This article problematizes the common distinction between production and reception in biblical studies with Septuagint study as a case in point. The article illustrates the problem in connection with two recent, major translation projects, A New English Translation of the Septuagint and Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title and La Bible dâAlexandrie. I argue that the binary classification of production and reception is inadequate to capture the textual history of the Septuagint and suggest an alternative way to conceptualize the development.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| å ¨é¨æé´ | è¿å»ä¸å¹´ | è¿å»30天 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| æè¦æµè§æ¬¡æ° | 639 | 173 | 8 |
| å ¨ææµè§æ¬¡æ° | 158 | 5 | 0 |
| PDFä¸è½½æ¬¡æ° | 317 | 12 | 0 |
This article problematizes the common distinction between production and reception in biblical studies with Septuagint study as a case in point. The article illustrates the problem in connection with two recent, major translation projects, A New English Translation of the Septuagint and Other Greek Translations Traditionally Included under That Title and La Bible dâAlexandrie. I argue that the binary classification of production and reception is inadequate to capture the textual history of the Septuagint and suggest an alternative way to conceptualize the development.
| å ¨é¨æé´ | è¿å»ä¸å¹´ | è¿å»30天 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| æè¦æµè§æ¬¡æ° | 639 | 173 | 8 |
| å ¨ææµè§æ¬¡æ° | 158 | 5 | 0 |
| PDFä¸è½½æ¬¡æ° | 317 | 12 | 0 |