[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: orion Bible quotes in the Temple scroll?

Judith wrote: 
>  >>
> >>I'm puzzled by the last phrase ...."where *he thinks* it is a quote."  What
> >>does *he thinks* mean?  How can Michael Wise have sufficient expertise to
> >>publish on DSS, if he doesn't *know* enough to tell his readers whether a
> >>sentence or passage in the TS  is or is not a quote?   Doesn't he know how
> >>to use a Hebrew bible concordance?  It should be a simple matter to
> >>establish whether a DSS passage is or is not a direct quote (or close
> >>paraphrase) of biblical material!
> >>It doesn't say much for Wise's work if he cannot even do this.  Is it
> >>possible that Dr. Schart meant to say that Wise uses [q] to indicate where
> >>something is a definite quote?   Some clarification is needed here.
> >>
> >>jrw@brown.edu
> >>
> >
> >After all the discussion on this list about preconceptions, difficulties of
> >defining concepts and the importance of presuppositions for building a
> >hypothesis it should not be difficult to imagine, why I added the phrase
> >"he thinks". And your short note in parenthesis _(or close paraphrase)_
> >already points out one (and only one!) important issue at stake here: What
> >is a quote, what a citation, what a close paraphrase, what an allusion?
> >Wise has written on that (p. 207-209). He does not differentiate between
> >quotation and citation. In fact, "citation" is a category he did not use. I
> >for one would like to make a difference and only refer to those cases as a
> >quote where a quotation formula is used.    [Aaron Schart]
> I think there may be a problem of semantics and vocabulary here.
> In my usage (which I think is quite general among wordsmiths):
>  "Quotation"  means an exact word-for-word presentation of a a text:, e.g.
> "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" is a quotation
> from the King James Version.
> "Citation" means giving the reference to the locus of the quotation one has
> in mind --e.g., here, the quotation consists of the words of the verse,
> whereas the citation is:  Genesis 1:1
> Yes, I know people loosely confuse these two, especially in America (except
> lawyers like yours truly!) but that doesn't make it kosher!

I had intended to stay out of this part of the thread I apparently
started, but I do have to make a few comments about this.

When I asked for quotations/citations/whatever I was speaking as a textual
critic, not as a wordsmith.  Use of such terms in TC is common when
referring to a passage in one work (e.g. the New Testament or the DSS or a
patristic work) that refers directly to another work, i.e. a NT author
using words and phrases from an OT passage or a patristic source doing the
same with a NT writing.  The question from a TC point of view is to
determine what version, recension, textual family, etc. a particular
reference is based on, and using this sort of evidence to reconstruct the
history of the work's textual transmission and (hopefully) the work as it
came from the author's hand (I am aware of many, many more semantic
difficulties with this last part, but pursuing them will take me too far
afield and so I am deliberately over-simplifying here).

To take a single example: I have mentioned before on this list the fact
that biblical materials from Cave 4 show a marked difference in textual
tradition than those of the other caves, i.e. those from Cave 4 include a
much higher percentage of documents and references that are built on LXX
type text than the documents recovered from the other 10 caves.  Speaking
as a textual critic, I want to know why.  To find out, I must not only
analyze explicit copies of biblical materials, I must also analyze how
biblical passages are used and "quoted" in nonbiblical materials.  A major
project based on these needs is what prompted me to pose my question.  A
"quotation" as a direct word-for-word citation may still be difficult to
identify if it "quotes" a divergent form of the text from what we are more
or less accustomed to.  That, I think, is why he referred to sections that
Wise "thinks" are biblical quotes, because with all the forms of the text
floating around at that time it is often difficult to tell whether a
writer was citing a particular recension directly, alluding to another
recension and inserting his/her own words (as happened often in the Temple
Scroll, apparently) or merely alluding or paraphrasing. 

I hope this clears things up a little.

Seen in a classified ad: "Parachute for sale.  Used once.  Never opened."