经外书、伪经、经外书

Old Testament Abstracts Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1353/ota.2023.0015

Christopher T. Begg, Fred W. Guyette

{"title":"经外书、伪经、经外书","authors":"Christopher T. Begg, Fred W. Guyette","doi":"10.1353/ota.2023.0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"article is an attempt to determine the nature of the variations between the Geniza manuscripts and the Qumran manuscripts of CD from morphosyntactic and syntactic perspectives, which I discuss under the following headings: (a) adjustments to Biblical Hebrew; (b) selection of Mishnaic Hebrew; (c) atomistic approach; (d) ambiguity in a linguistic analysis on the part of the Geniza scribes; (e) alternative view; (f) inconsistency; (g) embarras de richesses ; (h) scribal error; and (i) miscellaneous.","PeriodicalId":262734,"journal":{"name":"Old Testament Abstracts","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intertestamental Literature, Apocrypha, NT Use: Qumran\",\"authors\":\"Christopher T. Begg, Fred W. Guyette\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ota.2023.0015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"article is an attempt to determine the nature of the variations between the Geniza manuscripts and the Qumran manuscripts of CD from morphosyntactic and syntactic perspectives, which I discuss under the following headings: (a) adjustments to Biblical Hebrew; (b) selection of Mishnaic Hebrew; (c) atomistic approach; (d) ambiguity in a linguistic analysis on the part of the Geniza scribes; (e) alternative view; (f) inconsistency; (g) embarras de richesses ; (h) scribal error; and (i) miscellaneous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":262734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Old Testament Abstracts\",\"volume\":\"83 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Old Testament Abstracts\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ota.2023.0015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Old Testament Abstracts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ota.2023.0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本文试图从形态句法和句法的角度确定CD的Geniza手稿和Qumran手稿之间差异的本质，我在以下标题下讨论:(a)对圣经希伯来语的调整;(b)密西拿希伯来语的选择;(c)原子法;(d) Geniza抄写员在语言分析上的歧义;(e)备选意见;(f)不一致;(g)富国的困窘;(h)抄写错误;(i)杂项。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Intertestamental Literature, Apocrypha, NT Use: Qumran

article is an attempt to determine the nature of the variations between the Geniza manuscripts and the Qumran manuscripts of CD from morphosyntactic and syntactic perspectives, which I discuss under the following headings: (a) adjustments to Biblical Hebrew; (b) selection of Mishnaic Hebrew; (c) atomistic approach; (d) ambiguity in a linguistic analysis on the part of the Geniza scribes; (e) alternative view; (f) inconsistency; (g) embarras de richesses ; (h) scribal error; and (i) miscellaneous.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Old Testament Abstracts

自引率

0.00%

发文量