Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Quotation Comparison
#1
I've compiled all TaNaKh quotations found in the Apostolic Writings and attempted to line up the source and destination texts.
As of now it has some errors in it and has some verses yet to be evaluated and added to the list. The page is very large due to a lack of division into subpages (which I plan to do in the future), so it may slow down your browser if you are on an older computer.
I'd like to hear suggestions for different source-destination pairs I could add to this, any changes that I could make, or any errors you find in the resource. At the moment it shows verse correlations for Textus Receptus, Peshitta, Western Peshitto (for the 5 exempt from Peshitta), Old Syriac, Dutillet Matthew, and Shemtov Matthew.
You can access it here: Quotation Comparison.
As you can see... it's only useful to those who have a grasp on Greek, Aramaic, and Hebrew, so good luck!

There are no plans on making this Internet Explorer 6 compatible.
Reply
#2
I've basically finished the comparisons of the given texts... as before, I'd like input on improvements and errors. It's now available in Asshuri script, and each book has its own page. Use the link in the previous post to view it.
Reply
#3
This is absolutely awesome, i was looking for somethig like this. Did you personally compile this? Are there any plans to include other greek variants? What about discernment between the two Old Syriac? Instead of 1 and 2 you should name them curetonianus and sinaiticus. Also, an english interlinear would be great (i know i'm asking for a lot here, but what would it take?).
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.
Reply
#4
Yes, I personally leafed through all of these verses that have been previously identified as quotations and cross-referenced everything. In some places I may have either mangled the source or destination text.. so that's why it needs an eye for detail checking it over. In other places, there is little to no correlation between the two texts and it may be better not to include in the project.
I'll include other Greek translations if they're requested here... there are many and I am not keen on which would be the best ones to include (i.e. the earliest varying manuscript families) and where to procure them online.
I shall update the Old Syriac names soon. (I have a caching system behind the web version, so it may take 24 hours for the changes to show up unless you force-refresh or clear your web cache.)
English interlinear would be nice, but it'd require a great amount of work and I don't have translational skill... if someone else would be willing, I could add some means of putting that into the project.

My point is, if you know something more exact about any of these things, do share and I can include them.

Also, I may have to add a more sophisticated method of documenting the source texts being drawn from, as there are variants there also, and it may be best to cross-reference quotes to their closest source matches.
Reply
#5
Aaron S Wrote:Yes, I personally leafed through all of these verses that have been previously identified as quotations and cross-referenced everything.
Wow, are you a student at a university or something? Why do you have so much interest in this? Are you fluent in Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic?
Aaron S Wrote:In other places, there is little to no correlation between the two texts and it may be better not to include in the project.
i really think you should at least make those available on a seperate list (and maybe name it paraphrased quotes or similar). i know that the NT writers sometimes used paraphrasing as a proper way of translation, but if the list is not complete, it cannot properly fulfill its purpose.
Aaron S Wrote:I'll include other Greek translations if they're requested here... there are many and I am not keen on which would be the best ones to include (i.e. the earliest varying manuscript families) and where to procure them online.
i think the best option without overcrowding the project would be to include NA27 (it's a critical apparatus), which is the base for most "modern" translations. It is available here: http://www.bibelwissenschaft.de/online-b...bibeltext/(currently offline, should be back online in a few hours).
i am unsure if the copyright forbids using the text. Besides the NA27, i do not know where to get Greek texts online that have a significance in modern textual criticism. Could you deal with other formats, like PDF? The GNT-V (Greek NT with Variants) module for E-Sword would be good, but i guess the formatting will make an inclusion quite difficult.

Aaron S Wrote:I shall update the Old Syriac names soon. (I have a caching system behind the web version, so it may take 24 hours for the changes to show up unless you force-refresh or clear your web cache.)
thanks, it already worked for me.
Aaron S Wrote:English interlinear would be nice, but it'd require a great amount of work and I don't have translational skill... if someone else would be willing, I could add some means of putting that into the project.
i don't think it is a matter of translational skill. One could use a linking system, like Strong's. For the Greek and Hebrew, it should not be a zero-start work, as there are a lot of such interlinears. Strong's dictionary is available free online (it's not an awesome dictionary, but it should be enough for this project). For some people (like me), the Strong's # identification itself would be more valuable than the translation. i do not, however, know how to link the Aramaic (Strong's only has the aramaic words incuded in the Aramaic portions in the OT, and i know no equivalent system for Aramaic).
This may not be a big deal to you, but this is the way very most people study original languages when they are not able to speak them themselves.

