• Biblica
  • Filología Neotestamentaria
  • Resources
  • BSW Community
RSS

Share Biblica

  • Instructions for Contributors
  • Subscribe to Biblica or Send books for review
  • Index by Authors
  • Index by Biblical Books
  • FAQ
  • Font Instructions
  • Vol 93 (2012)
  • Vol 92 (2011)
  • Vol 91 (2010)
  • Vol 90 (2009)
  • Vol 89 (2008)
  • Vol 88 (2007)
  • Vol 87 (2006)
  • Vol 86 (2005)
  • Vol 85 (2004)
  • Vol 84 (2003)
  • Vol 83 (2002)
  • Vol 82 (2001)
  • Vol 81 (2000)
  • Vol 80 (1999)
  • Vol 79 (1998)
Home  >  Biblica  >  Vol 91 (2010)  > 

    Johann Cook, «Are the Additions in LXX Job 2,9a-e to be deemed as the Old Greek text?», Vol. 91 (2010) 275-284

    The LXX version of Job is described as an abbreviated, shortened text. However, it does contain two prominent additions in Job 2,9a-e and 42,17b-e. As far as the first is concerned this article argues that it is not the result of a later hand, nor of a differing Hebrew parent text. Based on a contextual analysis combined with an analysis of lexical items found in the additions, it reaches the conclusion that the translator of the Old Greek in fact is the work of the original translator.

    TAGS
    • Old Greek Text
    • LXX
    • Version of Job
    • Page 275/284
    • 275
    • 276
    • 277
    • 278
    • 279
    • 280
    • 281
    • 282
    • 283
    • 284
    • ›
    Are the Additions in LXX Job 2,9a-e to be deemed as the Old Greek text? * The Greek version of the book of Job is substantially shorter than the Massoretic Text (MT) 1. Compared to LXX Proverbs, another freely 2 translated unit, it can be deemed as a shortened, abbreviated text 3. LXX Proverbs, to the contrary, is an expansionistic text with a multitude of additions, transpositions and very significant, the difference of the order of chapters 24–31 in the LXX 4. It remains a difficult issue to determine the origin of these differences. One way of doing this is to describe the translation technique of the translated units. According to Cox LXX Job is unique since “It is not just free or paraphrastic, it is also something of an epitome of the longer and often difficult original. OG Job is one of a kind in the Septuagint corpus (my italics — JC). We can typify it as among the least literal, both in its attitude toward abbreviating the parent text and in the way the translator worked with that portion of the text for which we have a translation” 5. This less faithful translation naturally impedes endeavours to determine whether any given passage should be taken as the Old Greek (OG) text, or whether it should be seen as the work of later * This article was completed during my research stay at the University of Leiden as guest of Prof. Arie van der Kooij. I discussed various aspects in this contribution with him. H.M. ORLINSKY, “Studies in the LXX of the Book of Job”, HUCA 28 1 (1957) 53, thinks it is but five-sixth of the MT. The terms “literal” and “free” are problematic, however, for the want of 2 more appropriate concepts, I apply them in order to define the free, less faithful and even paraphrastic way these translators rendered their parent texts. See also the proposals by B. LEMMELIJN, “Free and yet faithful: on the translation technique of LXX Exod 7:14-11:10”, JNSL 33 (2007) 1-32, regarding definitions in translation technique. C.E. COX, “Job”, A New English Translation of the Septuagint. A New 3 Translation of the Septuagint and the Other Greek Translations traditionally included under that title, A. PIETERSMA – B.G. WRIGHT (eds.) (Oxford – London 2007) 667. According to Cox this abbreviation increases as one reads through the book. J. COOK, The Septuagint of Proverbs Jewish and/or Hellenistic 4 Proverbs ? Concerning the Hellenistic Colouring of LXX Proverbs (VTS 69; Leiden 1997) 332. COX, “Job”, 667. 5

Back to top

  • About us
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • RSS

Copyright © 2012 Weboost srl (unless specified).