Now that you understand that, does this change anything regarding the proposed
three new catholic lit av11ns ?
Best regards, David
Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 20:09, Cyrille <lafricai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Le 06/01/2018 à 20:51, Troy A. Griffitts a écrit :
>
>> Dear Cyrille,
>>
>> Are you taking into account my comment about our v11ns being supersets from
>> multiple Bibles and the comments at the beginning of the LXX v11n?
>
> No sorry I missed it! Ok it's clear. I understand well.
>
>> // This is a compromise versification system, intended to allow encoding of
>> Bibles using a number of slightly varying LXX-based versification systems.
>> In particular, it was produced in consultation with OTs:
>> // Rahlfs', Swete's, Tischendorf's, & Thomson's editiNOtions
>> // R. H. Charles' & James H. Charlesworth's anthologies of Apocrypha &
>> Pseudepigrapha
>> // Henry E. J. Howard's Pentateuch and R. R. Ottley's Isaiah translations
>> from the LXX
>>
>> // In addition to the LXX OT, the GNT has been included in this system to
>> facilitate production of modern Bibles such as the OSB, which are translated
>> from the LXX but include the NT as well. The following NTs were consulted in
>> producing this versification system:
>> // Antoniades' Patriarchal GNT and its translation, the EOB
>> // the NKJV (OSB NT) & NRSV translations
>>
>> // All of these Bibles & texts should be accomodated by this versification
>> definition without requiring that any extra verses be appended; as a
>> consequence, no Bible will include every verse of this system.
>>
>> On 01/06/2018 12:47 PM, Cyrille wrote:
>>
>>> Le 06/01/2018 à 20:13, Troy A. Griffitts a écrit :
>>>
>>>> These v11ns are not in the sources because we are still researching. But
>>>> since these have been double checked to printed editions,
>>>
>>> I have the printing edition!! And this report is about the printing
>>> edition, not about the doc file. But the doc file correspond exactly to the
>>> printing edition.
>>>
>>>> I highly doubt whatever 'errors' you see are actually errors in the v11n,
>>>> but rather a bad source text. I am sorry for speculating, but I know
>>>> these v11ns were checked and verified by a second individual against a
>>>> printed edition and also know there is a ton of low quality texts online
>>>> which claim to be things which they are not.
>>>
>>> The check was not good done.
>>>
>>>> These are simply my suspicions without having the time now to put in the
>>>> research. I hope you find a way to check and confirm.
>>>
>>> Then I can confirm this :
>>> The current canon_LXX.h and the LXX,rahlfs.h don't match with the printing
>>> edition, I have with me.
>>>
>>>> Troy
>>>>
>>>> On 01/06/2018 12:06 PM, Cyrille wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Le 06/01/2018 à 18:36, Troy A. Griffitts a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Cyrille,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just did a brief diff between the canon_lxx.h and the
>>>>>> canon_lxx-super.h I sent you in my previous email, and the differences
>>>>>> don't look like anything useful. I must be mistaken about what this
>>>>>> file is. Have a read of the comments in the file I send and those in
>>>>>> the canon_lxx.h included in 1.8.0. They are very similar, but the
>>>>>> *-super.h v11n includes this comment near the end of the header:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "This is not intended for critical editions that separately encode
>>>>>> variant traditions of Joshua, Judges, Tobit, etc. that are already
>>>>>> served by the Rahlfs versification system (q.v.)."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am not sure to what the "Rahlfs versification system (q.v.)" refers,
>>>>>> nor the /quod vide/ at the end of the reference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I could possibly refer to the analysis of Rahlfs in the LXX v11n folder
>>>>>> I send to you earlier, specifically here, but I am not sure:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://crosswire.org/svn/sword-tools/trunk/versification/lxx_v11ns/canon_rahlfs.h
>>>>>
>>>>> My question is why this v11n are not in the sources? And I compare the
>>>>> Rahlfs.h, it's not good... still a lot of issues. I ready to perform it.
>>>>> Please let me know the good way to help.
>>>>> But it clear for me that for the current source I have, it's not possible
>>>>> to use the current LXX v11n.
>>>>>
>>>>>> But I do not see any accommodation for alternate traditions in there. I
>>>>>> may need to go search old emails to dig up the discussions on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Troy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/06/2018 09:36 AM, Cyrille wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 06/01/2018 à 17:16, Troy A. Griffitts a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Cyrille,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just a few comments which I hope will clear up a few things.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The sword-tools SVN repo needs to be checked out to your computer
>>>>>>>> before you can run the convert.sh for CCAT. The repo contains the .jar
>>>>>>>> file you asked about. You cannot just download the individual
>>>>>>>> convert.sh script.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok It's clear. I need to clone it with hg? The user is this from the
>>>>>>> automatic email send? If it is this email I can't find it again :-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> SWORD versifications are often a superset for multiple Bibles. The
>>>>>>>> SWORD engine provides a facility for frontends to easily skip empty
>>>>>>>> entries. Thus, when you discover that a chapter here or a chapter
>>>>>>>> there has too many verses, it is probably that way to support another
>>>>>>>> Bible which has more verses for that chapter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> LXX v11n has been researched extensively by Chris and others. There
>>>>>>>> are many issues regarding the LXX which are not easily resolved, e.g.,
>>>>>>>> Rahlfs providing two textual traditions of the same book in parallel
>>>>>>>> with different versifications. I h research for LXX in general can be
>>>>>>>> found here:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://crosswire.org/svn/sword-tools/trunk/versification/lxx_v11ns/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK but what to do?? Is it possible to use the Rahlfs with osis2mod?
>>>>>>> Because Rahlfs is not the current one. I have the Rahlfs text. If I use
>>>>>>> the current LXX v11n with my text I will have really a lot of issues!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hope this helps a bit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Troy
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On January 6, 2018 9:01:01 AM MST, Cyrille
>>>>>>>> [<lafricai...@gmail.com>](mailto:lafricai...@gmail.com) wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>> Before to work on a new module for the LXX, I decided to verify the
>>>>>>>>> current LXX v11n. And what was my surprise discovering many errors!
>>>>>>>>> Please can you give me the list of the current modules using LXX v11n?
>>>>>>>>> I will propose a new with correction, some books give me worries, like
>>>>>>>>> Esther, which contains a versification in letter, I will make you a
>>>>>>>>> proposal once my verification is finished. I work with the A. Rahlfs
>>>>>>>>> (maybe the current LXX v11n was made with an other ?)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best regards, Br Cyrille
>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> sword-devel mailing list:
>>>>>>>>> sword-devel@crosswire.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>>>>>>>>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sword-devel mailing list:
>>> sword-devel@crosswire.org
>>>
>>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sword-devel mailing list:
>> sword-devel@crosswire.org
>>
>> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
>> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
_______________________________________________
sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel@crosswire.org
http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page
