UBS5 Sigla and NA28 Sigla

[_Ricardo_]

The NA28 Greek T (sigla) shows symbols similar to superscripts that helps find variants in the apparatus. However, the UBS5 doesn't. Is this the way it is supposed to be?

 

See an example in the attachment.

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

[Rick Bennett]

Yes, that's how it's supposed to be.

[Julia Falling]

Ricardo –

 

The NA28th + Apparatus and the UBS5th + Apparatus both show variants, but not the same variants.  The UBS5th is geared for students and translators.  The NA28th is more for scholars (+ whoever else is interested).  UBS5th shows the variants that are more likely to affect translation.  The NA28th will give information (variants) that may help the scholar understand the genealogy of a particular manuscript.  This is what I've been told and what I have read.  You might want to verify.  Perhaps someone else will chime in.

 

Additionally –

 

If you check the UBS5th Apparatus, you will see that there are no variants listed at v.6.  There are, however, variants at v1 and v7.

 

Most of us, after we've been in the GNT for a year or two, will want both the NA28th & the UBS5th.  The Greek in the two editions is identical.  However, paragraph breaks and punctuation may vary – that's up to the editors of each version.  

 

Each approach has its own strengths.  I have both NTs and use them both & their corresponding apparatus.  I also use Comfort and the CNTTS Database regularly.

Edited June 6, 2018 by Julia Falling

[Timothy Jenney]

The NA28 uses superscript symbols (e.g. ⸋ἐν Ῥώμῃ⸌) to indicate textual issues. The UBS5 uses  superscript numbers (e.g. Ῥώμῃ²).

[Douglas Fyfe]

The good thing with the NA style superscripts is that you can know what sort of textual difference has occurred without needing to look at the apparatus. So you know if a word has variants or is missing, just by looking at the type of symbol used. Whereas with the UBS style, you have to look at the apparatus. So UBS is more work from that aspect.

 

But from the other aspect, NA doesn't give you any evaluation of the merits of particular options (beyond the choice of what to keep in the text), while the UBS gives its choice a rating, which is helpful for new players. 

 

All that said, it's worth getting a hold of the Metzger commentary on the committee's decisions, as well as, very occasionally, dissenting opinions. It's a tool I use pretty frequently, even though I tend to use NA more than UBS these days.

 

Hope that helps/makes sense.