Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
problem with Silver's transcription of Codex Khabouris
#1
I've found that Dukhrana.com uses S. P. Silver's transcription of Codex Khabouris which can be found here: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicNTtools/Khabouris/New%20Khabouris%20Project%20Files/Khabouris.pdf">http://www.aramaicpeshitta.com/AramaicN ... bouris.pdf</a><!-- m -->

Now, I have problem with it, because some of these funny dots which tell how given word should be spellt are missing.

For example, second word in Mt 5:3 is transcribed as:

[Image: khabouris_word_poor3.png]

but in the Codex it has also those special marks:

[Image: khabouris_word_poor.png]

Now, there is nice feature on Dukhrana.com - it shows possible vocalisations of transcribed words. Yet, I can't tell which one of those proposed fits the one in the Codex:

[Image: khabouris_word_poor2.png]

Could someone tell me what I should do in this situation?
Reply
#2
I can only assume that Stephen's digital transcription does not carry forward the vowel pointings of the Khabouris. The Khabouris pointings seem a bit odd to to me, not quite Nestorian, but not quite Eastern either. And definitely not Serto Western.
Reply
#3
The dots (diaeresis) mean that the word is plural. There are two meanings for this word according to Dukhrana. If you look to the right, it says one of them is singular and the other is plural. You want the plural in this case. For other cases, you have to look at the words in the context of the ambiguity to resolve it; if you were not given the image showing the diaeresis, you would look at the previous word (or the word after the next) which shows in the suffix information that we're dealing with a plural subject.
Reply
#4
Aaron S Wrote:The dots (diaeresis) mean that the word is plural.
And how do you know that? Dots are diffrent and are in diffrent places that those two proposals shown in dukhrana.com analysis. Whole word can have diffrent meaning! See for example 7th word from Matthew 1:24:

[Image: khabouris_diffrent_meanings.png]

Dots can change EVERYTHING.

Aaron S Wrote:For other cases, you have to look at the words in the context of the ambiguity to resolve it; if you were not given the image showing the diaeresis, you would look at the previous word (or the word after the next) which shows in the suffix information that we're dealing with a plural subject.
Ok, that is some solution, but it CAN lead to error, to false readings. Especially when ALL words in Silver's transcriptions are devoid of dots.
Reply
#5
I'm not familiar with the function you are using on Dukhrana.

In order to know the vocalization for a particular word in the Khabouris, you would need to know how to transliterate the specific Khabouris vowel pointings into English. You are not getting that from the Dukhrana images you are posting.

Maybe you have a specific interest in the Khabouris. But if not, I might recommend you use the Peshitta analysis contained in this function from Dukhrana.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_verse.php?lang=en&verse=Matthew+5:3&source=ubs&font=Estrangelo+Edessa&size=150">http://dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_ve ... a&size=150</a><!-- m -->%

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_verse.php?lang=en&verse=Matthew+1:24&source=ubs&font=Estrangelo+Edessa&size=150">http://dukhrana.com/peshitta/analyze_ve ... a&size=150</a><!-- m -->%
Reply
#6
Jerry Wrote:I'm not familiar with the function you are using on Dukhrana.
It's the same you use (analyze verse) but for Khabouris, not for UBS version.

Jerry Wrote:In order to know the vocalization for a particular word in the Khabouris, you would need to know how to transliterate the specific Khabouris vowel pointings into English. You are not getting that from the Dukhrana images you are posting.
Thanks for explanation! This clarifies some things to me.

Jerry Wrote:Maybe you have a specific interest in the Khabouris.
Well, yes. That's because there are diffrences between BFBF/UBS version and Khabouris. See for example: <!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.peshitta.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1624">viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1624</a><!-- l -->
Reply
#7
Shlama Kowalski,


the analysis at Dukhrana is intended not to give a straight "literal" translation for the reader, but is meant to allow the reader to see the possibilities contained in the words in the text. as has been mentioned in an earlier post, only context will give you the truly proper route for translating. and only a working knowledge of Aramaic is going to help you really determine the best route to take if you are wanting to translate based on using those tools. the syame markings for plurality shouldn't always be taken as entirely valid, and neither should the vowel points -- a fact that has been documented well even at this site.

hope that helps!


Chayim b'Moshiach,
Jeremy
Reply
#8
Quote:It's the same you use (analyze verse) but for Khabouris, not for UBS version.
OK, now I see what you are using. Admittedly, I am a bit 'tunnel-vision' on the UBS functions.

For the UBS, only the specific vocalization is listed for each word, sometimes with multiple grammatical possibilities. But for the Khabouris, it appears that every known vocalization (in Western format) is listed for each consonant pattern used; which means that the function is specific to Khabouris consonants, but not to its vowel pointings.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)