10-01-2014, 01:23 AM
Charley,
I did report back. It went on for over 150 messages that anyone can read in the Aramaic Bible group. It went on to the point that Keith told us to cut it out and several members of the group confided in me that they thought you were being an [REDACTED]. So, if you've looked over the "whole site," did you read:
Is this unclear?
How about:
And this is followed by a list of sigla to indicate each manuscript source consulted in the reconstruction.
Is this unclear?
And here's a link to Chapter 1 of Mark:
http://aramaicnt.org/the-gospels/mark/mark-01/
Click on any of the links labeled "Apparatus" to see the textual alignment I've used for consultation. You can also read the footnotes.
Can anyone else say this isn't clear as crystal? I have answered each of these questions for the 50th time.
"What is this project about and what texts do you use?" "Here it is." "That's nice, but what text do you use?" "Here it is." "Ok, but what is this project about and what texts do you use?"
Am I the only one who feels that Charley is being purposefully obtuse and disingenuous?
Charley, I will not discuss this further in this thread, nor until you actually read and acknowledge what I've given you. The scope of my project is beyond clear and it is not accountable to you.
Peace,
-Steve
I did report back. It went on for over 150 messages that anyone can read in the Aramaic Bible group. It went on to the point that Keith told us to cut it out and several members of the group confided in me that they thought you were being an [REDACTED]. So, if you've looked over the "whole site," did you read:
Quote:I call {it} ?The Aramaic Words Translation.? Wherever Jesus or his followers are speaking, I try to provide a simple transliteration of their words in a reconstruction of their original language so that a reader unfamiliar with them may be able to pronounce a reasonable approximation for themselves.http://aramaicnt.org/about/
Is this unclear?
How about:
Quote:We have taken a public domain version of the Canonical Gospels and have interpolated wherever Jesus or his followers are speaking in a simple transliteration of their words in a reconstruction of their original language. This way you may intone those very words for yourself and get an idea of how they were originally spoken.http://aramaicnt.org/the-gospels/mark/
The following texts were used as a foundation for the reconstructions have been consulted and aligned in the apparatus under each Galilean Aramaic reconstruction where they are available. The Greek New Testament served as the structural base for each reconstruction, where the Syriac and Christian Palestinian Aramaic (CPA) served as examples for proper rendition of tenses. Galilean vocabulary and grammatical structures were then utilized when those in Syriac and CPA deviated from accepted forms {...}
And this is followed by a list of sigla to indicate each manuscript source consulted in the reconstruction.
Is this unclear?
And here's a link to Chapter 1 of Mark:
http://aramaicnt.org/the-gospels/mark/mark-01/
Click on any of the links labeled "Apparatus" to see the textual alignment I've used for consultation. You can also read the footnotes.
Can anyone else say this isn't clear as crystal? I have answered each of these questions for the 50th time.
"What is this project about and what texts do you use?" "Here it is." "That's nice, but what text do you use?" "Here it is." "Ok, but what is this project about and what texts do you use?"
Am I the only one who feels that Charley is being purposefully obtuse and disingenuous?
Charley, I will not discuss this further in this thread, nor until you actually read and acknowledge what I've given you. The scope of my project is beyond clear and it is not accountable to you.
Peace,
-Steve