Jump to content

Accordance MT Text differences


rsb594
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm new to the Forum and I posted this is another section. I now realize it fits better here. So here is the original post:

 

I get different search results in a word search when switching between my Hebrew texts: BHS-T, BHS-W4, and HMT-W4. I've tried to uncover why they are different and have concluded it must be the result of whether or not variants are in the text rather than in a critical apparatus. Can someone confirm this or give me a better--that is, more correct--answer? Of those three texts is there one that is 'better' than the other two?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi rsb,

the BHS-T text is the text of the printed Stuttgartensia, and it’s associated apparatus

the HMT-W4 is the upgraded Westminster-Groves Leningradensia text, which does differ in places from the Stuttgart text

the BHS-W4 is a previous iteration of the HMT-W4 text and has not been updated for some time. So it will differ from the BhS because it’s not the Stuttgart text, and from BhS-W4 because it does not include the last few years of W-G text updates. 
 

does that make any sense at all?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ken,

Thank you so much for this information. It seems then it might make sense for me to remove BHS-W4 from my active library. Where did you find this information? I'd like to be able to get the same info should I need it for other texts in the future.

Many thanks,

Steve (rsb)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Steve, if you open the text then you can select "About this text" in either the Accordance menu, or in the contextual menu if you ctrl-click (or right click windows)

 

It will show you the info below. You may see that the BHS-T and BHS-W4 have not been updated in copyright since 2010, whereas the HMT-W4 is more recent.

 

You can copy this information using the little clipboard icon in the upper right corner of the splash that appears.

Screen Shot 2021-07-13 at 18.48.59.png

Screen Shot 2021-07-13 at 18.47.51.png

Screen Shot 2021-07-13 at 18.48.36.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing to be aware of, if you're not already, is that all 3 of these texts are representations of a specific (though hugely important) manuscript, namely, the LC.

 

To put it another way, none of these 3 texts is attempting to represent something like a consensus on the (admittedly vague) notion of the Masoretic Hebrew Bible.

 

To put it yet another way, these are not really intended to be general-purpose texts, though historically they have been the only electronic texts widely available, and therefore have come to be used as general-purpose texts.

 

To put it yet another way, these are diplomatic/scholarly editions of the LC, not eclectic/general-purpose editions of the Masoretic Hebrew Bible.

 

Eclectic/general-purpose editions draw on the various other extant manuscripts, all of which are, unlike the LC, incomplete.

 

The most notable among these manuscripts is of course the AC (Aleppo Codex, aka Crown of Aleppo, aka Crown of Jerusalem).

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 7/11/2021 at 10:21 PM, rsb594 said:

I'm new to the Forum and I posted this is another section. I now realize it fits better here. So here is the original post:

 

I get different search results in a word search when switching between my Hebrew texts: BHS-T, BHS-W4, and HMT-W4. I've tried to uncover why they are different and have concluded it must be the result of whether or not variants are in the text rather than in a critical apparatus. Can someone confirm this or give me a better--that is, more correct--answer? Of those three texts is there one that is 'better' than the other two?

Another difference between BHS-T and HMT-W4 is that HMT-W4 provides the qere readings in brackets, immediately after the ketiv. Contrary to the Leningrad codex, the J Alan Groves Center for Advanced Biblical Research added theoretical vowel pointings for the ketiv to the HMT-W4. This is somewhat confusing and important to be aware of. As far as the Masoretic tradition is concerned, the text to be read, heard, and interpreted is the qere, not the ketiv, when the two differ. 
If you are reading in the BHS-T module, the only way to recognize that you are seeing the hypothetical vowel pointings to a ketiv and that the reading the Masoretes want you to follow is not even in the text is that the word in question will be entirely lacking its Masoretic accent. 

See the screenshot below. The Masoretes want you to read what is in brackets instead of the word which precedes it. The word which precedes it has vowels added by a modern scholar, vowels which are entirely absent from the millenium-old Leningrad Codex. In the BHS-T, all that you see is the modern scholar's vowel pointing!

Because of this, I only use the BHS-T module when I want to look at the BHS apparatus. I always read from the HMT-W4. 
1215868847_ScreenShot2021-10-04at11_37_09PM.thumb.png.20ab57a37fbb5c71cfa40cd337217963.png

 

Edited by Iconoclaste
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Expanding on what @Iconoclaste said above, if you ever look at images of the actual Masoretic manuscripts, be prepared to see ketiv & qere presented in yet another way. In the manuscripts:

  • The ketiv is pointed with the points of the qere. The ketiv, and only the ketiv, appears on the body text.
  • The qere is unpointed (!) and appears only in the margin.

In the standard modern way of presenting ketiv & qere:

  • The ketiv is unpointed and appears in the body text, usually before the qere.
  • The qere is pointed and also appears in the body text.

For the Genesis 8:17 example above, here's what the LC looks like:

 

image.png.f81f55a3f74cf7da5e1019403024a400.png

 

Whereas, for example on tanach.us, the words appear like this:

image.png.40612f3605d4387c9477adf25dae1dc7.png

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow.  I learned a lot just reading these posts!

 

I wonder, how is OT textual criticism done?  I get the impression that in the Hebrew we have very few different texts to work with.  Alternate readings are sometimes invented or proposed by rearranging Hebrew letters or substituting a similarly spelled word with no actually textual support.  The LXX is often compared, but that's not Hebrew.  Here are ones I can think of:

  1. Leningrad Codex (the MT, I think!)
  2. Aleppo Codex (someone mentioned that above)
  3. DSS
  4. Samaritan Pentateuch 

I didn't see the Aleppo in the Accordance store.

 

Anyway, I wonder if someone would care to give some pointers on getting started in OT textual criticism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LordByron I can only recommend this book "aspirationally", i.e. I can only recommend it in the sense I aspire to some day engage with this book myself:

 

Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Third Edition, Revised and Expanded | Fortress Press

 

But I'm not really sure whether one can just dive into such a book without a teacher, mentor, or guide. One would not enter an unfamiliar jungle without a guide. But perhaps I am too timid, and this is no jungle.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Benjamin Denckla said:

@LordByron I can only recommend this book "aspirationally", i.e. I can only recommend it in the sense I aspire to some day engage with this book myself:

 

Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible: Third Edition, Revised and Expanded | Fortress Press

 

But I'm not really sure whether one can just dive into such a book without a teacher, mentor, or guide. One would not enter an unfamiliar jungle without a guide. But perhaps I am too timid, and this is no jungle.

 

This book is available as an Accordance module: https://accordancebible.com/product/textual-criticism-of-the-hebrew-bible-3rd-edition-tov/

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Michael J. Bolesta said:

Thanks!  I added this to my wishlist.  This would require some serious study.

 

I don't suppose there is anything similar to the critical apparatuses that we have for the GNT?  That pretty much would show you what is out there for any given passage of Scripture at a glance.

 

Edit: After a bit of searching in the Accordance store I found this: https://accordancebible.com/product/hebrew-bible-apparatus/

Edited by LordByron
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...