letter of it is preserved. Therefore inferences about the precise extent of a fragment may not be justified (cf. below p. 86*).

7 See ECM IV/2 (Supplementary Material), 2nd rev. edition 2012, pp. 10-18.

8 See also the systematic list of abbreviations (Appendix IV).

9 Cf. J. Schmid, Studien zur Geschichte des griechischen Apokalypse-Textes (3 vols., Munich 1955/1956).

10 Cf. the relevant essays in K. Aland (ed.), Die alten Übersetzungen des Neuen Testaments, die Kirchenväterzitate und Lektionare [ANTT 5], Berlin-New York 1972; and B. M. Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament: Their Origin, Transmission and Limitations, Oxford 1977. It is highly welcome that there is a growing awareness about the problems of citing versional evidence in the apparatus of editions of the Greek New Testament. The following titles have to be mentioned in this respect: J. P. Lyon, Syriac Gospel Translations (CSCO 548). Louvain 1994. - P. J. Williams, Early Syriac Translation Technique and the Textual Criticism of the Greek Gospels (Texts and Studies; Ser. 3 Vol. 2). Piscataway 2004. Cf. the review of this work by T. Baarda, Novum Testamentum 48 (2006) 400-404.

11 The rare instances where a decision is not completely certain are marked with the sign ?.

12 The Old Latin tradition is referred to below by synecdoche using the conventional term “Itala”. On the character and structure of the Latin tradition, cf. the publications of the Vetus-Latina Institute, Beuron.

13 The Latin texts d, f and g of the bilinguals D (05/06), F (09/010) and G (011/012) are cited only when their witness differs from that of their accompanying Greek texts.

14 In addition to the witnesses cited in this edition unpublished collations of the following manuscripts were used: Ph20 = Ms Mingana syr. 480, Birmingham; Ph21 = Ms B20.2 inf., Bibl. Ambrosiana, Milan; Ph22 = Ms Sin. syr. 15, St. Catherine's Monastery; Ph23 = Ms Vat. syr. 475, Rome; Ph24 = Ms Vat. syr. 486, Rome; Ph25 = Ms Vat. syr. 461, Rome; Ph26 = Ms Diez A. quart. 105, Berlin.

15 According to the current state of research it is likely that there are independent versions in Akhmimic, Middle Egyptian, W, Proto-Bohairic, Fayyumic and V. See on this B. J. Diebner, R. Kasser: Hamburger Papyrus Bil. 1. Die alttestamentlichen Texte des Papyrus Bilinguis 1 der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg. Canticum Canticorum (Coptice), Lamentationes Ieremiae (Coptice), Ecclesiastes (Graece et Coptice). Cahiers d'orientalisme 18 Patrick Cramer Éditeur. Geneva 1989, pp. 54-56. - W. P. Funk: Zur Frage der achmimischen Version der Evangelien. In: Giversen et al. (ed). Coptology: Past, Present, and Future. Studies in Honour of Rodolphe Kasser (OLA 61). Leuven 1994, pp. 327-339.

16 This distinction occurs frequently in biblical commentaries because, especially in later manuscripts, the running biblical text has often been replaced by a different text type. The text as ascertained from the commentary proper reflects the text of the Father more accurately.

17 The text and apparatus are reprinted unchanged from the standard critical edition by Eberhard Nestle in the 25th and 26th editions. The apparatus to the letter to Carpian and also the canon tables record variants found in the earlier editions of E(rasmus)2-5, Stephanus (ϛ), M(ill), Ma(thaei), L(loyd) 1828 and 1836, Scr(ivener), Ln (Lachmann), (ischendorf), (ordsworth-White) and vS(oden).

18 Following the edition by A. Rahlfs.