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
© 2004 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
[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:
[ ].
1
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 [[ ]].
© The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd 2004, The Tower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NX and 15 East
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.
2
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’.
3
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.
4
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
25
and UBS
3
, both introductions are very brief on the subject of
bracketing. NA
25
(1963) merely states that brackets are used when ‘doubt
as to the authenticity exists’.
5
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
2
(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’,
BT
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
25
, p. 66*.
© 2004 SAGE Publications.
2004.
© The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd
All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008
A
ASGAARD
Brothers in Brackets?
303
says that brackets ‘enclose words which are regarded as having dubious
textual validity’.
6
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
3
(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’.
7
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
2
that bracketed material is ‘dubious’, UBS
3
focuses more on the
scholars’ role in the process of establishing the text.
Four years later NA
26
(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…).
8
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
3
by
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
27
and UBS
4
, a further change of attitude
seems to have occurred. In the introduction to NA
27
(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.
9
6.
7.
8.
9.
UBS
2
, p. x*.
UBS
3
, p. xii*.
NA
26
, p. 44*.
NA
27
, pp. 49-50*.
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 18, 2008
© 2004 SAGE Publications.
2004.
© The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd
All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
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
26
), 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
26
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
27
also indicates that a discussion has taken place as regards
the practice of bracketing.
UBS
4
(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
27
: 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’.
10
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
3
to UBS
4
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’.
11
Texts that are bracketed in the main text have a C rating.
12
10. UBS
4
, p. 2*.
11. UBS
4
, p. 3*.
12. UBS
4
, p. 2*.
© 2004 SAGE Publications.
2004.
© The Continuum Publishing Group Ltd
All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
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)
Inne foldery tego chomika:
Volume 26_No 4
Volume 27_No 1
Volume 27_No 2
Zgłoś jeśli
naruszono regulamin