Aaron S Wrote:My point is, if you know something more exact about any of these things, do share and I can include them.

Also, I may have to add a more sophisticated method of documenting the source texts being drawn from, as there are variants there also, and it may be best to cross-reference quotes to their closest source matches.
i agree with you on this. It makes no sense looking for agreement if you eg choose an LXX version that disagrees more than another with the quotes. Best thig would be if you could indicate multiple variants at once. i have no idea how to do that though.
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.
Reply
#6
I recently graduated from the University of Illinois at Chicago majoring in Computer Science and wanted to use my CS skills to help further developments in Aramaic research by providing data sets. I am not fluent in any of the aforementioned languages, but I can work with all three of them with the aid of study tools.
There are plenty of works out there showing verses that draw from wording found in Tanakh (i.e. paraphrase). This work is more for showing which quotes in manuscripts of the Apostolic Writ are more congruent with their respective sources. Many a time that it is said, "Paul quotes from the LXX here." The odds need to be evened by critically evaluating both Aramaic and Greek texts. One of the things I've noticed is that the congruency varies from book to book.

Cross-referencing each word with Strong's and Dukhrana numbers would be quite the undertaking, as there is no practical way to automate such a transition. I am willing to do it, but because of my lack of expertise in the languages, I will not be able to find some of the corresponding numbers; it is also the case that many of these words from the sources are not documented by Strong's or Dukhrana. (Strong's Hebrew does document some Aramaic words that don't appear in the Peshitta though, and that could be used as a reference)

CAL has its own textual analysis tool useful for seeing the Peshitta Tanakh text. Dukhrana has a textual analysis tool for the Peshitta text. And there are many resources useful for analysis of LXX and Apostolic Writ texts. Please give me more thoughts on this...because I am not sure which way to go on this one because much much more work would have to be put in for such a feature.

Hebrew Matthew doesn't really matter that much since it has no place in ancient writings... it was just given as a control.

To see the true extent of the amount of data required for the project, see the XML used to produce the web files.

Edit:
I just added all of the variants in the Khabouris text quotes to the projects. For the most part in quotes, Khabouris is verbatim to 1905. I've also just modified the cache to only store for 1 hour.
Reply
#7
Shlama Akhi Aaron:
I suggest that you get in touch with Lars Lindgren via Dukhrana Biblical Research. Your computing skills may be an asset that can be immediately used to further research in Aramaic Promacy. Dukhrana needs to crosslink with the TaNaK and with your skills and background you may be able to accomplish something useful there. We're non-profit but are open to financial assistance as the need arises, and as the LORD leads.

Shlama,
Stephen,
Dukhrana Biblical Research
<!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dukhrana.com">www.dukhrana.com</a><!-- w -->

Aaron S Wrote:I recently graduated from the University of Illinois at Chicago majoring in Computer Science and wanted to use my CS skills to help further developments in Aramaic research by providing data sets. I am not fluent in any of the aforementioned languages, but I can work with all three of them with the aid of study tools.
There are plenty of works out there showing verses that draw from wording found in Tanakh (i.e. paraphrase). This work is more for showing which quotes in manuscripts of the Apostolic Writ are more congruent with their respective sources. Many a time that it is said, "Paul quotes from the LXX here." The odds need to be evened by critically evaluating both Aramaic and Greek texts. One of the things I've noticed is that the congruency varies from book to book.

Cross-referencing each word with Strong's and Dukhrana numbers would be quite the undertaking, as there is no practical way to automate such a transition. I am willing to do it, but because of my lack of expertise in the languages, I will not be able to find some of the corresponding numbers; it is also the case that many of these words from the sources are not documented by Strong's or Dukhrana. (Strong's Hebrew does document some Aramaic words that don't appear in the Peshitta though, and that could be used as a reference)

CAL has its own textual analysis tool useful for seeing the Peshitta Tanakh text. Dukhrana has a textual analysis tool for the Peshitta text. And there are many resources useful for analysis of LXX and Apostolic Writ texts. Please give me more thoughts on this...because I am not sure which way to go on this one because much much more work would have to be put in for such a feature.

