Reidar Aasgaard_Brothers in brackets_a plea for rethinking the use of [ ] in NA - UBS.pdf

(226 KB) Pobierz

Journal for the Study of the New

Testament

http://jnt.sagepub.com

Brothers in Brackets? A Plea for Rethinking the Use of [] in NA/UBS

Reidar Aasgaard

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

2004; 26; 301

DOI: 10.1177/0142064X0402600303

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://jnt.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/26/3/301

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

can be found at:

Email Alerts:

http://jnt.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions:

http://jnt.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Downloaded from

http://jnt.sagepub.com

by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008

[JSNT 26.3 (2004) 301-321]

ISSN 0142-064X

Brothers in Brackets?

A Plea for Rethinking the Use of [ ] in NA/UBS

Reidar Aasgaard

Faculty of Theology, University of Oslo

P.b. 1023 Blindern, N-0315 Oslo, Norway

reidar.aasgaard@teologi.uio.no

Abstract

In their common main text, the last three editions of the Nestle-Aland

Novum

Testamentum Graece

(NA) and the United Bible Societies’

Greek New

Testament

(UBS) follow the long-established tradition of putting material of

problematic authenticity within square brackets. Although there has over

time taken place a development in these two publications towards a more

positive assessment of the bracketed material, this has so far had no conse-

quences with regard to their actual practice of bracketing. This article makes

a sample inquiry into the authentic Pauline letters, viz. of some bracketed

instances of address in the imperative (

a)delfoi/

). On the basis of external

and internal criteria, and of the general tendency in important early manu-

scripts to omit certain types of material, it is argued that there are good

reasons for reassessing the attitude and practice of bracketing in NA/UBS,

preferably in order to reduce the amount of material in brackets.

The Use of Brackets in the Text of the New Testament

The Nestle-Aland

Novum Testamentum Graece

(NA) and the United

Bible Societies’

Greek New Testament

(UBS) follow the long-established

tradition of putting material of problematic authenticity within brackets:

[ ].

In text-critical publications of this kind of ancient texts, such bracket-

ing is a necessary and viable solution when it proves impossible to give a

clear (enough) answer to the originality of a reading, or to reach an accept-

able consensus within the editorial committee responsible for the work.

1. In this context, I only deal with readings within single brackets [ ], not within

double brackets [[ ]].

Downloaded from

http://jnt.sagepub.com

by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008

New York, NY

All rights

USA.

26th Street, Suite 1703,

2004 SAGE Publications.

10010,

reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.

302

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

26.3 (2004)

The use of such brackets in NA and UBS has, however, occasionally

become an issue of discussion and criticism: J.K. Elliott has on several

occasions strongly questioned the practice of bracketing.

P.W. Comfort,

who is generally negative about the originality of the bracketed material,

criticizes the inclusion of it for ‘almost always [being] based on internal

considerations (versus external documentation) or tradition or both’.

M. Silva has objections of a more technical character: bracketing in combi-

nation with the A–D rating of readings in the UBS complicates the

assessment of readings, since the relationship of the two systems, particu-

larly their relative weight, is not clear.

In their introductions to the NA and the UBS the editors explain their

use of such brackets. It is worthwhile to take a look at the reasons given

for their practice. When we investigate this in the latest editions, we can

see that a development has taken place over time.

In NA

and UBS

, both introductions are very brief on the subject of

bracketing. NA

(1963) merely states that brackets are used when ‘doubt

as to the authenticity exists’.

This formulation is somewhat imprecise,

since it may indicate that brackets are to be used any time when there is

doubt about authenticity. However, the de facto use of brackets, much

more sparse than in later editions, shows that they are employed only

when the doubt is strong. In a similar way, UBS

(1966) very generally

2. In these articles, Elliott has described several problematic aspects with such

bracketing. I agree with much of his criticism, and have integrated some of it in what

follows. See J.K. Elliott, ‘The United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament: An Evalu-

ation’,

NovT

15 (1973), pp. 288-90; ‘The Third Edition of the Bible Societies’ Greek

New Testament’,

NovT

20 (1978), pp. 255-61; ‘The United Bible Societies’ Greek New

Testament: A Short Examination of the Third Edition’,

30 (1979), p. 137; ‘The

New Testament in Greek: Two New Editions’,

TLZ

119 (1994), pp. 493-96; ‘The

Fourth Edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament’,

TRev

90 (1994),

cols. 9-20; ‘The Twentyseventh Edition of Nestle-Aland’s Novum Testamentum

Graece’,

TRev

90 (1994), cols. 19-24.

3. P.W. Comfort,

The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament

(Grand

Rapids, MI: Baker, 1992), p. 134, also p. 126. Elliott, ‘The Third Edition’, p. 258 is of

the opposite opinion.

4. M. Silva, ‘Modern Critical Editions and Apparatuses of the Greek New Testa-

ment’, in B.D. Ehrman and M.W. Holmes (eds.),

The Text of the New Testament in

Contemporary Research: Essays on the

Status Quaestionis.

