This blog has relayed Joosten's 1990s claims that the Syriac Gospels relay Westernisms which the Syriac Old Testament usually doesn't, even if we overrule Joosten on the OT as a Christian document. I'll propose here an opportunity to test both Audlin and Joosten.
Joosten would bring Aphrahat's Demonstrations I 145, hy' for being "saved". Aphrahat probably used Diatesseron but this parallel is John 10:9, lingering in the Peshitta and Old-Syriac. Joosten flags hy' as a Westernism where east of the Euphrates they should be using frq, like in the Old Testament. Indeed: in Audlin's Lectionary, who entered, was saved (man d-'alal, hy')
(pace Audlin this isn't plural).
On to Agnes' Climaci Rescriptus, on John 1. "Abba" for "the Father"; although I am unsure this counts. By contrast Matthew 23:16, 28:6's lyt for negation would count (also the infamous Q. 38:2...) albeit we don't have these particular parallels in Syriac (and 2:6 has a lacuna from the lection). Matthew's sliba is here, tho'.
That Jesus is still (Greek) "Jesus" in the Palaestinian lections points to Luke (at least) being translated to Palaestinian, with no input from the Eastern Syrians.
However, if we add that Luke 24 is standard, I'm seeing this Palaestinian translation as late and as offering little advice to the East Syrians, in reverse.
No comments:
Post a Comment