Hebrew Matthew doesn't really matter that much since it has no place in ancient writings... it was just given as a control.

To see the true extent of the amount of data required for the project, see the XML used to produce the web files.

Edit:
I just added all of the variants in the Khabouris text quotes to the projects. For the most part in quotes, Khabouris is verbatim to 1905. I've also just modified the cache to only store for 1 hour.
Reply
#8
I have fully cross-referenced the Greek portions of the project with their corresponding Strong's numbers. The numbers appear as tooltips when hovering over a word in a Greek section. Tell me what you think and what I can improve while moving forward.

I found this to be useful in annotating the Greek; would anyone know if something similar is available for Hebrew?
Reply
#9
Boy, you are a machine! This is quite awesome! Looking forward to further development...
Jesus is the one true God of the Bible.
Reply
#10
As I said above, the resource to which I pointed basically did all the work for me...
with Aramaic, I cannot say the same (partly because I removed vowel points from Peshitta versions and partly because of ambiguously defined words)
I used the SEDRA3 database to process the unambiguous words (that is an Aramaic word appearing exactly once in WORDS.TXT), and that handled some of the work... but the rest requires painstaking efforts, and because of this, I've only indexed Matthew completely thus far (and all books following to a lesser extent). It is very very likely that there are errors in reference for some of these words. I've temporarily added underlines to all indexed words, so you can easily see the progress.
Reply
#11
Aaron S Wrote:As I said above, the resource to which I pointed basically did all the work for me...
with Aramaic, I cannot say the same (partly because I removed vowel points from Peshitta versions and partly because of ambiguously defined words)
I used the SEDRA3 database to process the unambiguous words (that is an Aramaic word appearing exactly once in WORDS.TXT), and that handled some of the work... but the rest requires painstaking efforts, and because of this, I've only indexed Matthew completely thus far (and all books following to a lesser extent). It is very very likely that there are errors in reference for some of these words. I've temporarily added underlines to all indexed words, so you can easily see the progress.

Shlama Aaron!

It is indeed a painstaking effort to index the whole Peshitta NT based on the SEDRA3 word IDs. I started this process quite some time ago myself, but have yet to finish. This is why dukhrana.com still uses a pretty lazy, but fully automatic, approach when showing an analysis of a verse (it is up to the user to distinguish the correct word among the ambiguous ones..<!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->). Maybe we could team up and collaborate, or at least compare our indexed texts in order to squeeze out any mistakes we've made. Let me know if you're interested :-)

//Lars
Reply
#12
Thank you for your empathy. It's especially difficult when I don't understand what the difference is between enclitic yes non-enclitic, ETHPAEL and ETHPEAL, and some other nuances. Thankfully, I'm only indexing a small sample of the text; but I'm also indexing up to 4 different Aramaic versions of it as well as the Aramaic Tanakh with it. For now, I've taken off the link to download the Source XML, as I've recently restructured the project, but once it's basically finished, the data is all yours <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> . To all interested, here's a resource I've found that I'll use to index most of the Hebrew: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://github.com/openscriptures/morphhb/tree/master/wlc/">http://github.com/openscriptures/morphh ... aster/wlc/</a><!-- m -->
Reply
#13
These websites might be of use, but it is more modern Assyrian-Aramaic.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.premiumwanadoo.com/cuneiform.languages/syriac/index.php">http://www.premiumwanadoo.com/cuneiform ... /index.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.lishani.com">http://www.lishani.com</a><!-- m -->

Good Luck and God Bless,

-Nimrod Warda-
Reply
#14
For Aramaic indexing, I'm debating whether to stick with SEDRA3's word IDs (2:n) or to switch to lexeme IDs (1:n) which would make indexing substantially easier. Any thoughts on this?
Reply
#15
Aaron S Wrote:For Aramaic indexing, I'm debating whether to stick with SEDRA3's word IDs (2:n) or to switch to lexeme IDs (1:n) which would make indexing substantially easier. Any thoughts on this?

Definitely SEDRA3's word IDs. Sure, it is a lot more work, but it is well worth the effort, and the result will be much more useful. Are you indexing the whole NT or just the quotations? So far I have indexed about 870 verses (which is roughly 11%) of the Peshitta NT.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)