A Volume in Honor of

Bruce M. Metzger

(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), pp. 287-88, also n. 20. J.K.

Elliott has also raised some of the same questions in the reviews noted above.

5. NA

, p. 66*.

2004.

Downloaded from

http://jnt.sagepub.com

by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008

ASGAARD

Brothers in Brackets?

303

says that brackets ‘enclose words which are regarded as having dubious

textual validity’.

The later NA and UBS editions, which have the main New Testament

text in common and also almost the same editorial committee members,

are more elaborate on the topic of bracketing. In UBS

(1975) particular

care is taken to describe more precisely the technical use of brackets.

Brackets ‘are used to enclose words (or portion of words) whose presence

or position in the text is regarded as disputed’.

In spite of different word-

ing, the reason for bracketing seems to be fairly similar to that of the

previous edition: bracketed texts are viewed as ‘disputed’. However, the

reformulation also seems to re ect the experts’ increasing awareness of

their own relativity: whereas it appears to be a unanimous assessment in

UBS

that bracketed material is ‘dubious’, UBS

focuses more on the

scholars’ role in the process of establishing the text.

Four years later NA

(1979) is much more detailed on the practice of

bracketing:

Square brackets in the text ful l their usual function in critical texts: The

words enclosed by [] are of doubtful authenticity with regard to the original

text. The reader must make his own decision in the light of the information

in the apparatus (although he can infer that the editors considered their

authenticity probable…).

Here, then, the editors refer to the established practice of using brackets in

scienti cally based texts, and leave it open to the readers to decide upon

it, although they hint—very generally—that the reading given is more

probable than improbable. They also follow up the change in UBS

emphasizing the judgment of the readers. Thus, a shift towards a more

explicit focus on the role of the audience has taken place in both editions.

With the publication of NA

and UBS

, a further change of attitude

seems to have occurred. In the introduction to NA

(1993) the editors say

that the use of brackets

indicate[s] that textual critics today are not completely convinced of the

authenticity of the enclosed words… The reading given in the text shows

the preference of the authors… Square brackets always re ect a great

degree of dif culty in determining the text.

UBS

, p. x*.

UBS

, p. xii*.

, p. 44*.

, pp. 49-50*.

Downloaded from

http://jnt.sagepub.com

by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008

2004.

304

Journal for the Study of the New Testament

26.3 (2004)

Now the editors underscore that bracketing still re ects ‘a great degree of

dif culty’ in deciding upon the original wording. However, bracketed read-

ings are no longer ‘of doubtful authenticity’ (NA

), but appear to be more

accepted as legitimate elements in the text. Although bracketing indicates

that textual critics are ‘not

completely

convinced’ (my emphasis), they

appear to have become more convinced than not. The bracketed material

has now become the ‘preference of the authors’, whose verdict in NA

was relegated to a parenthesis. Thus, a development towards a more posi-

tive evaluation appears to have taken place. The more extensive reason

given in NA

also indicates that a discussion has taken place as regards

the practice of bracketing.

UBS

(1993) re ects similar changes towards an emphasis on the role

of text-critical research and towards a positive assessment of authenticity.

On the latter point, the editors even express themselves more optimistically

than NA

: words in brackets ‘may be regarded as part of the text, but…in

the present state of New Testament scholarship, this cannot be taken as

completely certain’.

Here, the editors go a long way towards accepting the

originality of bracketed texts. They concede, however, that their assessment

is not ‘completely certain’ and also preliminary: future research may change

the picture. But nonetheless they seem more convinced than earlier.

Thus, in both NA and UBS, there appears to have taken place a noticeable

shift over time in the reasons given for bracketing. Although the editorial

committees of the NA and the UBS express themselves differently, their

positions seem to have evolved much in the same way. The development

is of two kinds. First, there has been a certain turn of attention away from

the issue of textual authenticity per se towards the scholars and their

assessments: the awareness of the role of the text-critics in establishing the

text has been heightened. Second, and more importantly, there has been a

shift from a more reserved or ambivalent attitude to a more positive evalu-

ation of the authenticity of the bracketed material.

This latter observation is strongly corroborated by the changes made

from UBS

to UBS

in the

A to D rating of readings.

According to the

editors, A rating means that ‘the text is certain’, B that ‘the text is almost

certain’, C that ‘the Committee had dif culty in deciding which variant to

place in the text’ and D that ‘the Committee had great dif culty in arriving

at a decision’.

Texts that are bracketed in the main text have a C rating.

10. UBS

, p. 2*.

11. UBS

, p. 3*.

12. UBS

, p. 2*.

2004.

Downloaded from

http://jnt.sagepub.com

by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008

Plik z chomika:

afranusieki

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

5823.pdf.ptl (202 KB)
1561.pdf.ptl (202 KB)
5818.pdf.ptl (94 KB)
1556.pdf.ptl (94 KB)
Reidar Aasgaard_Brothers in brackets_a plea for rethinking the use of [ ] in NA - UBS.pdf (226 KB)

Reidar Aasgaard_Brothers in brackets_a plea for rethinking the use of [ ] in NA - UBS.pdf

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: